phongkim

Some friends asked me why I left this site, so I told them some of

the reasons. I know my stuffs were at least average or above and

didn't deserve 1's and 2's from the trolls. And since the moderators

didn't seem to do anything about the trolls (at least on my case),

therefore, this site wasn't for me. Anyway, they said they don't

see any trolls attacking my works. Sure enough, it seems that

someone have been deleting those unfair ratting from my portfolio.

What was going on? Did someone did something to the trolls

recently? Have all the trolls been round up and elminated? I

understand that as long as the world continue to turn, there shall

always be troll; however, it's good to learn that this site is doing

something about it.

 

Before I go, I wish you all a very Happy Holiday and a great New

Year. Cheers!

"Then there is the constant "bust your chops" crew that enjoys giving A students F's and F students A's; to stir up the pot."

 

What phot.net is going to do about that? If you don't do anything about that, someone else may decide to join that "bust your chops" crew.

"Be polite, be respectful of other's feelings, and be honest -- in that order. Remember that most people are more interested in having their accomplishments recognized than learning the truth about what they have not done well. So try to do the latter along with the former. And remember that you are under no obligation to point out other peoples mistakes -- keeping your opinions to yourself is always an option. If you have some indication that your critique will not be received constructively, then just move on to someone else."<br><br>

 

That is exactly why I have never rated any photo below 3. If a photo is so bad but there is room for improvement and I think I can help, I will leave a kind comment instead. Of course, that doens't stop some one from giving me a 1 on my <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/3622677">most difficult shot</a>. That is the meanest and most insensitive thing, IMO. Since there are a lot of mean people in this world, we can either tolerate them or move to another planet. I'm pretty sure they will follow us to another planet eventually. Oh well, I probably will die of old age by then.

Thanks for cleaning up the mess, Patrick!

"I don't know what you're talking about. Who *wouldn't* give a sunset photo a '7' for originality?"

 

If there is a beautiful sunset that I haven't seen before, I probably give 7 for originality. Anyway, I rarely see any nice sunset where I live; otherwise, I would have posted some sunset photos by now.

 

Btw, if anyone would like chance to score a 7 from me, take some beautiful photos of nature, sunsets or landscapes. If you would like a chance to score a 7 from Tinna, take a beautiful portrait of a pet or people. If you would like chance to score a 7 from Kristy, take a beautiful close up photo of a fly. If you want a chance to score 7 from .Z, go for the busy documentary abtract type (the type of photos that most people won't give more than 5/5). Personally, I'm very happy if I get 5/5 from .Z. That's just my observation from the short time I have been here; I could be wrong about that.

There is an old Vietnamese saying "when you love someone, everything about that person is perfect; when you dislike someone, everything about that person is imperfect". I don't really see how you can prevent people from falling in love and/or to prevent people from taking revenge on one another. I'm slowly giving up on my interest in justice and world peace.

IMO, that photo doesn't deserve 1/1. If the moderator remove that 1/1, it's great. If not, don't worry about it. The internet is a really big place and it is full of good-fair-honest people as well as bad people.

Yes, it's possible.

 

1. Just go to the folder that you wish to change, on the left side of the "Details" button, there should be an "Options" button.

 

2. Now select "Edit folder title and sequence". Note, a negative sequence number will hide your folder (coming very handy for folder you wish to hide)

 

Btw, the folder sequence number won't work at your profile screen (where you see the list of folders below your biography). On this screen, all your folders will be displayed in alphabetical order based on the folder name. Even your hiden folders will show up as well for the public to see. I wish that the folder sequence in the biography screen would work the same as in the gallery screen; may be it will some days (if the mod is listenning).

Well, I don't expect any change on the rating system. I surely don't want you guys to throw away the current system. However, there are small things you can do to make it better. For example, people shouldn't be able to give out more than six 1s per day. Why not, you have already restricted people from giving out more than six 7s per day. Of course, recently you also restrict people from giving a 7 to anyone that have already given you a 7. I thought that was kind of cruel, but I'm sure you have your own reason. Therefore, I'm just throwing out idea to simulate more thinking/brainstorming and hope that something better may come out of it. I really don't mind if everyone think my ideas are bad. That's ok! The only time I fell bad is when I'm standing on the corner of the street and hello to everyone that passing by, but none say hello back. That isn't the case. I appreciate you guys taking the time to talk to me and thank for pointing out why you think it won't work.

 

Best regards,

Phong

Hi Patrick,

 

"I think this isn't going to work. Suppose we start with Joe, an average photographer who get an average rating of 4, assigned by the Elves. Joe can now rate his average friends Jack, John and Jochem and give them high marks. They rate Joe's work highly and together they have become Gods on the photo.net Gallery."

