Billy Goat Gruff

It wouldnt let me edit my post, just want to clarify the lowest mark other than a single 0.5 was a 2.0, not a 1.0.

Ed at Ridersite wrote:
> I think the winner is extremely suspect. Look at his other challenge results. Always an inordinate number of 5-star votes. Very telling IMO.
>

Hi Ed, I did check the entrants other challenge results before putting my response on this thread, all I can give anything accurate about though is my challenges on which I can see the voting patterns and certainly on this one if the voters who gave the 5s were doing so strategically for this entrant they didnt do a very good job of it going by the other high votes they gave on the challenge including 4s and other 5s. If it were dodgy I would expect to see at least one 0.5 each but there was only one between them and only one 1.0 between them [ not the same voter who gave the 0.5 ], their average marks would have been in the low range but none of these did so.

If the hosts of the other challenges would like to note the relevant patterns for us to compare between us privately then we can see if there is anything to either contact admin to look into further or to accept that there has been no wrongdoing on the part of this entrant which, on the pattern for this challenge gives me no reason to consider anything was wrong.

I think regular forum users have probably sussed by now that I'm a stickler over sandbagging in any form, including voiding a challenge altogether because of the actions of one voter, so I haven't come to my conclusion of entrant innocence on this one lightly either. I am of course open to being proved wrong but I would want that proof to come from admin checking isp's and whatnot, not from circumstantial assumptions ;)

I think the winner is extremely suspect. Look at his other challenge results. Always an inordinate number of 5-star votes. Very telling IMO.

Patchandcrew wrote:
> Royginald wrote:
> > I just hope those who 5 voted 5 stars make a comment and explain their votes here.
> >
> > . . .
>
>
> They don't need to as far as I'm concerned. They each gave others 5s and 4s as well. Only one of them gave a -0.5 to one entry only and a different voter among them a 2 to a different entry, all their other votes were mid range and above. None of them show any iffy voting pattern, the average between them are high upper range votes for others.
>
> This placing and the high votes are well deserved. The exposure, the background framing the goat perfectly, the goats expression, the unusual horns, the gentle movement of the hair, the focus, and the goat being very striking looking all come together to create a lovely stand-out portrait.

--
AEH
http://aehass.zenfolio.com/
Question: What do you do all week?
Answer: Mon to Fri. Nothing, Sat & Sun I rest!

Royginald wrote:
> I just hope those who 5 voted 5 stars make a comment and explain their votes here.
>
> . . .

They don't need to as far as I'm concerned. They each gave others 5s and 4s as well. Only one of them gave a -0.5 to one entry only and a different voter among them a 2 to a different entry, all their other votes were mid range and above. None of them show any iffy voting pattern, the average between them are high upper range votes for others.

This placing and the high votes are well deserved. The exposure, the background framing the goat perfectly, the goats expression, the unusual horns, the gentle movement of the hair, the focus, and the goat being very striking looking all come together to create a lovely stand-out portrait.

. . .