Summer is Coming--Are you kidding me?

Started Jun 19, 2012 | Discussions thread
Slynky
Senior MemberPosts: 2,431Gear list
Like?
Re: Summer is Coming--Are you kidding me?
In reply to RaptorUK, Jun 22, 2012

RaptorUK wrote:

Slynky wrote:

RaptorUK wrote:

Slynky wrote:

I think if a challenge of mine had that kind of obvious cheating, I would DQ the image that was the obvioius crux of the bad voting. While some might say the entrant should not be punished for how others voted, my consideration runs toward NOT watching multiple numbers of entries get the bad end of a cheating session. Additionally, it might even be the individual with multiple IDs doing his own voting.

I'm not clear what you are saying here . .

You seem to say that the Entrant is an obvious Cheat and then go onto say you don't know who voted . . .

So what is your evidence for calling the Entrant a Cheat ?

Once Hosts can see voters true IDs they will be able to take informed action . . . there will be no more guessing, they will be able to act on facts and evidence.

I don't see why this hasn't been changed already, it cannot be technically difficult.

I'll try it again, then.

I think there was cheating going on in that challenge. Either friends or family of the photo/entrant that won or multiple ID voting by the entrant himself. Obviously, I don't know which is the case.

Soliciting of votes is not disallowed by DPReview (yep, still not disallowed) and it isn't disallowed by the Host in the Challenge rules. Multiple IDs are not disallowed by DPReview . . . sandbagging is also not disallowed. What one person calls sandbagging another might call tactical voting . . . other sites specifically cover this kind of voting in their rules and do not allow it.

When I started my comments, the comments I made pertained to my challenges (with my rules). I prohibit vote soliciting and (so-called) vote sandbagging (manipulation). So, assuming the same kind of voting in one of my challenges, I would disqualify the photo with all the 5.0s (and no .5s).

Justification?

Some kind of vote manipulation has occured. Is it a fact? I can't prove it. Do I feel so within the specificaitons of my challenge guidelines? Yes. The challenge is supposed to be anonymous but voting would not seem to support such results. It looks like friends, family, and/or multiple IDs (which I address in my rules).

So, I will remove the photo that I think is the subject of favoritism, etc.

IF someone wants to complain about me, then go ahead. I'm sure it will receive the same amount of consideration all our complaining has recieved to fix things around these challenges. Untill the site finds some kind of year to install the (paraphrasing) "ability to view voting patterns and disqualify votes from this view", I will handle it by announcing it in my rules and employing my own substitutle way of handling it.

I would disqualify the image. The only concern I would have is the following: what if friends and family did all the bad voting and the entrant had nothing to do with it (other than, for example, bring his entry to their attention). In other words, his friends and family could have made the decision to sandbag vote on their own and he had nothing to do with it yet he is being penalized.

How would you know that the bad voting is in any way connected with this particular Entrant ? and I don't mean guess, I mean know such that it is fact ?

First of all, let's talk about facts. And a story.

An interviewer investigating a co-worker for the renewal of his top secret clearance asked me if I had known him to cheat on his wife. I replied I did not know for a fact. And how could I unless I had watched him? He told me he had. He bragged about cheating on his wife. But, factually, for all I know, he was making up stories to tell to make him fell like he was more of a man. I don't know for a fact the man cheated on his wife--even if he says he did.

Even in courts, jurys are expected to base a decision on a preponderance of evidence. I doubt a single juror can actually know "for a fact" a person is guilty unless they saw it happen.

So, I don't worry about "know for a fact". Even the "facts" I read online (and in books) are really not facts, now are they? I don't know "for a fact" that Hitler ever had Jews killed, now do I? All I have is what other people have written down. And even some people say it never happened.

I know for a fact that I'm typing this.

So, to answer the first part, I'm just coming to a conclusion based on evidence that shows too much of a pattern to have happened randomly with no colusion or vote manipulation.

So, with my rules and guidelines specified and nothing happening from DPR, I'll do the best I can with the limited tools I have to stop that kind of voting (or nullify it the best I can).

 Slynky's gear list:Slynky's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony E 16mm F2.8 Pancake Sony E 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 OSS Sony E 50mm F1.8 OSS +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow