Is there a way to view your Voting results of your images?

if you click on your Caedes Control .. it will tell you how many votes, views, DL's, ... etc ... but it won't tell you what those votes were

Is this what you were looking for?

Yes sorta. I was curious about the average vote also?

Nope. Its my understanding that there used to be something showing what people had voted on an image, but people got mad seeing 1's and 0's...

lets get real.. when an image with a C index in the high 70's becomes a C-index in the 50's with three or four votes.... obviously there's one's and zero's being handed out...

mad seeing 1's and 0's... seeing #FF0000?

There used to be some sort of graph in either The FAQ or " Other Stuff " that showed just what the average vote was.

It's still there under "Fun with statistics".

(*cough*) .. surely MY work is not receiving AVERAGE votes .. so what good would such a chart do for me

hahahahahaha

HERE is the average c-index ... from THIS page .. the average vote chart seems to be gone

seems I touched a nerve! LOL

There is only one way...you have to become the site administrator!

How come I get an error message in the voting booth the image is blank and if you click on the blank image I get error #0569478 am I doing something wrong.
Jason

I know you sometimes get an error if you leave a voting booth page for a while and then try to vote (because someone else has voted on it in the meantime). Not sure if this is the error you're describing though. I'd probably just refresh or reload the page, if that doesn't help then you should lodge a report on the dev site.

No I just logged on and tried to to use the voting booth b4 I uploaded my image and I got the mess straight off. :(

Same thing happened to me with an image in the VB. It's still blank. Title is Caged Fright and it's gone from the person's gallery as well.

Sorry about that. Somehow an image was approved which didn't upload properly.

WE have a voting booth? Where? Why wasn't I invited?

~staggers off with drink in hand tryin' to find this voting booth thingy~

i just want to say "thank" you (the actual word i'd like to use has one less letter) to whomever has been going out of their way to tank my work in the VB. I've given up on trying to get someone, anyone to do anything anything about it. damn shame, really. when an image with a C index of 70+ all of a sudden become a 50 something, or a 60 something once in a while, ok...i'll buy the 'law of averages' theory. but it's been every G-damn time, with something like 3 exceptions. so i'll keep posting my work, for you few who seem to enjoy it. and when i'm finally tired of the nonsense, i'll just pack up my stuff and head out the door. and no, there wont be any further mention of this, or ensuing drama. do you really think because it happened once and was fixed, it wouldnt happen again? those who run the site dont strike me as a naive bunch. i've tried asking, behind closed doors, for some resolution to this, and in several instances..i got an answer that boiled down to : "dont sweat it, it happens to me too" well sorry. i'm sweatin' it. if it were just a silly little number (it is, actually) with no weight, then fine. but it's one of, if not the only slide rule in determining which works are or arent banished forever to one's own gallery. it's the unfairness that's bugging me, and the fact that it's known that this still happens and not one thing (that i know of, granted) that's being done to correct it. I don't for a second imagine i'm even close to being the best photographer in the room... hell i probably dont even fit IN the room. i just want a fair score.

70 --> 50 isnt much of a change. 70 --> 30 is. Happens to me all the time, i just use the c-index as a extremely vague gauge of what people like. Actually i think the best way to know if ur work is good or not is to see how many people visit it.

Your asking for a fair score...we are open to ideas (are we?...)

noah, i'm talking about a repeating, constant pattern where the image already has most or all of the full compliment of votes.. say on average 10 to 12 at the time the site is updated. for it to drop 20 points in 3 votes... do the math...

In that case...whats the deal!? 20% in 3 votes!?!?!?!? Wow, yeah.

hold on, my brother is playing with my "speakers"...let me slap him.

*edit* I'm back. So since you talked to other ppl about this, it cant be a server delay sort of thing, right? I'm just guessing it's unprobable unprobablility happening to you.

The number of votes is updated in real time, but the c-index is updated once a day. Therefore, you can't say anything about those last 2 votes because you don't know how many votes were included in the earlier c-index.

