japi

D, obviously not all and not always my photos get that 'instant' 3, just like you said.

The rule is one member one vote and the condition for voting is an active PN account, regardless of an active portfolio. Fair enough, I just thought that the purpose of being a PN member was to participate in this comunity as a photographer. What is the point of being just a voter ? And why keeping the votes from new members (are they members or not ?) on hold pending review ? And, if this is an election, why not open the vote to the general public, members or not ?

I fully agree with you that judging the rater's competence by the general score of his own shots would be even worse, how do different styles and aestethic options compare ?

Brian, many thanks for your prompt response and explanation.

Best regards

In my opinion - valid, I hope - a name would help.

Just like we are doing right now. We are exchanging points of view in a free, open and civilized way, we may agree we mat disagree, I know who you are, you know who I am. What's so different about ratings ?

A rating system, any rating system, will be by definition controversial and imperfect. Scale used, anonimity (of both rater AND author), justification, criteria, certification of rater, etc, etc, etc will always be open fields for debate.

We, of course, have the radikcal solution in our hands: not submitting our photos to rating. The fact is that we DO want our photos to be appraised by our peers. That's the purpose of the whole thing !

I have a lot of simpathy for David M's point. Me too, normally 2 secs after posting a photo for c+r, I'm hit with at least one ANONYMOUS 3/3. Why is always the first one and almost authomatic, remains a mistery to me. Has anyone ever received an identified 3/3 ? Not me and, believe me, I have collected a few of these on my galleries.

On the other hand, I presume that all ratings are validated in some way by the WM's ? How and when is that done, since some ratings from "new members" are kept uncounted for long periods ?

I agree there is no miraculous solution in any other site known to me. I would consider two possible modifications to the system -

1. Rating only available to members with an active photo gallery. Critique/comment open to all members

2. On the rating forum, the ANONIMITY option should be available but requiring explicit action by the rater (tick box)

Best regards

I know this is an old, recurrring issue in the forum. Accept my apologies for

coming back to it.

However, I still fail to understand how does the valindation of ratings from

new members work.

I have, as I presume we all do, dozens of photos with ratings pending review

and validation. But, take this one of mine -

http://www.photo.net/photodb/ratings-breakdown?photo_id=4264378

It has 5 (five !) ratings pending validation for quite a long time. Will these

ever be counted ?

Thank you.

Good question, Jim.

In fact, I have several photos with the same remark. Some habe been like that for a long time. Does it mean that the new author was not approved and the ratings deemed abusive ? Will those ratings ever be counted ?

Thanks

Guys,

We are just, as far as I am concerned, exchanging views and opinions amongst people who are interested in photography, regardless considerations of competence, skills, technique. I am here to learn from all of you (although I would like to know who I am learning from - sorry about the joke, just could'n resist).

We are here only because we want to be here, we post our images and submit them to rating only because we want to do so.

The important thing is that we are all trying to make a great photography site even better, if at all possible. So whatever the conclusion of this topic might be, if any, I love being here.

Alexandre, nem penses nisso, no hard feelings at all, we belong to the same family, my friend and countrymate !

Alexandre,

As far as I take this discussion, there is not a ratings "problem".

There is a free exchange of points of view, where, as about anything else, nobody is totally right, nobody is totally wrong.

I have expressed my point of view and I am not whining about anything. In fact, I find the word, used in the context of this discussion, rather unnecessary and out of context. I would never be able to respond if your post was anonymous.

Regards

My pleasure, Janusz.

Brian, thank you for your post. We agree that it never be anything like a perfect so.lution

This is fascinating topic, always present in any site of this kind, which require - and live of - critiques/ratings/votes from own peers.

I confess I have mixed feelings about it. On one hand, photography is a hobby for me, I do not have any technical skills (not even self-developed) other than practice, I do and I post mainly travel photos for my own pleasure and so I don't care about ratings or votes.

On the other hand, the curiosity about what other people interested in photography think about my images brought me here to PN as well as to another Portuguese photo site. I post images, I submitt them to ratings and therefore, I obviously care about how they do.

One thing I do agree, comments are far more important and relevant than ratings and I have learnt a lot from some fantastic comments and constructive criticism that I received here. It a pleasure when someone takes the time to look at one's photo to view it, analyse it and criticise it. I have a great deal of respect for comments.

As far as ratings are concerned - probably a necessary evil as they are a more expedite way of participating in the process than writing a comment - I do not see the point of anonimity.

If somebody feels like rating one of my photos a 3, a 2 or a 1, why should he or her do so under anonimity ? What seems to be the problem ? We all are free of liking or disliking - for whatever reason, technique, subject, simply taste, perceived message - a photo. So what's wrong about voting in one's own name ? Do we change opinion, do we soften/sharpen our judgement just because it gets known and public ?

In my case, I have NEVER received a signed 3/3 and I have received A LOT (some of them, modesty apart, totally incompreensible)of anonymous 3/3.

Is there a message behind ? I think so.

A 3/3 means "below average" in both criteria and therefore there is something wrong with the photo for somebody. The photo does not match that person's "average" and if that is the case with one of my photos (and apparently it is the case with many of them)I would like to know why, I would like to improve and do things better.

I am totally in favour of fair, harsh if need be, but constructive critcism. I am totally against of use of the coward cover of anonimity to downgrade the work of others.