 

I'm pretty sure thousand of other honest members on photo net won't just stand by and do nothing about that. Even if his friend Jack, John and Jochem give each other very high marks, their impact on the average would be minimum. A couple 7/7s won't increase their average up that much. With the recent rules that you guys just put in place (you know what I'm talking about...if someone give you a 7 you have to wait at least 14 days if you wish to return the favor; plus no one can give out more than 6 7s per day), Joe, Jack, John, and Jochem can't really have each other much.

 

---

 

"Along comes Rose, a talented photographer who produces quality work. Joe & friends don't want to lose their top positions and give Rose low marks. What can Rose do? She can either further consolidate the high ratings that Joe & friends have received, she can shut up or she can hope that Susan comes along and form an alliance with her."

 

Again, I believe in the honesty and the ability to do good from the majority of the people. Joe and his friends are the few, their number won't mean much if more honest people give their voice to the community. Beside, I'm sure we can come up with some other way to help Rose out. For example, if Rose photo gets chosen as the "Photo of the Week", she should be given a power pack or something. Let's try to put the "fun" back into posting photo for critique. There are so many other way to help Rose. This community should have a voice of their own against injustice and those that abusing their power.

 

---

 

"I think all this hocus pocus around rule #3 is a good indication that it is too complicated."

 

It may be so, but I'm hopping once people starting to throw their own idea into it, the end result may be much better than what initially start out with.

 

---

 

"Also, what are we to do with all the existing ratings and the views based upon them?"

 

Just keep the old ratting system and implement additional rules on top of it, for example, Yongbo Jiang is current has an average of 6.00 for Aesthetics, and 5.75 for Originality from all of his photos, he should keep what he got; therefore, have the average rating power of 6/6 (rounding it up). As for the people who have given out a lot of rates but have never submitted any of their own photos for critique, I'm sure we can work something out for them.

"Also, a hypothetica MrC who joined up yesterday should be allowed to buy more power - say $1,000 will buy him enough power to rate many dozens of photographs with 7/7's or 1/1/'s. Such power would also be available for sale in EBay auctions."

 

No he can't! Rule #1 and #2 would prevent him from doing that. Of course, with a $1000, he could hire a professional photographer to create an excellent photo for him to post as his own. Then, he could gain higher rating power that way. No rating sytem will ever be perfect, but if we won't try to make it better, it's never going to get better.

 

Btw, if MrC is the new at this site, but he is a very good photographer, he should be able to claim to the top and gain respect from this community without much of a problem. On the other hand, if he is a really bad photographer, this system would prevent him from giving out bad rate to everyone else who have been putting out more quality photos than him. This system also prevent people from creating boggus account (or multiple account) for the purpose of trashing somebody else works. There are people who intentionally give bad rate to any top photos so that his own photo can claim its way to the top. That's unethical and very uncool and think this community should do more to discourage that.

Hi Ian, I know you are right! Thanks for your honesty.

While we are on the subject, do you think <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/3613666"> this frog photo</a> that my wife took deserve a 3/3. It was a direct rating from some guy name Paulo Pampolin. I have never comment on any of his photo and I have never rated any of his photos. I don't even know that he exists; so I can't think of any reason why he would like to say hello with a direct 3/3. How many of us would like to say hello by throwing out a direct rating of 3/3 or lower without leaving comment? That's pretty insensitive and very uncool, IMO.

"Give me a drag off that before you throw it away"

 

Thanks! I have been thinking about this last night and I think it will work. I still can't put Rule #3 into word, but may be the following example illustrate what I was shooting for:

 

Let's say MrA has an average of 5 for Aesthetics and 5 for Originality. Let's say that MrB have an average of 4 for Aesthetics, and 4 for Originality.

 

Now, MrB shouldn't have the power to rate MrA any less than 5/5. Since MrA has an higher average than MrB, it means he has put out more quality photos and more photo experience than MrB, therefore, MrA's advice should have more weight than MrB.

 

In this example, the lowest rate MrB can cast on MrA is no less than 5/5. Of course, he can always go higher but not lower than his own average. Note: Because MrB average of 4/4 was less than MrA average or 5/5, MrB can't rate lower than 5/5 on MrA. On the other hand, MrA can cast any number on MrB. Yes, it's ok for MrA to give MrB 1/1 if he deemd reasonable.

 

This is exactly the reason why rating power have to be earned. I believe that if you have been in the community for so long, you have earned a lot of respect from your peers, your words should count more. If you are a professional phographer, naturally, I would expect you have an average of at least 5/5. Therefore, you have the power give pretty much any low rate to photos that you deem bad. Now, if you have an average rate of 6/6. Only your peers with the average of at least 6/6 can give you a lower rate than 6/6.

