There's been some mention of things the site is missing. I don't think the former voting booth would be something the site would be better off with, if only for the susceptibility to abuse and discontent.

So here's my idea:

Be your own booth. Set up your own 1-5 or 1-10 scale, or whatever. Whatever parameters you choose, as well. Be it aesthetics, artistic merit, color, technical merit, etc.

But here's the catch: for each number offered, substantiate it with a reason. Good, bad, or otherwise... come up with a "why".

Last two things, and they're the most important.

A) No hit and run number, and go. If you choose to use this idea, do it all the way. And B) please, please, PLEASE do not leave a score with the expectation of one in return, or as reciprocation because one was left for you. Do so ONLY because a given image moved you to provide insight.

Whaddya say?

Point us in the direction of some you have already done, as examples, and it may catch on

It's a newly hatched idea, but basically,

"Hi (insert name here). I thought I'd stop by and take a shot at critiquing your image.

I'd give this about a 7/10 for technical quality. It's nice, but here's where you might've missed a touch here and there"

etc etc

I think one of the reasons people don't leave detailed comments is because they are either reluctant to raise the ire of the the person they're "talking" to or they don't have enough experience to make a critical critique. Whenever I find myself commenting on someone's work, and I have no previous experience with them, I look at their bio to try to determine their level of experience.

Interesting thought, Nik.

And just to clear something up, I'm not entirely sure to what extent I'll be offering these critiques, if at all.

I thought I'd offer an idea which might be useful to the site and its members.

Have fun with it. :-)

Nik, I used to have a system awarding points for certain aspects in the old VB. It is not so relevant any more as a chunk was for the suitablility as wallpaper and that seems to be not such a requirement any more.
I did try to find the original post but as the search function here in the discussion board has not been working for some time have not been successful - yet

I find I get more constructive comments if I offer some myself when I post a picture showing that I am aware of its perceived shortcomings. Perhaps if artists were encouraged to give themselves marks out of 10 it might encourage others to do likewise. Then we may get to a situation where honest critiques are more accepted.

I suppose, Chris. But this was less about telling people what they're doing wrong, and more about offering an idea for a different activity, exercise, etc. Besides, I'm guessing for those who chose to voluntarily (key word) participate in this exercise, will themselves become more aware of the merits and shortcomings (for lack of a better term for needing improvement) of their own submissions.

I really wasn't intending for this to be seen as something one would receive (or offer) begrudgingly.

Hey, I tried.

It still all comes down to a difference of opinion and no semblance of compromise among the members here.

-Nik

After so many years of controversy over the c-index and voting booth I think it would be a mistake to return to them...Rob's idea is a good one as it allows those who invite a rating and honest critique from others on their images to receive such by indicating their own rating and opinion first in the description of their images and then invite others to do the same, while those who don't like it needn't include that in their image description...see "Strange" by Chris (coram9) for a current example.

Looking at the above mentioned image and the comments that follow certainly helps one to understand this idea better. Probably the best thing about it is that it is entirely up to the individual whether to participate.

I think it can work provided people give their HONEST opinion, both when giving themselves a rating and when leaving comments on others images. If it turns into a gush fest/"10/10" fest then it will be pointless.

Oh look. My very own stalker-troll has logged back in. Why not use your real name, coward?

Guys, I'm a little busy, but to answer briefly, this is kind of a do-it-yourself idea.

Want to set an example by self-rating? Great.

Want to have a pre-set guide of which things to critique? Great.

Want to hand out all 10's to be nice? .... Eh, not so great.

The rest? I have faith that those who choose to participate will figure out how it works best for them as individuals.

:-)

Gotta run. Real life beckons.

kamvebrat's bratty little speech is canned. Lauren hasn't been here for months, and besides I already read it. There hasn't been any brow beating, name-calling, or unchecked rampage on this thread at all.

But does he REALLY mean that he's not coming back?? Saints be praised if he goes away for good but somehow I doubt it. He certainly didn't mean it the first time he rolled out this tantrum.

Mary, that um, "bratty little speech" was actually mine. It was in the middle of a heated moment on a heated thread. I'm not proud of the fact that I lost my temper, but I'm human. It was, however, by my best guess at least 4+ years ago. The point of this person's repeated posting of my words, though, seems to be the continuation of some sort of grudge agenda.

So now that that's out in the open and done with, lets get back to the topic of the thread itself. Please?

Sorry. I thought you had checked out for a while. File the 'bratty little speech' under "Karmic Rebound" and be done with it.

Works for me. ;-)

I give this discussion.. a 6.

... ...

Hmmm.. maybe a 7.

Content: 8
Focus: 5


I think it could have been improved by doing a couple of things. First and foremost.. ignore the trolls.

Then..

Sending me some cookies.

... ...

That last part is particularly important.


Constructive commenting.. do it.

Assigning a number?

If desired, the author/artist can request as much in the accompanying narrative.

Forget the restrictions.

Doesn't work, anyways.. any how on anything that has been introduced to the site.

At least, not to the letter.

Which is ok, I suppose. Community adjusting to whichever and whatever.

If enough people adopt it, probably would be easier to justify recoding stuff to make it a more permanent function/option of the site, methinks.

No restrictions, Les. At least, not intended at conception. More like guidelines, sort of the way museums (ahem) "suggest" donations. I kid.

But really, this was intended as a "do it if you want, how you want" exercise. Site coding not really necessary, since this is voluntary and arbitrary, no?

Sure, on the voluntary note.

Guess I am showing my hand insofar (and as combative of an issue as it got at times) the C-Index is concerned.. would like to see it return in a more permanent way.

As I believed it drove and kept traffic on site here.

Um, ok. I don't see a way to exorcise demons of the past if the C-index is returned as a permanent fixture, simply due to some the behaviors and attitudes it fostered.

But anyway, as a "happy medium", my thought was this new alternative might let members stick their toe in the water, and offer their opinions, but again, because it's something they wanted to do. Not because it was a vehicle by which they could post, or through which they could curry favor with others.

I think what might attract some members, both old and new, is some minimum standard of quality. Other than porn, or copyright infringement, it kinda seems like there's an "anything goes" acceptance of images. Some probably feel that's ok. Others, perhaps, might not.

But since that opens up yet another can of worms, again, I suggested the "no strings" alternative. Maybe if some honest critiques are offered on images that "need help", some headway might be gained in re-establishing a bar of some minimum height.

n/a

n/a

A personal word about the c-index, of which I did my share of bitchin'... but there was a positive angle for me too: It did help me learn about what constitutes good photography and eventually I began to 'compete' with myself and try for higher scores. I repeat: This is just a personal word and not a vote to bring the c-index back. I'm aware there was cheating and bitching and that would no doubt continue. I like Rob's ideas; right now there are a lot of beginners who could benefit from some sort of direction, and a lot of images that do need help.

practically everyone thats ever used the the thing had some sort of a problem with it.that dont mean it was a bad thing.i mean really if you want to drive a nail you dont pick up a wrench.

*bangs head on desk*

Well, again, the whole reason I suggested this was to provide a way for those who wish to critique and/or rate (let's call it what it is - quantify) an image and it's various properties.

The C index was a fixed, semi-mandatory function (the opt-out option was a good idea) that tended to polarize the site's members. But the one value, 1-10 was far too open to arbitrary, unguided "whatever" votes.

This way, a person has a means to explain why they rated an image, and on what aspects.

Could we keep any discussion centered around how to engage in that exercise? If we get entangled in reminiscing and debating about the c-index, the potential for positive conversation might rapidly vanish.

Just sayin'....

*throws hands up in despair*

Rob, I tried to make it clear that I wasn't reminiscing about the c-index, only chirping about how, for me personally, I managed to overcome a lot of sarcasm from a person (no longer here) when I complained about said c-index. I almost left the site back then because of that and the bloody @%$&p;!!! index. I did not say I wanted it back nor did I say I was 'reminiscing' about it. I said: "I like Rob's ideas..." My comment was calm and cool, at least that's how I tried to make it read, but somehow it read different to other people. From now on I stay away from commenting on these threads...

signing off...

Ummmm.... Uh....

I'll chalk this one up to "lost in translation".

Mary, I PM'd you with a more detailed response.

:-)

"Les what part of the c-index kept traffic on site here?"

Time spent in the voting and then, and perhaps.. checking out other images seen in the booth not normally viewed.

Time spent per page.. pageviews.. and and ...


And I don't mean to sound as terse as the above suggests, in that quantifying 'art' is the end all.

What I am saying is.. having it restored in some shape or form.. allows for one more on-site activity not currently available.


And I enjoyed it.

The activity itself and that of the feedback provided.

This-is-not-a-thread-about-the-C_index. Please?

That is all. Carry on.

:-)

n/a

n/a

n/a

I think.. that there has to be some anonymity attached to attaching a score.

Else.. scores would probably be somewhat inflated.

That was and therein.. lied the rub with the thing that shall never to be mentioned again in this thread.

But.. it gave some feedback.

And.. for the life of me, never understood why opting out for some was not a solution.

Then again.. I digress.


Increasing posting limits.

Good good idea.

At it's base, as I understand it.

The problem, as I see it?

Increasing posting limits might effect the signal to noise ratio. Now.. faced with, and for the sake of argument.. three uploads per day ... less selective.

Maybe.

Could try it, though.

n/a

What parameters would you suggest the VC's (volunteer critics) use?

Just the fact that this isn't a site function, and completely voluntary, should reduce or eliminate the whole "upvoting" fiasco. The reason is simple; there's nothing to be gained. And the lack of anonymity furthers this, it allows for transparency.

So, again, this idea of mine is intended more as a learning and teaching exercise. It's a way to say "hey, friend, I like what you did here. Perhaps with X, Y, or Z I'd like it even more.

Period.

I have no opinion on the annonymity issue.

As regards upload limit - in the past we had to put some effort in for the privilege of uploading (i.e. vote on images)
Perhaps a defined number of comments could be a qualifier to upload.
Sitting here uploading 2 images without any further activity around the site is not conducive to encouraging a vibrant and interesting community.

To quote from post above "been on a while thought about postin somethin why waste time theres not a god to be seen."
Actions speak louder than words. Thinking about posting is hardly going to achieve anything. Posting your own work and commenting on others' images just might.

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a