...i shouldof known that...

third_eye the voting booth is random so ther is no way for an individual to target and sabotage your scores.

In theory anyway, they could still target certain image types with score bombing, affecting all artists with that particular kind of picture...

My point is that individuals have no control over who's images they get to vote on so they can't target any particular artist.

there's two main reasons why i disagree. firstly, to answer samatar, a good many images that have zero votes have already been viewed a good two dozen times (easily) and i myself have recognized lots of images from the new images gallery in the VB. it's one of the reasons i dont vote much anymore. i dont feel i can be impartial.

secondly, to answer geri, i'd once again beg to differ. the site updates at or about 830 am eastern time. if an image had 12 votes prior to update, and then upon updating, shows the C index based on those votes, would it not be fair to say that any subsequent C index would be the result of... (drumroll please) the additional votes cast. i may not have a PhD in math, or physics, but i'd say i have a decent grip on logic. So i ask, what if anything will be done? it isn't just me, i'm just the only one with enough nerve to come out and say it's happening..or will anyone join me?

as a PS... here i am, a member of the site saying i feel as though i've been wronged, and it seems there's more energy devoted into shooting me down than actually looking into my claim. i mean, i'm not stating something to insult someone, i've presented what i feel is a valid concern, and i'm requesting a serious, non-dismissive answer.

Why don't you suggest how it should/could be fixed then.

two things come to mind. the first would be to have votes cast on images, and then releasing them to the new images gallery. this would do more to ensure the anonymitity of not only the voter, but the image as well. the second would be, as has been brought up before, to split the images into photography, CG, and fractals. this way images are voted on by those more familiar and well versed in a particular medium. and while i can't divulge who's said what to me, others have gone through this as well. so why not ask around? i'm enough of a hothead (yes, i can admit it) to say what i think, when i think it. others might shy away from stating a position in public forum, but might be more candid in say...a blind survey, or even a one-at-a time inquiry...

Honestly, i was thinking about suggesting:

1) BYE BYE C-INDEX! But I know that has probably already been suggested and shot down by the people who cherish the scores.

2) C-index also based on a 7 day, amount of visitors visiting/commenting the image (cuz ppl visit images that are good, right?) concentration avarage (get the idea?)...So say you get 25 visitors (1 pt) in 7 days and you get 3 comments (worth 5 pt ea). (One more thing, people that have you on their friends list cant affect the score). So then your score is (25+[3*5])/7=your little average sorta thing. Then you add ('your little average sorta thing' + 'the normal c-index score') / 2 = kaboom! Your new c-index based on visits. This to has it's problems, but, hey, it's an idea. (Sum1 could build off it).

not to poo-poo the fact that you are speaking out, or making suggestions .. but ..

You really want a possible TWO DAY delay on image passage?

a lot of people sign their work

in the interest of fairness, i'd go along with that.

I think you will be out-voted 10 to 1...I'll belong to the majority btw. I think c-indexes work well, they give u a VAGUE idea of how GOOD your work is to the GENERAL caedesian PUBLIC.

IF anything should be CHANGED then the most sensible way to slightly fix things is to vote by gallery.

The only way to get a good result is to ask all ...what...er, 6.5 billion(?) people in the world to vote on your image. ONLY then will you have a ACCURATE and PRECISE...or one of those two (yes they are different) result....but i have a feeling it would take too long to get your results back. :-S

Of the subject..i wonder if my school has a photography club....

noah, i think you misunderstood something. if an image gets voted on, and the average vote winds up being 30..then 30 it is. i'm simply asking for assurance that it's an honest 30. not to mention what you just posted totally contradicts your previous post.

..i change my mind a lot, that way people think i'm on both sides; it's a technique to make every1 mad at you.

Anyways, if out of those 14-16 people, 30 c-index it is. Lol, i honestly dont see anything wrong with that.

New idea: Caedes should take one of your, or mine, or sum1's images and make 100 people vote on it. Compare, contrast..repeat serveral other times. I have a feeling the results MAY be closer than you expect...but i've been wrong b4. >_> ...many times b4.

Why are you so hung up on the c-index? Do you think the c-index makes a difference one way or another (besides letting members stroke their own egos over a high c-index, or give them something to complain about when they end up with a lower one)? We have said it on quite a few occasions, ' It has no bearing on our choices for the permanent galleries.' The c-index is way more accurate then the system we use to elect the president of the U.S., but I haven't seen you say a word about that.

...i love that last line. WOW! That was good...

Anyways, were you talking to me, us, him or they?

only because it hadn't been relevant, Tom. i wish you had been around (offline, in real life) while i've fumed and raged about it. as for my 'hang-up on the C index, that wouldn't be accurate. as i had written above, if an image wound up with 30 (as an example) and it was due to votes averaging out to just that, then fine. chalk it up to a difference in taste.

it's when an image of mine has gotten a decent score, and then afterwards takes a nose dive, therein lies my grievance. so the base of the matter isn't even the end result of a score. someone's messing with my work, and by extension, me. and i'm still amazed that here i am, saying i've been wronged, and all the energy seems to be placed not in resolution, but in squashing the very grounds for my complaint. why is that?

Fuming and raging over a c-index, how can you say that isn't getting hung up on the c-index? If an image's c-index takes a nosedive, does it degrade the quality of the image? No, it doesn't. The more votes an image gets, the more it's c-index will stabilize. Every great artist/photographer has had their detractors. Honestly, do you think everyone liked Picasso's or Monet's works. Rise above such petty stuff, don't let such things bother you and concentrate on taking great photos.

yikes..the fuming and raging was over elections...

..uh piner, your heads on fire. ;-) (just had to say that, no real relavence to the conversation).

Oh, fuming about the elections... you didn't make that clear at first. Sorry.

btw Rob, just to address your other question... I think it's pretty much universally agreed that the c-index is not currently functioning as intended, and it's also universally agreed that until each image has a higher number of votes and a stable stastical basis for comparison, we can't completely evaluate it.

There's been so much debate over what would fix it and what's wrong w/it, that many people are just burnt, and would like to see the whole issue go away for awhile.

While it is possible that someone has seen your photos in the new images gallery before they've gotten to the voting booth... it would take alot of time and energy to invest in screwing you over on purpose… just think how bad you must have pissed somebody off for them to take that all that time to go hunting for your images! Good job soldier! 8•P

that's me stuffed then :-)

Cat said: "...I think it's pretty much universally agreed that the c-index is not currently functioning as intended, and it's also universally agreed that until each image has a higher number of votes and a stable stastical basis for comparison, we can't completely evaluate it....."
~~~~~
Yep, this has been debated for some time and it is still apparent that "the c-index is not functioning as intended," Cat, and, clearly, many here are "burnt" in relation to this debate. Nonetheless, your claim that "until each image has a higher number of votes and a stable statistical basis for comparison, we can't completely evaluate it," is based on faulty reasoning in that many images are archived before such a "stable statistical basis" is ever reached. Once archived, images no longer come up for votes in the voting both. Hence, their c-index is locked in based on a relatively small number of votes, which makes their reliability suspect.

As for the claim that "the c-index is way more accurate than the system we use to elect the President of the U.S.," I highly doubt that. Perhaps you could define "accurate." <G> Wen

"... universally agreed that the c-index is not currently functioning as intended ..."

I disagree, therefore this statement is false.

Perhapse you could define "functioning as intended" since this seems to be the central point of the debate.

I visited the booth just to see what it was and it said that I should vote on 10 images if I upload one. Is this enforced or a guideline or something else? I admit that I immediately backed out as it had presented me with a photograph and I just don't have a clue what to look for in a photograph. (I don't have much idea in other categories either, but it is definitely more so regarding a photograph.)

Is there any sort of guidance on this or on the meaning of the scoring system? Or are people supposed to vote just on the basis of whether they like the picture or not (in which case, it seems a bit odd). It's rather confusing...

By the way, if the c-index doesn't affect choices for the permanent galleries, then the information at http://www.caedes.net/Zephir.cgi?lib=Wiki&page=voting should be altered. Right now, it lists one disadvantage of "selective voting" as "Bad: Some images do not even get a single vote. This robs the author of feedback on the image and makes it more difficult for the ImageMods to determine the image's quality (for inclusion in the permanent galleries)." which is quite misleading if the results are not used by the ImageMods in any case. Or am I missing something here? (Last time I asked something, I discovered I'd missed a link explaining it in detail.)

There's also an apparent discrepancy between "you must view the fullsize image" and "you must download it". While technically true, I bet most people think of downloading as saving to disk.

Also, is there anything to prevent somebody opening the new images gallery in a new tab or window, finding or searching for the image shown in the booth and thus finding out the author etc. before voting? This would still involve some work, but not much. I would test this, but I don't want to vote on an image I don't feel qualified to judge (especially not if it is only one of 10-12 votes).

-cfr

as a beginner your first TWO images are free of the voting requirement ... after that you must vote 10 images per 1 upload ... and these votes expire after, maybe, 20 hours ... so there is no ....

Wimpy: .. I will gladly pay you today for a hamburger on tuesday

or .. you could join the Caedes Cadre and support the site ... voting is still an option and privledge available to you

Margali.. i don't understand how you cant vote on a photograph or any other kind of image.. I have said this many many times on many many threads about voting (and have taken a lot of abuse from certain members because of this opinion)...
I'm sure you can look at an image and decide whether or not it looks nice.. for photos.. does the pic appeal to your taste, does the colour look real, is it too dark, too bright, does it look grainey.. as for fractals and any other kind of art... ask yourself.. do i like the colour, do i like the design.. its not that hard to do.. and i'm sure there would be at least one thing you would like about an image even if it was just the colour...
When I became a member, the only photos i had ever taken were family & holiday pics, I had no idea of DOF or composition etc, but i learned gradually I started off looking at the pic and saying.. ooohh i like that scene or what the hell is that?.. lol.. or love the colours etc.. the more you vote, view and comment on the different art here, and read other peoples comments above you.. you will work it out.. but for now, vote on what YOU see, what YOU like or dont like.. I start at 5 and work around that number.. 5 is average for me.. there are tips on how to vote on the voting booth page, it gives you an idea on what to look for...

so PLEASE.. just because photography isnt your "thing" just open your mind and your eyes and give the artist, the pic and your tastes a chance...

Wendy, as stated before, yes, images currently archived will lose out by not achieving the higher # of votes that later ones will while in the new images gallery. This is one of the effects always of instituting a new system until balance is achieved. Sad but true.

Caedes, my statement was based on many many conversations I've had both on the threads and in pm's w/various members. I have yet to hear any member say that on average the c-index gives a fair evaluation on a regular basis. As has been discussed, this is due to a number of factors... the relatively low # of votes per image as yet, people low voting due to dislike of certain types of art, and ad nauseum the numerous reasons raised before.

My impression of what the c-index should be is a fair, unbiased evaluation of a piece displayed as a numerical rating. It is the reason I continue to support the need for a c-index, and continue to ask people for patience while we hit the higher number of votes per image (although I have been sadly lax in voting myself lately... I'll fix that, I swear). I have seen way too many instances of friends lauding images that are deficient in a number of ways. I think that constructive criticism is much more honest and useful in those situations, especially as exclaiming wondrous only encourages people to continue posting images w/obvious flaws. This is not to say that those images have no merit, but it does not encourage people to strive harder for the better image, and I think a c-index which functions correctly will be a valuable tool.

(p.s. my statement was "pretty much universally agreed" which takes into account one or two dissenters 8•P)

I say .. as part of membership here, we all have highfalutin symbiotic circuitry installed that votes our conscience ... instantly beams our gut reaction to the mothership ... in fact we could hook into a highspeed slideshow (360 images per second) and be done with the whole shebang rather quickly

then some plucky chap who has managed to make his pectorals bounce and jump to music will also have figured a way to affect the signal prior to sending

Google search for chill pill:-)

Please find 2 of them Darryl ;=)

Oh, I was going to hand them out to the whiners oh damnit spelliin I meant winners

okay..gotcha. I was just needin' to chill a bit after reading the mantra again !!!!! ;=)

Darryl, do you really just see this as whining? yes, i got the joke, and yes, i can take a joke, it's just that this has been happening over and over and over again. i've tried submitting images at different times of the day, etc. without beating a dead horse, it really just simply appears as though i'll get a score of "X" and then have to wait for the next 5 or so votes to see how much it drops. on average, i'd say it's usually 10-15 points. and as i've said before, it's not even a question of just the low score.it's the pattern it takes on during the process....

I just checked and see that Caedes Cadre don't have to vote. It's a perk. Well I try to vote for 40 images every 12 hours even though I pay for a subscription. Maybe that perk should be removed and then we'd get more input in the VB. You could just require them to vote for 5 images for every one they upload.

It is logical that the c-index would be less indicitive of you final score on the first update as it would likely be based on only a few votes (for example you might upload at 10 pm and the c-index might be updated at 12); at the next update a full 24 hours would have elapsed so several more votes would have been received and the c-index would be more indicitive of how people feel about it overall. THis might explain why people often experience a large change in their stats between their first score and the second update (however it doesn't explain why the c-index would consistantly go down, indeed in some cases you should see the same thing in reverse, ie a large jump from a low score to a high one). Anyway I just thought I'd put that out there for everyone, maybe it will help one or two people.

So I voted on 30 images, but I'd still like a translation of the numerical scores...

Cat said:"....Caedes, my statement was based on many many conversations I've had both on the threads and in pm's w/various members. I have yet to hear any member say that on average the c-index gives a fair evaluation on a regular basis......"
"....My impression of what the c-index should be is a fair, unbiased evaluation of a piece displayed as a numerical rating....."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I second that for the most part. My understanding is that the c-index is basically intended as an index of image quality. Currently, as I peruse images on this site, I simply do not see what appear to be reliable c-index values. SOME scores appear to apply fairly well as an index of image quality, while many more seem to tend to grossly underrate images, particularly non-photographic images, though I don't think c-index values on photographs provide a truly reliable index of quality either.

The problem, as I see it, lies in the low number of votes on images. You simply cannot obtain a RELIABLE statistic if the SAMPLE of votes is too small. In order for the c-index system to truly work, c-index values would have to be based on MANY MORE votes. RELIABILITY is an essential ingredient of VALIDITY/accuracy. You can't have an accurate system if the system is not statistically reliable.

I'll leave it there, though there are other concerns with the current way the c-index is calculated that I have voiced before (i.e. forcing c-index values into a STANDARD distribution, weighting votes, etc.)

I love this site, but I think the c-index is currently little more than an irritating distraction.
Wen

lol. yes, i think everyone agrees the current sample of votes is too small and that's the major problem... but do you know of a better way to get to a higher # of votes than to be patient and keep voting? 8•P

yes, but noone here takes me seriously....

ok, so i went for the cheap laugh, but seriously, yes. i still say if the VB is split in two categories, photography and non-photography, that would go leaps and bounds towards images getting a fairer, more informed vote (i speak to the CG and fractal side of the house here too).
the other idea i've brought up, which would trample all over everyone's need for instant gratification, is to have images voted on prior to display in a gallery... but i know we all have a better chance of seeing elvis, and having him tell us where jimmy hoffa is buried...hmmmm although... that would motivate more people to engage the VB...

I guess whiners was a little harsh. We are not able to please everyone. A lot of hard work has gone into providing this voting system and we should be less concerned about how it is functioning. It is rather inconsiderate to keep bringing this up with people that have no means of solving your issues however. These discussions just bring moral down. You just need to read above to see how this affects the members here.

*applauds darryl*

theres a more accurate way of knowing if your image is better...

go to an image that has been posted around the same time as yours, and compare it's views and c-index with yours....so at least you know ppl like THAT pic more than YOUR pic and do it with other people, and you know where u stand...

...i stand pretty low btw. ;-)

faulty logic noah... there's no guarantee or even likelihood that the images came up in the voting booth @ the same time. 8•)

The way I see it, we can't get an unbiased evaluation of anything. There are those who dislike the color yellow, and would therefore vote anything containing an amount of yellow lower than a more favored color. People are, by nature, selfish, and they want things their way. Some voters dislike photos, other dislike fractals/flames. What it all comes down to is that there is no real solution. Cat, I understand what you mean by unbiased, which is a fair, logical look at something without any opinion getting in the way. People are incapable of being unbiased.

I don't submit images as often as I used to, due to being busy, et cetera, but I have given up on trying to improve what can't be "fixed." By "fixed," I mean made into an unbiased rating of the quality of an image.

Lastly, I do have one suggestion. I agree with ThirdEye, et al, that images should be split into different catagories. Taking a photograph is a completely different process than making a fractal, or a render. It is comparing apples and oranges.

And now I'm done writing for the day ;øP

Cat .. Noah's faulty logic was based on image Views\DL's ... let's face it, if your image doesn't draw people to its mini-me version ... no point in waiting for *geinstein's theory of qualitivity to tell you it ... uh, what is the word I'm looking for ... oh,yes .... SUCKS

..you also have to use a little commen sense in w/ my comparison "method". =P

Just look at the pics, if they look good, then they are good, and compare with your own...

(we all basically already know what the c-index index score will be as soon as u post the pic...or, i hope u do)

People are NOT basically selfish! I disagree with that statement whole heartedly. Many of the people here are very friendly, interactive and understanding, but not selfish. You can read that in their comments and PMs. There are some very fine contributors to this website who enjoy other peoples works as much as their own. I like to be motivated by others to better work and in my comments I try to be encouraging and helpful and I know that others do the same. This is not a winning/losing game, it's a website for like minds with like interests to have a chance to get their images posted (that right there is an opportunity) and critiqued and have some kind and friendly banter with other photographers, fractal makers, graphic designers, etc. from around the globe.
Forget about the C:index. Beauty is as beauty does. If you see the beauty in yourself, you will see it everywhere. 1-10 is a subjective assessment at best. I'm happy if an image makes it to 50, but not unhappy if it is less. Different strokes for different folks, I guess, but why let that C number become a big bugaboo. If you like your art, post it. If you like what you did to an image and find it pleasing, post it. If you want a critique of your images, post them and let the C:index fall where it may. So what.

People are, by nature, selfish!

Who's wants are the ones that you most often think about? Your own.
If that's not selfish, than what is?

If we want nothing, then we are never disappointed. Love your neighbor as yourself. Is that not a good way to live?

speaking of beuty, i have to give my latest photo a little advertisment. ;-) ...ok, continue on.

Whether thinking most about your own wants is selfish probably depends on what you want. There's nothing to stop me wanting somebody else to do well. Besides, "most" doesn't mean "only". If somebody spent 49% of the time thinking about the wants of others would that be selfish?

Unselfish is not the same as selfless, is it? - cfr

LOL! Looks like this has turned into a discussion on the nature of human motivation/hedonism. My take? It's hard to have sincere concern for others if you don't also care about yourself...they are not mutually exclusive, IMO.

Anyway, Cindy said: ".... If you want a critique of your images, post them and let the C:index fall where it may. So what...."

By and large, I agree with your reasoning here, Cindy, EXCEPT that the c-index is NOT a meaningless number on this site. It determines what new images are cycled on the Caedes Home page and, if viewers sort images by c-index (an option people have in viewing images,) chances are good they may never advance to pages of images with relatively low c-indexes. Some moderators have said that the c-index does not influence whether images make it to the permanent galleries, while others have siad that it influences what images they take the time to look at to make decisions in that regard.

So, while I wish the c-index was inconsequential here, that simply doesn't seem to be the case. Wen

Point well taken.

well, now that some of you have weighed in on the issue, and i've done my bit of venting, i have this to say.. wen did a fine job of making a case for the relevance of the c-index, and that's partially why i'd gotten irritated. whether i'm correct or not, it was more than just petty dissatisfaction over the 'popularity' of an image. since, even indirectly it has a bearing on the image's future, it's something i'm concerned about. i had actually forgotten about the automatic display on the home page based on the c-index, as well as the sorting by c-index option in galleries (thanks wen).

i'm not trying to drive a wedge between any of the members, nor make things any more difficult for those who run the site (believe it or not) and honestly, if i didnt like it here, instead of investing all of this effort, i'd simply leave. i've tried to make a coherent post about what i believe is a valid concern. i just ask that it be treated as such

rob

Um, sortof off topic (waits for third eye to pm me again)...anyways:

Could we make a new forum area where people can request for more c-index votes. So lets say i write: "More votes on Prassino Plz" then inside the thread it says "...i think the c-index is a little off, oculd people that have an interest in computer art plz give it a few more votes?"...or maybe "could people who only have 800x600 monitors vote plz".

This wouldent count for one of the 10 votes that you do to normally post, so that way people still get their c-index scores ontime..or something like that. Good idea? Or er, no...?

That would kind of kill the random aspect of the voting booth. Also, what would only people with 800x600 monitors voting do?

also, if i'm not mistaken, that's how images were voted on before. and then there actually had been abuse (see 'voting wars of '05') and i'm guessing that going backwards is a bad thing.

and noah, i pm'd you in an effort to be discreet, rather than making what i had to say a public matter...anyone who wants to know what i said, just ask (in a pm)

Grrr, i'm making more mistakes than a monkey today and um, every other day... >_> (has nothing to do with your avatar). Anyways...(forgetting the past)...

Theres away around the problem with my idea, (theres a button that allows ppl to vote on your image, if u so choose), but thats a pain in the...*ahem*

Noah.. i personally don't thing asking for a vote is a good idea

#1 its unfair to everyone, as I know only certain members would do that and a lot of others wouldn't (I wouldn't bother)

#2 thats how voting was done in the past and got abused which is why the whole thing was changed in the first place..

This debate will never die, there will always be people against it, people for it and people who couldnt care less about it... whatever happens to it whether it stays the same or gets changed the feelings for the "C" will never be resolved...

To me personally (this is my own opinion and i'm not against anyone who is upset about it) but I put my work on here to share with others, I do the work as an outlet of my creativity, imagination, relaxation and learning new things.. to me the c-index is just a number, and i couldnt tell you what they are on my images.. i rather have feedback whether its positive or not, advice, suggestions etc thats more of a help to me than a number.. you could have a number of 50 what does that tell you.. does it say your image would look a bit better if you cropped it here or increased the gamma or get rid of the grain etc?

well thats my opinion I've had my say.... i'll go back into my corner now... lol...

*Please note: This was not meant to offend anyone or start another argument or upset anyone...

*shakes fist at jackie* grrrrrrr!! :o)

..which is why the owner of the image can decide if he/seh WANTS it to be voted on an extra 'x' amount of times...

...so, yeah, it could be unfair, but it may work.

Crawls out of corner.......

*smooch to Rob.... lmao

NO NOT "COULD BE" IT IS UNFAIR... Why should only a select few get the votes to make them better than everyone else... that idea is abusing the system the same way as it was abused originally...

I wouldn't sweat it Jacquie. The silly thing about all these types of discussion is that people should have realised by now that the voting system isn't going to change any time soon.