 

I hope I have explain myself better this time. I think it will be a very fair rating system. I have been a moderator for a famous gaming forum for a long time and I know that the veterans of the community do make a big different. Their contribution to the community is priceless; therefore, their rating power, their words, their comment on a photo should have higher impact.

 

Of course, to prevent the mate from giving each other power, we may have to consider disabling direct ratings as Yongbo had suggested. I usually don't worry about someone abusing their powers. Most veterans of the comminity aren't the type that like to abuse their power. Beside, their peers and the admins do have the power to take them down.

Actually, that doesn't sound right either...Sorry, I was so close, but I couldn't nail it. Please just ignore what I said...I'm going now.

I believe I have made an error in rule #3. Here is actually what I was thinking:

 

Rule #3: In order to give a lower rate, your average rate that you have received so far must be at least equal or greater than the low rate that you are going to give.

If I'm running this site, I probably will try to come up with a better rating system. On top of my head, here is another idea that may work:

 

Rule #1: In order for people to rate other people work, they must have posted at least of their own photo for critique.

 

Rule #2: No one shall have the power to rate unless at least one of their photos have been rated. If everyone are newbies and no one have the power to rate anyone, the elves will have to cast the first rate to get the ball rolling.

 

Rule #3: You shall not give anyone a lower rate than the average rate that you have received so far. For example, if the total average of the rate from all of your photos = 4; this mean you aren't allowed to give anyone a rate of less than 4. You can go higher, but not lower.

 

I believe that power to rate have to be earned. In order for you to have the power to give anyone a 2 for originality as example, the average score of your originality from all of your photos must be at least greater than 2. This rating system will help prevent people whose portfolio are very bad from casting very bad rate on anyone else. If people have bad taste and don't know how to create good photo of their own, they should be allowed to rate anyone else lower than themselves. Go ahead to see if you can nitpick my rating system apart. Thanks!

"If somebody can't rate photos honestly because he is concerned with hurting the feelings of the photographer, he should not be rating photos."

 

Very true! If a strange girl ask us to rate her figure, what would we tell her? If she is stunningly beautiful, we would have no problem to be honest without concern about hurting her feeling. What if she is terribly the opposite? Would we tell her the truth or would we rather keep your mouth shut?

 

I really like that Simon guy on the American Idol, but personally, I really don't want to walk in his shoes. I would rather go with Paula Adul any day.

"What do you do when you get one of those request to explain your taste and your judgement?"

 

It really depends on the tone of voice of the question. If someone has asked you kindly to explain, may be you should say a few words why you think his/her photo is bad. In fact, I would be glad if someone has asked me to explain my taste before they launch the nuke in retaliation. I have meet many people who would simply launch the nuke at me without asking any question (regardless whether or not I have rated their photos).

"The problem is the PayPal. PN should accept credit card payments. Many guest users are in US and not using PayPal."

 

Nowadays, people can use PayPal without openning a PayPal account. Basically, use their Visa/Master card to make a one time payment just like they would normally pay anywhere else. Behide the scene, PayPal will wire the payment to PN. Therefore, people don't have to open a PayPal account if they don't want to.

I paid the subscriptions without anyone told me to. I think $25 per year is a real bargain for 100 MB of storage space. Even if nobody here see any of my photos, that's ok. It's good storage space for photos I want to show my friends and families; I would just simply email them the link to my photos. Don't have to attach anything that may jam up their mailbox.

"I really don't think that most of us are going to ship an expensive camera to anyone if we have not been paid first."

 

The profesional scammers are actually much more smarter than that. They could easily send us a real check. Of course, because we are not stupid, we would naturally wait for the check to clear before we ship them anything. The check may be issued from a real bank account, but it from a stolen bank account. When the bank send out the statement at the end of the month, the real owner of the account will mostly notice the stolen check. Then the bank and the cop will go after us. We will most like be arrested for cashing a stolen check. I saw how this whole scam played out on Dateline NBC (or may be it was on 20/20, I don't remember exactly which one).

I like the smiley!<IMG SRC="http://www.photo.net/general-comments/attachment/2832645/smile.gif"> Everyone using Instant Messages on AOL and MSN do it! I don't think it's for 14 year olds at all.

Sorry, my spelling isn't very good. For example, I use spell "defending" instead of "depending".

Pnina, since I'm not sure what browser you are using, I can't say anything specfica about it. Take IE browser as an example, you can empty the browser cache memory by going into "Tools->Internet Options->Delete Files->Delete all offlines content". As for the thumb image, I believe PN net rebuild it in batch at a certain time interval (may be once or twice a day defending on available processing power).