Admin

So if there is one pic with 10 votes of 4 points each and another pic with 6 votes of 5 points each we would get:

1) (4x10)/16=2.5
2) (5x6)/16=1.875

Pic #1 would win. But it's obvious that the pic #2 is the better one. It just happened to get rated by fewer people.

Besides, please check my post about voter to pic ratio. That's the main problem to be addressed.



This is interesting. Do you know if there is a tested theory behind this method that could be read/looked at somewhere?

alienmurphy Loc: Alaska

At the end of a contest with any of the suggested scenarios who's going to do the math or pay for programming to do this in the background on the website?

rob s Loc: La Mesa, CA

Of course everyone could get five votes but assign these as places 1 - 5.
Just another way to refine which pictures are ranked highest.

Ragarm

If you do this, nix the revoking option. From an economic theory standpoint, the justification for you splitting the votes is sound. We each have a limited resource, our vote of 1, or 5, or 117, or whatever as longe as we all get the same amount of resources. Now, we each decide how to distribute our resources.

Why nix the revoke option? Because as has been noted, early high vote getters tend to draw even more votes based on their early lead. That's a dynamic bias that is propagated by the revoke option.

Ragarm

This is fair. I like the time limit on submissions and the limited number of votes over a fairly short period of time.

Nikon13 Loc: North Carolina

I have an idea and if it has already been suggested....my apologies. Why don't we ditch the voting and go with judges selected from the UHH ranks. A professional, an amateur and a newbie. Members could volunteer to be contest judges and be randomly selected with each contest to participate. Voting is messy....ask anyone from Florida.

Linden

It wont be fair no matter how many points you assign...... because people don't use the same criteria to judge. People will vote for the one they like, not necessarily the one with best technical merits or drama displayed. If it were judged with rules then points split for each criteria would make sense.

So one point, or the ability to pick a first, and second place. This way, those who automatically vote for their own will also be placing a vote for someone else!

You could make it even more fair by with holding the vote count until the end.

And I still think a wall of shame to permanently display all the contest winners would be good!

Wahawk Loc: NE IA

I like the idea of unlimited votes, on a scale of 1-5. But then somehow factor in the number of views so that pics with more views get slightly higher results than pics with only a few views. If a pic gets 10,000 views and an average vote of 3, it is probably still better than a pic with only 100 views and an avg vote of 4.

JimMullinaux Loc: Austin, Texas

I seriously doubt most folks will take time to look at all 200 entries in a contest. They probably will look at the first ten or twenty, cast their vote(s), and skip the remaining 180 pictures. It then becomes a contest based on how quickly you can enter your picture.

Not only should contests be easy to enter, they also should be easy to judge (especially if you're going by popular vote). With a two-tier system, a panel would select ten or twenty finalists, and only those ten or twenty would be put up for member voting. More than likely, most people would be willing to look through ten or twenty pictures before casting their vote(s).

The main point is to keep our focus on the pictures -- and not how quickly they were entered. It's also important to get as many members as possible to look at the pictures and to cast their votes. They won't look through 200 pictures, but they might look at ten or twenty.

I think the main concern against a two-tier system is having to trust a panel. This could be softened somewhat by having panelists selected from volunteer members and by having the panelists' names remain anonymous. Also, different panelists would be selected for different contests.

Again, all this is aimed at making it easy for the general membership to vote. Also, asking members to serve as panelists helps to get them more involved with the UHH family.

Ragarm

I like the idea of a newbie. The different combination of judges could generate lots of interest, in and of itself. Another benefit would be the different views, criteria, and biases brought to each contest. The more I think about this, the more I like this idea.

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

Why do you think that the picture that got two votes of 5 points is better than the one that got three votes of 4 points.

I think that if one picture gets 10 votes but each vote is only one point is a winner over one picture that gets one vote for five points. More people voting for the people in any form means more people like the picture.

You could always use a similar point system as the college football bowls, but we all know where that leaves us. lol

Dback4430 Loc: Lockport Il

I don't know at all about the theory . IT was the first thing that jumped into my mind .
To simplify this , use the General public to narrow it down to say 3 or 5 photos . Then repost them and the games begin lol. I was trying to help . I really don't think that there are going to be many people to lok at all the pics till there is a way to just do the pictures as thumbnail size @ 100 per page , then they may investigate further . Just a guess , butt ....

artfuldiver Loc: Clearwater, Florida

I agree with f22 just don't show the vpotes till the end and don't change the order in which they are displayed

TomJ Loc: Kansas

A modified version of Joyfullee's suggestion is to allow 3 votes with numeric values 5, 3 and 1. Winner is photo with highest sum after all votes are counted. Using weights greater than 1 should create greater dispersion of total votes.

texaseve Loc: TX, NC and NH

I like the idea of not voting until all entries are in and not showing scores until the end. How much they are scored or how many votes we get is not important to me. I have belonged to another site where the same people always get all the votes because of who they are and how long they have been there so after a long time, I left.