I submitted a number since this system was implemented, I noticed that some were declined rather quickly but those on review seems to have been there for a while. My hunch is those declined were voted out by popular opinion and those on review were those which passed and are now awaiting final judgment by the guys running the site.
Bong On 7/18/07, AlunFoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I had a couple of re-instated pics too, so I asked them. > Their reply (in just a couple of hours, good response time) explained > an early bug that mistakenly declined photos that got lots of > thumbs-up from the voters. As you say, they got back in the Waiting > For Review category the day after. So now they are awaiting final > judgement. > > Given the time they've been there was my motivation for asking about > turnover in the first place. Maybe it's down to other bugs as well, > that we don't see as users. > > Jostein > > 2007/7/17, Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > If they wanted to do it properly, they should monitor the popular vote > > of each individual to see if they tend to vote in a similar manner to > > the judges. If they see enough consistency with specific individuals, > > then they could rely on the rejection of the popular vote. But that > > would take much more time and effort on startup and that is what they > > are lacking. > > > > Perhaps what they actually do is have a ceiling and floor for > > consideration and rejection. The image starts at zero and each vote > > increments or decrements until either floor or ceiling is reached. At > > that point, floor images are rejected and ceiling images are held in > > reserve for the judges final decision. > > > > The first day of the artist judging a couple of my images suddenly > > became rejected. The next day, they were back on waiting for review. > > They are still there, but a few others have been rejected. I suspect > > they fine tuned the voting as it got started. > > > > -- > > Bruce > > > > > > Tuesday, July 17, 2007, 8:57:39 AM, you wrote: > > > > A> That's my impression too, Bruce. I haven't submitted anything since > > A> before the voting started, but I had images in for evaluation at that > > A> time. Some declined, some still awaits final judgement. > > > > A> If our guess is right, it means that the judges restrict their > > A> material to what's been approved by "popular vote". I wonder if this > > A> is bad or good... > > > > A> Jostein > > > > A> 2007/7/17, Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > >> It seems to have sped up rejections, but has had no effect on some of > > >> my images. I'm guessing that there is some number of negatives that > > >> will eventually throw it out of consideration. As there is some > > >> number of positives that keeps in under consideration. Once those > > >> numbers have been met, the image is either rejected or kept on waiting > > >> for review by the judges. But the image would not keep showing up to > > >> be voted on. All a guess on my part. > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Best regards, > > >> Bruce > > >> > > >> > > >> Tuesday, July 17, 2007, 1:07:06 AM, you wrote: > > >> > > >> A> Just a yes/no question, really, but if you have particular > > >> A> experiences, I'm curious. > > >> > > >> A> Thanks, > > >> > > >> A> Jostein > > >> > > >> A> -- > > >> A> http://www.alunfoto.no/galleri/ > > >> A> http://alunfoto.blogspot.com > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > >> [email protected] > > >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > >> > > > > > > A> -- > > A> http://www.alunfoto.no/galleri/ > > A> http://alunfoto.blogspot.com > > > > > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > [email protected] > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > -- > http://www.alunfoto.no/galleri/ > http://alunfoto.blogspot.com > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- Bong Manayon http://www.bong.uni.cc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
