annabeth_smith

You two are pathetic. I bet Brian cracks up when he reads your posts here. I know I do.

I'm laughing my heinie off reading this thread. Do these so-called top photographers who

are complaining about other top photographers being mate raters really think they are

fooling anyone? Whether someone amasses 7/7, 7/6, and 6/7 ratings by mate rating, by

giving out lots of inflated ratings (6/6's and 6/5's) to their "fans" (I guess that's mate

rating too, really) and to people they don't know in the hopes of getting high reciprocal

ratings in return, or both, the end result is the same. I would venture to guess that most of

the site's "Top Photographers", at least most of those on the first 3 or 4 top rated pages,

have participated in some type of rating game in order to amass at least some of their

high ratings. Just visit their photo.net summary pages. Most of the site's highest rated

photographers have given out average ratings of 5.6 or higher. One of the biggest

complainers here has given out more than 12,000 "6" ratings, which make up more than

70 percent of his total ratings. Only about 200 of his total ratings (A+O) are 4 or lower.

Please, give this forum a break from your hypocritical whining.

 

I happen to like the variety of the new TRP and I do believe that Brian's changes are really

having an impact on those who have for a long time now been playing ratings games in all

their various forms.

To each his/her own, but my attitude is much the same as John Falkenstine's--I admire

good photographs, regardless of who takes them. BTW, the new default TRP is a refreshing

change! The mate raters have all but disappeared from the top pages, LOL.

 

BTW, I find it very amusing when people who give out average ratings along the lines of

6.14 for Aesthetics and 5.82 for Originality pretend not to be mate raters. It really makes

me LOL when these same people criticize others for mate rating.

Laurie, I've been looking in on this site for a few months now. I don't know exactly why I decided to sign up today. I guess I just can't stand hypocrites and felt like speaking out here. Hope no one holds it against me if and when I get up the courage to submit my first photos for critique. (-:

There are many members who are more clever with their mate rating habits than those in the 7/7 club being discussed here. These covert mate raters liberally throw out 6/6 and 6/5 ratings to average and below average photos in the hope of receiving inflated ratings in return. Some of these covert mate raters actually have the nerve to complain about the less discrete 7/7 mater raters commonly discussed in this forum.

 

Here is an example of the kind of rating distribution that a covert mate rater might display:

 

# Ratings Given:

 

Rating:_____1_2_3_4___5___6___7__

 

Originality:__1 0 0 104 2015 6359 207

 

Aesthetics:__1 0 8 90 1344 6280 963

 

Very amusing, isn't it?