dave_nitsche

There is no way. The presentation option is the strongest thing that P.net offers when compared to other online sites and it is neglected by management and users alike. I wish there was more visability for them too...

Has the check cleared?

Go take a beginner course in HTML at a local college, get yourself dreamweaver and roll on. My site is a real simple design and serves it's purpose well. I have gotten a lot of compliments on it. I don't actually sell on my site but the email link is a click away. I have pretty incredible traffic for what it is and get a lot of sales from it.

 

HTML isn't that scarey. It's actually fun. I have started learning PHP because updating the site is a little bit of a pain. If I did it weekly it would only take a bit but I let it drag on. I want it to be a bit more dynamic so PHP is the next venture.

 

My site isn't nearly as in depth as Bob's but he offers a lot more than I do, or you would probably.

If you read the conversation we were talking about the comments by people who have images posted and those that don't. It wasn't about Pro v. Amature, it was more about photographer v. non-photographer.

Hanna, that's not what I said. Let me say it again (and I quote)...

 

"Both opinions are valid but for varying reasons. IMO it is important to know who is telling you what about an image. It helps interpret the thoughts they are giving and how they can be used."

Mike, agreed, but the opinions that matter the most to those 'in the biz' they are in are from those who are respected in that genre. I can only talk for the music business being involved in it for a lot of years. There are a lot of 'marketing' reasons why the general public will like a movie, album, whatever. There are personalities that get involved with critics.

 

To directors of films, or producers of albums, the comments of their pier groups are weighted heavier than others because that core group understands the overall process better.

 

I think that also means a lot to photographers here. Like I said, I have struggled with this thought for a while. I didn't mean you asking it in particular, just the overall thought.

 

Now conversely, having had a show or two now, the opinions of the non-photographer public are radically different than that of the photographer. The 'stuff's' that matter to the photographer are non-existant in the general public. Blown highlight? They couldn't care. Not falling on a third? They couldn't care. All they know is if they like it or not.

 

So my struggle. Both opinions are valid but for varying reasons. IMO it is important to know who is telling you what about an image. It helps interpret the thoughts they are giving and how they can be used.

Mike, I have struggled with your statement for a long time now...

 

"I can tell people whether I liked a movie and what I thought its strengths and weaknesses are even though I've never made a movie. Have you ever recorded and produced an album? Do you know what CDs you like?"

 

Who's opinion is more important to the film maker? Yours or Zeffireli's? As far as music, yours or Mutt Langs? It's an important distinction to many people.

I sometimes put up for critique, other times don't. For a while it was because the second my images went in the RFC it would get Faith/Golarka/Yani/ into oblivion so I stopped using it all together. It was obvious to myself (and a few others) that Faith wasn't the biggest fan of anyone who threatened the 'main' alias in the TRP. Giving high rates to himself and low balling others. I would have 3's the second my images hit the RFC. Infact toward the end of the Alias wars the first 3 rates I would get were from the terrible trio and they were all under 4's rendering my images invisible.

 

So if this went into affect retro, I would lose half my ratings if not more. I get the same ratings now going through the RFC or not. Of the last 3 images I put up 2 were through the RFC. Same results on all.

 

Not everyone circumvented the RFC to 'game the system'. Some of us had what we considered legit reasons. Faith and his 130 aliases weren't a creation of mine but I sure had to deal with it for a year and found a way around it.

 

If I lose my ratings, so be it, but it wasn't because I 'gamed' the system, it was because I wanted to have an enjoyable time at p.net not constant aggravation that was caused by one person and 130 aliases.

Marc, http://www.photo.net/bboard/forum?topic_id=1481 click on the word "New" in the Critique Only catagory. Has been that way for a while now.

Number 4 and number 2. That would be great Patrick. You rock man. Also, get out and have a pint or two...

 

Dave

Marc, I am figuring yes as I think that is why I have lost rates both given and gotten also, and agree, so be it. This would explain the example David M. gave too.

Dave, yeah, I have had a bunch of ratings removed also and I don't think I would fall into the mate rating catagory with 1150 images rated after 3 years. Not sure about this, I guess that's the way Brian wants it though.

 

How a person who has rated no images could be considered a mate rater is beyond me.

My question wasn't how long it would go on. I hope forever. I was wondering if all the legacy ratings have been gone through.

130??????? Holy cow. That is pretty sad.

Brian, is the script done running on old images? I have lost 3 or 4 ratings total I think. Just wondering if this will be going on for the next few days or if all the old 'legacy' rates have been dealt with?

 

Pretty neat idea actually.

"It is interesting that nobody noticed the discrepancy until now."

 

How long has it been going on Brian?

 

Just checked a few images. Looks like it is clipping 2 or 4 ratings on some of the image in the TRP. Instead of 40 7/7 they get 38. Still a 7/7 average. Just not noticeable enough I guess for them to bother bringing it up to you.

 

It's impossible Brian. Just forget it. The same names are still there in force. Some with 2,3 or 4 images in the 3 day. I have no idea how it could be fixed and even if I did, some would find a way around it.

 

The way other sites have done it is to tie subscription into ratings or even using. Most of the mate raters won't pay for service, they just move on as is evident by other sites history.

 

Food for thought: There isn't one (not one) paying member in the first page of the 3 day TRP. It think that is criminal.

 

 

I guess its futile. What a crying shame...

No Spamming/Email Address Harvesting

 

From time to time, users post their email addresses in our chatrooms, forums, and other public posting areas, and the site makes available the email addresses of members to other logged-in members. You agree not to gather these email addresses for purposes of spamming or for any non-personal or commercial purposes.

 

Now does P.net consider spamming to be asking people to check out your latest photo and rate in a mass mailing? Not sure.

John, send the emails to Brian. He will do something about it. He has before...

Yeah Peter seems to work for me also today. You could have at least sent one saying 'hey!!' :-)

I requested an email addy earlier today (about 1). I never got it.

Later in the day (about 4 hours) I requested another address. A few

seconds later the first addy came through but the second didn't. I

then requested my own addy and a few seconds later the 2nd one came

through...

 

It seems like a new request has to push the old request through.

 

Hope this explains it well enough.

Michele, change your search parameter to 1 year, 2 year or 3 year of photographers average and you can see.

 

Top photographer average (average score of all images with over 10 rates) in the TRP.

 

1 year ago 12.53

2 year ago 12.22

3 year ago 11.91

Yeah, I get tons of hits every month from people who link to my site for their blogs. That is the main reason I put my name and title on every image. Most leave it even if they copy the image locally. A few cut it off then I get in touch with them, or the manager of the blog, and it's usually removed pretty quick.

I requested one earlier and it took a couple hours to get to me, but I did get it... There was a delay though.

"If you were running an operation, would you turn it on its ear based on the complaints of less than one percent of the "clients"?"

 

If you foresee it as a problem that can grow and cause damage it is the ONLY time to turn it on it's ear.

 

Any later is a formula for disaster. Of course you have to see it as a threat and as you have made it abundantly clear, you don't.

Brian, sent you an email...