A subject to think about - or maybe talk amongst ourselves. No Photo involved

[Mira]

In the last contest, at the time of voting for the finalists, JeffR commented:

quote
"I don't like a contest that ends with two entries getting 50% of the votes,
which is the way this seems to be going. Having said that, I think Another Misty Morning is a wonderfully rich and very deserving winner in this contest, but I'd very much like to see more votes going to the rest of the field, because those photographs are superlative, all of them."

He ended up winning the coveted second place with "Arabesque" his comment involved his own photo being one of the two with about 25% of the votes.

He stated his displeasure, but not a suggestion of how to resolve it.

I'm at a loss to think of a way to get people to support and laud ALL of the photos rather than get behind of what might turn out to be front runners.
Many magnificent pieces of work get thrown under the bus and ignored.
Rarely do we have a real race to the top between more than two or three, and when we do it is extremely exciting.

Now my question is, does anyone know of anything we can do to make it more equitable, or is it just one of those things in life we may not like, but can't change?

[Celebration]

1. it is what it is

To me the whole point of the contest is not who gets how many votes, but to inspire ourselves and others. The way to handle this is for each of us not to be personally invested in how many votes we or anyone else gets in a contest. If that happens, there truly is no issue.

[Mira]

2. You said what I also think and you said it with conviction and truth.

The answer lies in the serenity prayer.
I brought it up because it has been gnawing on me a little bit, and I wondered if anyone else gave it thought.

[Stevenmarc]

3. It's the nature of contests

there are always going to be front runners and after all those ten were chosen out of a pool of 30 so in some way the finalist have had their recognition, look at it in an Academy Award I'm honored to be nominated sort of way.

[NV Whino]

4. It's a contest. That's what happens.

Personally, I have no problem with it.


There is a solution to that sort of thing, however, it wouldn't work here, and there is no way GD people would take the time to do it even if we could figure out an efficient way to present it. The only way to even the playing field is to do a point system. Assign a total number of points (10 or 100 or 20 or whatever). Divide the available points among designated categories (adherence to theme, technical quality, whatever). I always throw in a wild card category, as in I don't care if it's technically perfect or it fits the theme, I just plain like it (or don't like it). Then add up the category points and the top number wins. This system works amazingly well, but as I said is inappropriate for what we do.

[Mira]

7. That's pretty brilliant! Along those lines I could try to evaluate my own work

as I decide what to enter. This was a valuable response for me, but I think, as you said, it would not work with GD.

Another thought I had, GD, just like we ourselves, gets educated subliminally about what is good and what is not as good as we keep putting photos in front of them.

All seems well as we ponder this issue.
Thanks all for helping me think it through.

[Sheepshank]

5. I think the voters play their own run off.....

They see that two shots are pulling away from the crowd and start the natural process of participating in the 'run off' between the two hopefuls. I don't know if it's necessary the right or the wrong thing, so I don't read it as people ignoring the other photos, I see it as people helping to ensure a finalist amonst the top runners.

[Mira]

6. These are soothing thoughts on the subject, and I think quite accurate.

Many times I reserve my vote in case I want to help a favorite in the end. Other times a favorite is so far ahead I vote to support others I'm crazy about but are lagging.

[Brickbat]

8. Honestly? I think seeing the running poll results makes a difference. I wonder if the votes would

be more spread out if you couldn't see how the voting was going.

[bluedigger]

9. "Blind" voting would be the solution.

It would be fun to try it, I think.

[regnaD kciN]

11. Unfortunately, you can't do it with the current forum software...

I have been thinking of the same thing on and off since back in 2005. Some web forum software supports it, some does not. And, to be honest, although I think it would be a good idea in the abstract, I'm wondering if we would get as many votes -- and, hence, as much attention -- if we did that here. Like it or not, I think there's a fair amount of bandwagon-jumping on DU concerning these contests, and, if people didn't have the opportunity of possibly being the deciding vote or helping a deserving second-place entry catch up, they might not give the contest a second glance. I'm not saying that drawing fewer bandwagon-jumping voters would be a bad thing, but I think it would be a different thing, and we'd have to be ready and willing to go with that difference. (The same can be said for the other crucial change that can't be done with the current software: allowing more than ten entries per poll, which would allow us, like some photo sites I know, to run our photo contests as one field of thirty or forty or however-many-happened-to-be-submitted entries, instead of doing the preliminaries/finals split as we've always done.)

[postatomic]

12. Not true

The software used for this forum can easily be modified to allow voting on all 30 (or any number) entries at one time AND the voting results can be blind. The issue would be if the owners would want to take the time to make the modifications. They may feel it's not necessary since the current polling is primarily used for non-photography contest purposes. Or, it could be that no one has ever asked them to do this.

:shrug:

[regnaD kciN]

15. I mean, you can't do it as a forum member, not as an administrator...

[postatomic]

19. True dat' on the member part

I believe the administrator's have access to the software. If so, they only need to make minor changes to it. But I don't know the who, what, or where regarding making software changes. Just sayin' that it can be done by the person(s) who have designed Democraticundergound.com

[blueraven95]

42. I know this is true

When I've done the calendar polls, with blind voting, the results are generally much, much closer.

[Blue_In_AK]

10. I think they just kind of pile on.

Once they see that someone's photo is quite a bit out ahead, they think to themselves, "Oh, the rest of them must not be very good, so I'll vote for this one, too." There's nothing we can do about the herd mentality in GD.

[ManiacJoe]

13. I like seeing the running totals.

It allows me to game the system by sometimes voting for the "second place" during the first round of voting so that the finals are a harder choice.

[tabatha]

14. Gaming the system is what is to be avoided.

I have seen what I think was gaming the system going on.

I believe that blind voting would be the best.

[Mira]

16. I do not understand the term "gaming a system" fully, but this is my post and

I want to address your comment.

I assume though that it implies dishonesty in voting or counting. This casual implication without the substance of backup makes me nervous because I enjoy participating in the contests and having a doubt that like thrown on them cheapens them to me.

I've been taking part here for 2 and a half years. It's true that I'm not extraordinarily bright, and I also did not look for it, but dishonesty has escaped me.
I have seen co-operation and genuine well wishing of one to the other, and think they are simple contests in the spirit of low key competition.

One of us has complained to me that he/she thinks people go and see whose photo it is in the submission thread, and then vote by name not preference. I don't think something like that would "game the system" or invalidate the whole.
And that determination of who submitted what would still be possible in blind voting, unless there are also blind submissions.

Your comment takes this into a whole new direction from my OP.
There I addressed a possible complaint about "sheeple" type voting and asking if there is any way to stop that from happening and have folks vote their own favorites rather than blindly follow the preferences of the majority.

I remember you coming on the scene, I don't think anyone knew you as a photographer then, and you won first place with your first submission. Schema Thing did the same.
You have submitted a few times since, and that's great. From my vantage point, limited since it is from a total amateurish perspective, your contributions are wonderful in photos and comments.

But if you think this is not on the up and up, why participate?

[Celebration]

17. Maniac Joe brought up that term

"gaming the system"-- rather than tabatha. Tabatha just responded using the same term, saying that "gamaing the system" as Maniac Joe described and liked to do was best avoided.

I don't think it means anything dishonest anyway. But I wasn't exactly following Maniac Joe's strategy. :shrug: I don't really *get* the strategy. I assume people use all sorts of different strategies in voting and far be it from me to start judging those.

I mean really, guys. This is just a silly little contest and basically just an excuse to show off our photos and get accolades and have fun. I think whatever issues there are with voting are all washed out in the end, and, ahem, until there is $$$ I am going to ignore any controversy. People will vote for whomever they want and for whatever reason they want and I could care less about it.

[tabatha]

18. Yes, it came from Joe's comment.

But I once did see a post, that another person also saw and mentioned, where someone asked others to vote for them in the contest.

I believe that almost all people are on the up and up, as in most situations in life.

And my intention, as I mentioned before, is not to win, but to participate.

Also, as in all matters in life, if ones sees something not quite kosher, then one can say something or keep quiet. I did not say anything about it at the time, until I saw Joe's comment, which prompted me to say something. Maybe I should have kept quiet.

I was embarrassed by winning the first time - I never expected it. And I hope it is a long time before I win again.

[Mira]

20. It was I - or does one say me - who caught that person soliciting another

forum's group of members to vote for her. And I called her on it big time. In our forum, and also the other one. Because I never was able to keep quiet, not my best trait.

I'm glad you were specific. Now as I see it the case is closed.

[Mz Pip]

21. I think that kind of thing

is hard to completely avoid. It certainly is something that I would not do because I believe the work should be judged on its own merit and not on the popularity of a particular screen name. I would hope that we all feel the same. Good for you on calling it out.

I would hate to see the photo contest turn into a popularity contest but I doubt that really can be controlled. In the years that I have been here the winners have been deserving but often some excellent photos don't even make it to the finals. It's pretty subjective and it's hard to predict what the voters will do. People's esthetics are different.

Personally I use the contests as a way of learning to look at a particular subject as creatively as I can. Sometimes I am successful, sometimes not. I try to move outside of my comfort zone even if most of the stuff I shoot ends up in the trash. If I'm lucky, I'll get something worth hanging on to.

It's enough for me.

