What should be done with cheats ? Part 5 :-(

Started Mar 15, 2013 | Discussions thread
OP Deleted pending purge Senior Member • Posts: 1,197
Re: Couple of Items

Slynky wrote:

I would suspect requiring a vote on all other photos in a challenge as a requirement would (possibly) yield the following results:

(1) Hurried voting to get it overwith because it's just an irritating requirement one needs to "check off" in order to have one's photo compete;

(2) We might see the end of challenges with 100 and higher entry limits as people avoid large challenges and the required voting;

(3) IF something like this happens, DPR should have a routine in place that automatically verifies voting on every image occurred and if not, removes the entrant from consideration (i.e., no extra work required by the host).

@Slynky, merops...

It does look like people vote on all or nearly all entries, and it is mostly so that all entries are likely to get some vote... but then, it is entirely optional on the part of voters. DPR states that one may vote on as many entries as one wishes, thus, at least theoretically, you might have a situation where, say, 50% of the entries get actual votes, and the rest does not! This might be the case with large-volume challenges, true, since people wouldn't go through 200 or so entries...

As the entries get to be shuffled for each voter, maybe every image gets its exposure, but if you have only three or five voters that attempt to vote upon some of the entries, there are bound to be some images that do not receive any votes - and that is even legitimate (=supported bu the system).

And yet, in the end, all the images are sorted according to some order, meaning that this evaluation did come from somewhere!

My concern is that, although it looks like all votes were cast by the voters, some percentage will actually be the result of soe other process.

Re (1)... Hurried voting can happen in every challenge. There is no way to check it. Many people hurry so as to see more challenges to vote or "vote" upon...

Re (2)... the part of the changes would be to set an upper limit to the maximum challenge slots, because open-end challenges are hardly receiving sufficient attention. To me, 100 would be sensible, 150... rarely.

Re (3)... The voting process "remembers" your votes even now: if you visit a challenge the second time, you will see the votes you have cast before, and you can continue to vote upon the rest. The same routine could be in operation IF the proposed change happens, and only the votes of those who have voted on all entries would be used in the final processing. But it would be perhaps easier to be able to vote in two or more sessions, there is a whole week there to do it.

Frankly, I do not see another way to get sufficient votes on all entries so as to thwart the effects of tactical voting. Asking members to vote is kinda desperate, and often happens when the host sees some funny play in the challenge. In all-vote-on-all-entries suggestion, members are not pressed into voting, BUT once they go and vote in some challenge, they would need to vote on all entries, or their votes would not count. Thus, it follows the logic of "if it's worth doing, it's worth doing right".

-- hide signature --


Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow