I just had that - maybe silly - idea of having a second voting index on every posting made by those writing replies.
Official or not, maybe that would 'help' those who still are upset about the c-index voting system that opens door for any 'wise guy' having fun by giving zeros ...
As I said before: that may be a silly idea, but that other index could differ a lot from the c-index.
Nuff said, now it's up to you putting your two cents in it ;o)
I would rather live my life as if there is a God and die to find out there isn't, than live my life as if there isn't and die to find out there is.
Albert Camus
........
My Gallery
I would rather live my life as if there is a God and die to find out there isn't, than live my life as if there isn't and die to find out there is.
Albert Camus
........
My Gallery
I've stopped paying much attention to the voting scores and just compare the views to the downloads. I don't always have the time to be super social so I don't always get very many comments and if I'm understanding what you mean correctly, I don't think it would help to get a more accurate c-index score. And besides I don't think that most people would want to "insult" their friends with a low score even if they honestly thought it deserved one. I don't think it's fair to know who you're voting for.
What I would like is to have some guidelines posted in the VB on how to judge an image and how it would relate to the score given. At least more people would be voting by the same rules. They did an excellent job on the guidelines for critiquing an image but that's quite different than giving a score. For instance, should every image be compared to a National Geographic quality professionalism? or do we take into consideration that most everyone here is an amateur and grade on an amateur level? And what would that be exactly?
I would assume a 6 is a 60 so is that a failing score like in school? Or is it a good score because of the average of how people vote? If someone doesn't like a picture and gives it a low score because it's repulsive to them do they consider that maybe it's actually a good quality capture of a snake or they prefer photos without filter applications but it might be good for it's category. Or would it actually be proper to vote on how an image makes you "feel"? That's what art is all about, right? To express a feeling?
I could write several more paragraphs with questions on how to vote. Does anyone else agree that maybe some guidelines could help the voting system? Who's in charge of that anyway?
I'm sorry Chris if I changed the subject on you and I didn't mean to go off on a tangent but I'm not a robot. ( hi Jerry- x)
'Lisa
I've always thought that the c-index was a rating of how popular an image was, so I would be inclined to vote purely depending on how much you "like" the image. If you don't like it, regardless of whether it's due to the subject, the quality of the image, or whatever, you would vote lower on it.
PS I tried to think of an example where I might vote low on a good quality image where I didn't like the subject, but honestly couldn't think of one... maybe a cockroach... but I think if the detail levels/sharpness were high, it was well framed and composed etc (ie all the usual elements I look for in an image) I would like the image despite not liking the subject.
Maybe it's much simpler than I make it out to be when I vote but I know I don't always vote consistently by the same rules because there are none. What is the lowest number you consider a "good" score for popularity in the VB? 7? 5?
If there were guidelines in the VB stating to vote in the manner you said I would do so and also get why my scores were so low. But I often try to vote on quality alone. I think I voted about an 8 on "Rescope" or one of your other similar works with flowers because it was jam up quality work, but would I want to hang it on my wall? No. They both have around a 37. I think good quality deserves higher than that even if it looks more like a commercial than a "pretty picture"
But the real point is, Is there a vast difference in the way people vote and could that be the reason for low C-I scores or is it really just sabotage like many seem to believe? Could having guidelines help fix the problem? Or is Chris's idea a better solution? Maybe I'm wrong. I don't know. How does everyone determine what number to vote? Am I the only one with this opinion?
There have been many threads in the past suggesting improving voting etiquette and techniques but for the most part they are generally ignored. Here was my offering
Thank-you Phil, that was very enlightening and eloquently put, might I add. I'm glad I'm not alone in my sentiment although if it's already been discussed in such detail and ignored, it seems somewhat useless for me to try to make a point that's already out there. I think I'll just go back to ignoring my scores. I am curious to hear more about Chris's idea in more detail. How would that be done exactly? It could be fun at least. I would regain an interest in the scores to compare the differences between them.
I was just thinking of a second voting opportunity like it is on many other photo pages (like photosig.com) where you can give your voting in addition to your response.
BUT what's even more interesting:
some time ago - when I still gave a sh** on the c-index, I wondered how the voting system works.
then I thought about a technical update to this system which could look like this:
every vote is being logged, so the c-index can be created.
if there's a clear direction into which the index goes from a certain number of votes AND then there's one that votes totally different, let's say more than 3 beside (lower or higher), then this vote could be automatically 'corrected' to a lower difference.
all these parameters of course have to be tought about and defined very carefully but then at the end, no one can say 'my photo's c-index was fu**ed by some funny wise guy who only comes here to make low votes and having fun of it'.
Hope some of the persons who are involved in this site's technique read this, maybe getting some new ideas.
Greetings from Austria
Chris
I was just thinking of a second voting opportunity like it is on many other photo pages (like photosig.com) where you can give your voting in addition to your response.
Unfortunately this is how it used to be until some big egos took it upon themselves to vote over and over again on the same pic with a 0 and then vote on their own work over and over again with 10's so that is why it was buried..
I think with the voting it could be compulsory to state "why" you voted the way you did with anything under 3 not so much as a comment but with a few things to tick eg. perspective (good/not too bad/needs work), lighting (good/too dark/too light), focus (good/bad/needs work)and a little box next to each word where people can write on how to improve.
At least that way people are getting a reason as well as helpful suggestions this too will stop the critic/voter getting abused in a PM due to voting being anonymous..
I just had that - maybe silly - idea of having a second voting index on every posting made by those writing replies.
Official or not, maybe that would 'help' those who still are upset about the c-index voting system that opens door for any 'wise guy' having fun by giving zeros ...
As I said before: that may be a silly idea, but that other index could differ a lot from the c-index.
Nuff said, now it's up to you putting your two cents in it ;o)
Have a nice day
Chris