[ManiacJoe]

22. Campaigning for an individual entry does seem a bit odd.

In the years that I have been here the winners have been deserving but often some excellent photos don't even make it to the finals.
This is what I try to work against. By sometimes voting for a deserving but vote-lacking pic, I can help make the final round a better race. (To whatever extent a single vote's influence can have.)

[Celebration]

27. If that is what gaming the system is

I admit I am sometimes guilty, LOL.

Now aren't you glad you brought up "gaming the system"? :rofl:

[postatomic]

23. "Gaming" means "Played"

If you did not really present that flower to your mother (which I suspect you did not) - that is one example of "gaming" the system as an entry.

From my observation gaming and nepotism certainly play a significant role in the voting.

I agree with Tabatha and I also think that making her feel uncomfortable explaining her feelings and questioning why she enters a contest is unfair and a tad bit arrogant. I suspect everyone has their reasons for throwing a photo in the contest.

Blind voting and voting for all the entries at one time would certainly help to address the concerns expressed by Mr. JeffR.

Another solution to this would be to hold the contests here in the photography group. Eliminate the gaming and nepotism completely by having the host be the judge. The 'winner' would then become the new host and judge for the next contest. Allow people to enter 2 or 3 photos. Allow comments to be made in the submission post. Make the contest what it should be. A way to share photos and interact with one another on a common level. Judging a contest would also be a great learning tool for the host.

This would eliminate much of the bullshit that goes on with the General Discussion forum voting and keep the contest focused on Photography. Not prose, gaming, and nepotism. I also believe it would increase the participation in the contests. Just an idea.

[Mira]

24. I remember that you surprised me with your post that my photo of the

robin's butt on the snowy branch was not a valid "Winter" entry and an undeserved win. I forget the words you used as they came in from left field.
It's fascinating but no longer surprising that you are now pre-judging my entry for "Spring".

The photo is of an 8 year old, and the true line was "It's for you, Grandma" as she presented it to her Grandmother who was standing beside me. It's none of my business why you are second guessing it just like the fill-in story is none of yours, but what they hey, I'm telling you anyway.
Photography is capable of and often used for capturing emotion and also humor.
What matters is that it is my entry.

I asked the logical and obvious question of Tabatha why she would participate in something that she considers rigged because I wanted to know the answer. That's pretty simple, and not really a subject for your interpretation.

One question I don't ask is why you come in and offer critique and underlying motivations to my work; that's none of my business now or in the future. After all we two do not have a relationship or history in this forum or anywhere else.

To my knowledge you have posted 2 photos. I liked one of them very much and told you so. I hope you keep them coming.

:)

I am not responding to your complex suggestions for a new and improved way to handle contests, because I wanted to zero in on your repeated singling me out for your attention. It became important to tell you that though it is flattering it's not really necessary.

If your suggestions find some traction, and if we enter into collective discussions about it, I will voice my opinions then.

[postatomic]

28. I was showing you what "gaming' meant

You are "playing" to emotion by using a Title that is only meant to fuel that. The photo could stand on its own but you want to play to the electorate in General Discussion. You completely missed that point and took it as an 'attack' on you.

Yes, I did not like the Robin Butt photo and was using that as an example in another discussion of how the electorate ignores much better photos for whatever reason. That was the point that Mr. JeffR was trying to make and was the reason for you starting this discussion. There again, you were "gaming" the system and you are "gaming" my response by ignoring the points I was making.

It was pretty damn obvious that Tabatha was uncomfortable with your reply to her. Again - you missed that as well.

I've thought about renaming my Spring entry to "Just Seconds Before They Were All Slaughtered By an AK-47". :P

Oh, and I've posted more than 2 photos. It's more like 50+ photos. But who's counting. I know you try to keep track of everyone in your "kingdom" but you were a little off on your count.

It's obvious that the two of us have quite different views of what real photography is and it's also quite evident that you hold a stern hold over the Photography group with your monarchy. I know that others have the same feelings that I do but are unwilling to voice them or back me up.

I'll just leave it as that. You may have noticed that Mr. JeffR hasn't taken part in this discussion. Actually, it appears he is gone completely at the moment.

[Mira]

29. I can't figure out if that is your family in your spring entry,

or if you just chose that title for emotional impact. Either way, it's a nice photo.

[postatomic]

30. ** sigh **

Yea, I'm the 3rd one back. It's a bitch trying to type with webbed feet. :eyes:

[Saphire]

31. I think showing our photos on these threads is our way of interacting

with one another. The comments that are made on those...the advice and suggestions given, are the real "meat" of the group.

Posting these contests in GD are the reason I looked for and found this group. I look at the contest simply as a way for the folks in GD to view some of the work we do here and the "contest" part of it is just plain fun.

It doesn't matter if you win or lose, it's how you play the game. It's all for fun.

[CC]

25. On my short break from outdoor work

I am going to toss a grenade into the whole conversation.

The contest is for the group to share their work with the rest of DU and winning or losing doesn't mean crap beyond what each individual person gets from it with in themselves. You don't win money, trophies, prestige or jewels. The winner gets to host the next contest. Think about it. If by sharing with the rest of DU we feel a bit better about ourselves, our work and most important get more people to participate and share it is a WIN for all of us. If some one "games" the system so what? They will always know they gamed the system and never know what the general public really thought, felt, liked. Not much a of ego boost then is it? People have been "caught" telling others to vote twice that I know of. It was pointed out, shared here and commented on. No you shouldn't do it but the world won't end over it. Mostly the guilty party should be embarrassed and look with in if it matters that much to them when there is no actual prize beyond the ego boost. I don't really see the need or want the contest to change. Sometimes there are two photos that really do deserve to be way a head of the pack and it isn't always because the mechanics of photography were right.


Now as to what I get out of it, it has taught me a lot about what the general non-photographer public likes. Not so much the whys since many don't comment but it teaches me to see a bit differently. But the thing I get the most out of the contest and group is the sharing, viewing and learning from each person that is brave enough to post their photos. And yes it can and does take courage to post those first few photos.


An added note. I've noticed in the group you tend to get what you give. If you are nice, comment a lot, post photos, critique nicely, etc. you get noticed, get comments etc. If you come across as rude, easily offended,negative etc. some tend to just go quiet on you. Why bother commenting if I'm going to get a hard time over it no matter the reason for the blow back? It is very hard to read emotion in typing so it can be easy to make mistakes reading. If I haven't been around encouraging others (and I haven't) then why should I expect them to take the time out of their day to encourage me? If they happen to anyway it is all good and says more (good) about them than it does me.



Not back to yard work. :hi: Read through any typos.TY

[Celebration]

26. Thank you

You said everything far more eloquently than I could have.

[Saphire]

32. pretty much what I just posted, but said much better. Thanks.

[CC]

39. You said it well

nicer and with less typing. :toast:

[Mz Pip]

33. On Titles and "gaming"

Again this is just a personal observation. A title does help frame the narrative of the photo if it is a narrative work. I am not good at coming up with clever titles - one of the contests I won was with a photo entitled "Tropical Still Life." Not too imaginative IMHO. But then it was not a narrative piece so it really didn't matter.

A title helps create a narrative if one is needed. Some of our contests have themes that are more narrative driven - Portrait of a Stranger comes to mind. Some don't but the photo entered might be a narrative work.

I'm not good at titles. Sometimes I think I might do everything "Untitled."

[postatomic]

34. Some of the contests that I enter

Just want to know where the photo was taken and when. In others the juror(s) never see the title unless it is selected. These are contests where you have to pay money to enter and pay to have your work custom printed/framed. You have to be pretty confident in your photography to enter these.

I'll be honest. When I'm paying money to enter a contest I will find out who the juror(s) is and I will base my decision to enter or not based on that info. In a sense, I'm "playing" the contest. I don't look to enter a photo that I think a juror(s) will like. Not that kind of "playing". For example; if the juror is a Photography Teacher I don't bother entering the contest.

I associate narratives with documentary photography. Or, photo-journalism. Narratives are also real big with Greeting Card photos. Just my opinion. That, and $6.00, will get you a Starbucks coffee.

[CC]

35. I would suggest that if you do not like a person

instead of calling out, calling names etc. you put them on ignore per the DU rules.

I will restate, you get out of this group what you put into it. PERIOD

[postatomic]

36. Calling out? Calling names? Etc?

Please cite a specific example where I did either of these. What I did was no different than questioning why a person enters a contest. It obviously made you uncomfortable. Not sure what all this has to do with 'Titles', which was the only thing I was discussing.

Not a problem. If you are saying that I'm breaking any rules can you please back that up with something other than emotional fodder? If I have I need to know so I don't do it again.

Thanks
:hi:

[CC]

38. I was referring to this line

specifically,"also quite evident that you hold a stern hold over the Photography group with your monarchy. I know that others have the same feelings that I do but are unwilling to voice them or back me up."

My suggestion for the ignore is if you don't like someone then use it before you break rules. That would go for any where in DU. It works. The suggestion works both ways. Much better to use ignore than let things devolve until people get tomb stoned. What I am defending is not so much *Mira but the group and its inclusiveness. This group survived primaries,elections, name changes,GD spill over and GD-P spillover and remained a place of calm, relaxation and enjoyment so why would I or anyone else that enjoys this refuge let it be filled with dissension now. It is very hard to read emotion in typing and very easy to come across as negative so maybe things/words are losing something but your post have hit me as negative and brought out a negative reaction. With time people tend to figure out a person's "voice" but it does take time. As for whispering in PMs, don't know about them don't care about them. Me, I'll say what I have to say in the open.

You can read or re-read my post above of what the group has been, why the contest are like they are as I have seen/experienced it for the last few years. YMMV but I like the group being inclusive of everyone no matter their skills or equipment.

I still find it funny and kind of sad that anyone would even want to "game" our contest. If anyone wants to host the contest that bad we have tried numerous times to get someone to volunteer to be the permanent host.:) Those that entered would still be able to learn from watching how the general public votes and from each other.


*I think Mira can defend herself just fine though the evil side of me thinks she ought to do it in her first language so she knows she is typing exactly what she means. Not that I've ever had a problem with her English. If you look you might notice her original thoughts on "gaming" were to be see if she read what was meant correctly or not in a second language for her. She has done that before.

[Celebration]

41. the *evil* side of you

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

That made me laugh! I wouldn't mind seeing a post in German from Mira at this point, so that makes me :evilgrin: too!

[postatomic]

43. Put a Stake in my heart

And call me Fred. :P

That statement didn't break any rules unless it falls under the "Etc" category. It wasn't "Calling Out" and it wasn't "Calling Names". It was a factual observation that I made because, like you, I'll say what I have to say out in the open. It was far less of a malign statement than when a particular person questions why another person enters a contest and makes that other person uncomfortable.

You've done nothing other than reaffirm my statement by going after me in this manner.

Actually, it was you that broke the rules. You "Called Me Out" by responding to a missive I wrote about Titles with a response that had nothing to do with what I wrote. I would call it "Stalking" but if the correct phrase is "Calling Out" I'll go with that.

This is counter-productive and you let your emotions control you so any further "discussion" really isn't necessary. If a particular person wants to show their Evil side I'm cool with that. I understand Good and Evil. At least that is black and white. Not the fuzzy gray from someone who can't control their emotions.

If I have disrupted the calm-relaxing nature of this group that you enjoy then I apologize. That was not my intent. I didn't start this discussion. Was just going with the flow and saying what I have to say without having to worry if I pushed a over-react button or two. Obviously, I was wrong. The subjects of 'Gaming' and 'Titles' are officially removed from my thoughts.

:hi:

[Celebration]

44. Hold on, before you erase titles

I want to know what you think of my title "Wisteria Gone Wild" in the spring contest?

You see, it is supposed to subliminally remind people of "Cheerleaders Gone Wild", and thus get people to vote with their libido. Do you think I'll win? ;)

[postatomic]

45. I would start writing an acceptance speech now

You've got a lock on this one. I'm surprised anyone else entered the contest after seeing that Title with your photo. :P

[CC]

47. The group will survive

and as for me, emotion and what not. Not that much emotion involved on my end and hopefully not on yours. The evil part of me was me suggesting Mira speak to you in German and just assume you would get it without any misunderstanding and said with a small laugh. If some of the real life stuff going on bled into my reading or typing well that is mine to deal with and you will understand or not, let it go or not. As far as emotion it really is a shame typing loses all that because both of us might of read more than existed into the typing. I only know where I was coming from.


As for contest. The group might just be able to handle more than one kind and more than one contest at a time. There may be people interested in a contest judged only by the host. It is an idea you might want to try. It would be something new and I (hopefully everyone) enjoys new ideas and activities. When we have gone for changes to the existing contest it is usually polled on. A search of the history can be enlightening to those that would like to see how it has evolved over the years. Personally, I would not want to be the only judge but that is me. Shoot you could even pop off a short in group only contest that only has 10 entries to vote on just for fun if you wanted. Nothing is written in stone and there is always room for more people and ideas.


I have a feeling title teasing is going to happen for while, and not in mean way though maybe a tension releasing way. Seems there are so many funny ways to go with it. Title matter some times. I fail to see even now how a title is gaming the system and am a tad dense on it for some reason. Then again I think of gaming/playing the system as a form of cheating so my not getting it probably goes back to that.


:grouphug:

[Tuesday Afternoon]

48. I thought he was respectful in stating his opinion...

I don't see where a rule was broken.

also, there is a huge difference in hosting one time and volunteering to host permanently. Perhaps a happy medium could be found.

I like the ideas of both blind voting and untitled photographs.

[Stevenmarc]

37. Wow, who knew

This whole thread has gone to places that I would have never expected a friendly little competition to go to.

Gaming? Really? I'm sorry but even if a title puts a little more heat to the emotional spark I can hardly call that gaming the system. Now if you really want to game the system then you would just use a little social networking outside of DU to direct people back to your entry and nobody would be the wiser, well except for a significant voting spike, but to what end, to win the responsibility of hosting the next competition.

Honestly that's one of the reasons that I rarely enter these competitions to begin with, well that and if I do enter a contest I want to be judged by peers who take into account the technical aspects of the work. As much as I like DU I have to say that there have been instances where I've seen some technically beautiful but a little out of the box shots passed over for a shot with more popular subject matter but with technical flaws that aren't quite that apparent to someone without photographic experience, but that's the nature of this particular style of competition.

That said, I don't see any reason to change what honestly isn't broken, after all putting it back in it's proper perspective it still is a friendly little competition, no more and no less and if that isn't working for any individual then they need to reflect on what their needs actually are and pursue them.

[Celebration]

40. I have to admit I did have one suggestion for the competition

And that was to have more time for each subject matter so I wouldn't have to always resort to using archives......but I don't think anyone agreed with me. In any case the voting is a non-issue with me as I take the results with a grain of salt. I am okay with hosting this month because that is the price to pay for enjoying entering the contests. Anyway, I also exercised my right to choose a subject that I liked. That felt important to me. Everyone here knows I like a Czar that acts like a Czar so I started off by asserting my authority.

It always surprises me when people choose to be confrontational. I just am not really into that mindset at all.

The term "gaming the system" got into the conversation and actually it is an interesting lesson in the power of words. Apparently that particular phrase started hitting hot buttons of more than one person here. Yet it started as a rather innocent remark! People started jumping to all sorts of ridiculous conclusions, and it just deteriorated from there. It would probably be helpful if people would sort of take a step back before they typed something that could start stirring the pot. I'm not that adept with words, though, and sometimes I write things that can be taken different ways, and end up stirring the pot without any intention of doing that.

I feel that a good way to approach posting is to depersonalize a lot of it. I really do try to do my best to respond to posts rather than posters, and photographs rather than photographers. I am sure that I don't do a 100% perfect job at this, but it really is my goal. That way, even if I have a problem with someone's post, it doesn't get personalized, and in another thread all that is forgotten. I suggest that some others here might be well served to take that approach.

[CC]

46. I think you are right that the term

gaming the system was taken in a negative way at least by me. My understanding of the term is using the rules to take advantage of to the point where many think of it as cheating. Example from current events, Banks and Wall Street gamed the system to enrich themselves and brought down the economy. I can't say too much since I am not that good with words either and really need a visual to be able to see/read tone.

As for the more time, I thought we were giving more time, just not doing an every other month thing. I do think we will have to watch time creep, where shooting time gets shorter without it being on purpose. I would rather have a Czar choose the theme and have more time to shoot that have a poll though mixing it up seems to work best. Polls for the Czar that wants it, and not for the Czar that doesn't.

As for the rest, you are right one and much better at wording it all than I was, am or would be.

[Celebration]

49. "gaming the system"

Some people take it as more of a negative than others. The ones that take it most negatively are probably believers in "the system", whatever it is. I have enough anarchist tendencies to think of systems as being both good and bad. If one games a "bad" system, for a "good" outcome, then that would be a positive way that gaming a system could be used. I submit that it is possible to use the term in that context.

I'm not really a believer in an "all systems are good" mentality.

An example of someone "gaming the system" for a good result was depicted in Schindler's List. Schindler gamed the system (Nazi Germany) in order to save thousands from the Holocaust. Note that to a certain extent he had to be a part of the system to be able to accomplish this. To me, this was a profoundly interesting movie because of that. :thumbsup::thumbsup: from me.

In the context of the Photography Group, the example given of gaming the system did not seem negative to me, but at least somewhat positive. We don't have a perfect system, and I doubt that a perfect system is even possible.

I just found it really, really interesting that many people here automatically took the term "gaming the system" to be negative. I think of it as being more neutral..........

Just my unprofound thoughts on a Sunday morning. I have actually been thinking about this a lot--why did so many people here freak out when I didn't? Maybe I am WEIRD!!

[CC]

53. I know why I thought of it

in a negative way. I know a card counter that calls it gaming the system. Though the ability amazes me that same card counter considers it cheating therefore will not gamble. Personal history does have an effect.

[Mira]

50. Language is an interesting thing, so I looked up "gaming the System" in Wikipedea

They present it exclusively negatively, and here is the thing they call "nutshell"

Quote
This page in a nutshell: Playing games with policies and guidelines in order to avoid the spirit of consensus, or thwart the intent and spirit of policy is strictly forbidden.

Ever careful to not misunderstand the finer points, or maybe missing a secondary meaning, I asked what the phrase meant in this case. In the one direct response to my question I was criticized personally by Mister Postatomic, and not for the first time accused by him of emotionally manipulating (gaming) the group, and I responded to that.

It was later pointed out by Celebration that the understanding of it being negative was not necessarily the only way to interpret it, and I suppose in the vernacular that may well be true when it is not personalized as it was in the aforementioned interchange.

None of what happened had a lot to do with the original post, which was IMO finished with after just a few early responses.

Some comments did emerge, where there was implied but not in the least clearly stated criticism of how the contests are run, and suggestions of how to amend the thoroughly tried, relatively true and not broken ways in which they happen every month and bring us fun and learning and allows us to show our stuff in GD.

This is the 50th reply to my post and we might want to consider putting this puppy to bed.

I'm not saying this because I am the uncrowned Queen here, but because I started the thread, it is uncharacteristically annoying in our forum, and useless in its meandering, and I would like to ask for it to stop.


Edited to make a sentence more clear

[Celebration]

51. Did you see what ManiacJoe meant by it?

He was the first person to introduce the term in the thread. It was only after that that Tabatha said something. Tabatha's interpretation of the term was negative, as was most everyone else's. Really I think that ManiacJoe and I were the only ones that weren't exclusively interpreting it that way. Well, it is hard to tell with some people.

ManiacJoe didn't want to change voting systems because he liked to "game the system". By that, I later found out, he meant that sometimes he would vote for the second best photo in the preliminaries rather than the first best. And why did he do that? The first best one would be way ahead, and that was going to make the finals anyway. So, he wanted more competition in the finals, and would thus vote not for his favorite in the thread, but the second best. Guess what?? I "game the system" sometimes too. I don't feel like I am doing anything wrong.

While usually gaming the system seems like a negative thing to do, as it does "avoid the spirit of consensus" and "thawart the intent and spirit of policy", I submit that gaming the system is sometimes the appropriate thing to do. In the extreme case of Nazi Germany, Schindler worked *within* the policies established by the Nazis, but not in the spirit of their policies at all, in order to save people from the Holocaust. As time went one, he probably eventually crossed the line, and specifically broke the guidelines, but it definitely started out by gaming their system. The upshot of it is that systems are not perfect, and neither is consensus.

Maybe ManiacJoe didn't use the term exactly correctly, but I submit that his specific example of it was nothing "bad" at all. Even when he first posted it, I could tell it wasn't negative, but he had not yet sufficiently explained it. I just think those words, rather than what he meant by them, set off the firestorm.

But Mira, you will always be QUEEN! That title goes to anyone who hosts the photography contest twice in a row, when they weren't even the winner. As Czarina this month, I bestow on you the crown. You get to keep the crown until someone else hosts the contest twice in a row without winning! For doing that, you are also an angel, but I don't have the power to bestow that.

[Mira]

52. Dearest Celebration: To answer your question,yes, I read everything. More than once.

I have no real beef with your interpretation of from whence it sprang and how it trickled on. No problem whatsoever from the get go with Maniac Joe. I completely understood what he said, I vote in strange ways myself sometimes to advance a photo I like or to help get it into the finals if I think that is where it needs to be, even if it is not my favorite. No problem with any of that. It is our right.

When you bring Nazi Germany into this little tempest in a teapot I must stay in the here and now and bow out of that branch of the discussion.

There was one person smeared here, and that was me.
And it was not the first time, there have been swipes at me veiled and otherwise by this man, Mr. Postatomic, for a good while now. And no, I do not suffer from paranoia, I just let most of it go before now.
I did not, nevertheless, suffer it gladly.

Mr. Postatomic kept trying to be the white knight for Tabatha because I asked her why she would partake in a contest she thought was "gamed". A reasonable question.
I asked and she answered and I have a suspicion that she and I are just fine. It is he who kept trying to rescue her from me and kept up that she was wronged by me in my "arrogance" as he called it.

Maybe the fact that I was wronged here escaped a few people, and any overreaction on my part goes back to that.

I thank you for your words of appreciation. It was my pleasure to run the contests, truly, I sometimes help when it is needed.

I must go now and think of a stunning title for my entry in the contest of "Backlit", just to help along another potentially mediocre photo that can't stand on its own.
If I succeed, then I'll be running the next contest on my own merit.

:sarcasm:

I won in May last year 1st place
I won in May the year before, 1st place
it's possible that I am dangerous in May

But we know now that Titles Rock
(though I don't remember the titles, nor the photos)

Also I am going to watch President Obama on 60 minutes, and do not plan to return to this thread.

[ManiacJoe]

54. Fun to see the directions this thread went.

:evilgrin:

Yes, "gaming the system" is often though of in a negative context, but it need not always be the case. It can also be used to treat a normally serious competition as just a game to maximize the points via the written rules while discarding the traditional "unwritten" rules.

I should have been a bit more verbose in my original post. :grouphug:

[ohheckyeah]

55. Is there a way

to fix it so submissions are anonymous?

Let me preface this by saying I have no gripe with the votes my photos have or have not gotten. I was amazed that one photo in particular got any votes....I entered it because it was different and meant something to me not because it was a good photo. It was taken in the belly of a decommissioned nuclear silo so the light stunk, it was dingy and it was not a pretty photo so I was shocked anyone voted for it.

Having said that, I think it's obvious that at times some photos get votes because of who took the photo, not because the photo is particularly good. That's not directed at anyone in particular as I honestly don't have enough time to spend here to remember who submitted what photo. I don't look at the names most of the time in the submission threads....I either think it's a good photo and like it or I don't.

As for the voting in GD I don't think there is much that can be done about it. For some people in GD the photo doesn't have to be in focus or have good exposure it just has to be 'cute' or have pretty colors. It is what it is.

I do think that as photographers we all need to be more honest in our assessments of photos posted on the board. If it's out of focus say so. If it's over exposed or under exposed say so. That's the only way any of us get any better. I personally have trouble sometimes seeing that a photo is slightly out of focus. It's my 50+ year old eyes and I'd rather people be honest than stroke my ego.


And that's all I've got to say about any of that.

[Celebration]

56. there is a way

That would be for the Czar to say, "I am not having a submission thread, everyone has to send the photo to me by IM." I don't think the outcome would be any different, though. First of all, GD doesn't know who submitted what photo, and the people in the Photography group have too much love of the art form to vote for the person. Oh, I definitely think that GD people vote more emotionally than artistically. There is absolutely no doubt about that! Whether that is a good or bad thing just depends on perspective.

I think constructive criticism is a good idea. Most of that lately has been about cropping, though.

I will think about starting a poll and see if people want to try blind submissions this month. The one thing that it could change is that I think people like to see some of the first entries before they submit theirs. Often times I know I don't have a winning entry, but still have several good choices. I wait until the end to decide what the contest (and I consider it more of an art show) needs for diversity. I try to use my late entries to fill out the show. If we submit blindly, we could have four cats playing with a ball of yarn, if that makes sense. Since we have twelve contests a year, in addition to the seasons, I wouldn't object to trying out blind entries for a couple of them. But overall, I doubt if I would like it for most of them, for the reasons stated above.

The host could post them anonymously, though, as they came in......................hmmmmm.............

[Mz Pip]

57. Might be interesting

I do agree about the diversity issue. I have occasionally tried to submit photos that are different than others if there is a run on one theme - like 4 cats playing with a ball of yarn. So having the host post them anonymously might solve that issue. That's a really good idea.

Another thing that I do when I've been host is to use a random sequence generator to post the prelims and the finals so the photos aren't in the same order that they were posted. It's a lot more work though and I can see why someone wouldn't want to do it.

Lots to think about!

[ohheckyeah]

59. I really don't think I would like blind submissions.

Just throwing the thought out there in answer to the OP.

[Solly Mack]

58. Wow. This whole thread makes me sad.

I enter to help improve a skill I am still learning.

I have a lot of stress in my life. This group has been a great way to reduce the stress.

I don't bring my politics or my personal likes and dislikes into the group.

That isn't what the group means to me.

You've all meant a great deal to me in helping me to grow and improve in my photography skills.

You've all been an inspiration in one way or another.

I agree that sometimes a great picture gets fewer votes than one not as good...and I don't know how much the politics of personality/popularity play into that....and I don't think about it. Because these contests are for fun and to learn and to become better at the shooting photos. This group is for people who share a passion...and to inspire and help each other. To be happy for each others successes.

You guys have no idea what a help you've been to me.

I voted "yes" in the blind contests poll because it's different and different is fun to try... and I saw that poll before I saw this thread. Now I understand the motivation a little better. I just thought it sounded fun to not know whose photo it is...I was thinking about the fun I would have trying to guess who did what...because I think we all have varying styles and things we like to shoot more than other things.

[Mz Pip]

60. I agree

Sort of a surprise really at the direction it took. I've been here for at least 5 years, maybe longer. I remember my first entry got 6 votes. I've learned a lot about photography from observing and participating in the discussions since then, mostly I just observe. It's been invaluable to be inspired by talented and enthusiastic people.

And I do agree about it helping to reduce stress. Art therapy!

Everyone has there own personal esthetic. Some people (probably not in here) think Thomas Kincaid is the most wonderful artist in the world. I think he's horrible. I do think the DU photographers have damn good esthetics, though, and that will keep me participating.

[Solly Mack]

61. I think some manipulations with HDR look like a Thomas Kincaid painting

and I always cringe when I see one that goes that far (off the deep end).

I've got lot of pictures to share once I get to where I can set my system back up. I'm gonna drive people crazy! lol