Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Admin
Page: <<prev 1 ... 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 ... 46 next>>
Jun 8, 2012 11:14:11   #
I'll look into the idea of setting up a chat room on UHH, but there are few things on my to-do list that I need to finish off first. So unfortunately it won't be any time soon.
Go to
May 10, 2012 17:11:55   #
You probably blocked images from static.ulgyhedgehog.com in your browser.
Go to
May 8, 2012 04:37:44   #
I'm thinking about setting up a section for pics like that, but not at this time.
Go to
May 3, 2012 03:29:32   #
Neither a 5-point system nor allowing 5 votes per user would work. It's simply not enough to cover the voter to photo ratio on UHH.

Two-stage contests are too complicated.
Go to
Apr 20, 2012 15:59:20   #
Quote:
Why won't tha avg. system work. 1 vote per person. The one pic get 10 votes at four stars and the one gets 1 vote of five stars. The avg is based on total votes period. Meaning by 11 total votes in your example. So the first gets 3.6 avg. the five star with one vote has a .45 avg.


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.

Quote:
1a + 2b + 3c + 4d + 5e = total score, where the letters “a through e” are the number of people who voted for a photo at that level of scoring.


This is interesting. Do you know if there is a tested theory behind this method that could be read/looked at somewhere?
Go to
Apr 20, 2012 03:54:49   #
Quote:
No voting until all entries have been received.


We already have this option.

Quote:
Additionally, I have an issue with the small size of the thumbnail images. They are really too small to properly indicate which images are worth a closer look.


That's true. But I'm not sure what would be the appropriate size. If I make the thumbnails bigger, then people on slow connections would have to wait forever to load, say, 200 images just to see what's in the contest.

Quote:
I don't have the math reference off hand, but I remember reading that a better way to have an election was to give each voter a certain number of votes, say 10, and let them use them however they wanted. One picture could get all 10, two almost equal favorites could get a 6 and a 4, or 10 pictures could get one each.


That's the kind of stuff I'm aiming for. A way to split the voting power among multiple pictures. We need something that's not complicated, not boring, and at the same time mathematically fair. Ideally, without having to resort to arbitrary limits (like top 5 or only 5 votes, etc.) as any such arbitrary limit would be flawed.

Quote:
Sounds good, top five have a vote off at the end.

Quote:
This seems to make the most sense. Raw score gets you to the finals. Once the top five have been selected for the run off the 1-5 makes mathematical sense as long as each person has to rank all five photos.


I think multi-stage voting would be too complicated to manage.

Quote:
Maybe allow everyone one vote but no tally till end of contest.


We already have the means to implement something like that with the current system. But it's not working out because of the specific circumstances of UHH contests.

Normally, the ratio of voters to contestants/candidates/etc. is very high.
Imagine some small town mayor elections. There might be 2 or 3 candidates with 20,000 voters. So one vote per voter works out really well.

But on UHH, we have something like 300-400 people who are ready to vote, with 150 of them submitting their own pictures. And even if I bump up the internal marketing of the contests to make sure every single UHH user is aware of an ongoing contest, the overall numbers would increase, but the ratio would probably stay the same.

So rather than having a ratio of 20,000:3, we have it as 400:150 (or 8:3).

That's why one vote per user isn't working out well. And five votes per user won't improve the contest system either.

Quote:
I personally think it would be better to have a scoring system, but it becomes problematic when we want all members to score 150 photos.


Yes, the scoring system would be the best and the most fair way to rate entries. But I agree, it's simply unrealistic to expect a user to go over all images in the contest. Additionally, having to keep track of which picture you think should be 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and which one should be ...57th would drive people crazy. So that's out.
Go to
Apr 19, 2012 10:01:43   #
donrent wrote:
I just picked the #5 to use as an example... Realalistically, we will not get much over maybe 10,000 (probably 30) entries so 5 just seems to be a decent #...


I agree that 5 is a reasonable number. I just don't think the system would be much different from what we have now. It won't solve the issue I outlined with the current system.
Go to
Apr 19, 2012 09:53:32   #
I'm thinking another option is to dilute the voting power of a user based on how many votes he/she placed.

For example:

For any given contest a user has one point to share.

So if he/she only places one vote for some picture, that picture gets a score bump by one point.

If later on, that same user votes for another picture, the point is split. At this time, two pictures would get 0.5 point each from this user.

If he/she votes for 10 different pictures in the contest, each of the pictures would get 0.10 points from this user.

And the winner would be decided by the raw sum of all points from all users' votes.

So if you really like one picture, only vote for this picture and nothing else. But if like multiple pictures, you can vote for as many as you like provided your voting power gets split among them.

Users would also have an option of revoking a vote. So if you vote for some pictures and later on decide to concentrate your voting "juice" on fewer pictures you like the most, then you'll be able to revoke your earlier votes for the pictures you liked least of all.

What do you think?
Go to
Apr 19, 2012 09:45:51   #
donrent wrote:
Instead of your idea, why not let the voter have - lets say vote for 5 of H/H's favorite ones and the picture that gets the most is winner...


Hmm. I think such system won't be much different either from what we currently have or from allowing unlimited votes.

If we consider setting some arbitrary limit, we can either go high or low.

Why 5? Why not 10? Or 50? Or 200? This would lead us to essentially unlimited voting. It's like hitting "like" for everything you see on the screen. Not good.

On the other end of the spectrum one might ask why 5? Why not 2? Why not 1? Which would lead us to the system we have now.

So if we go high, we end up with unlimited voting, and if we go low we end up with what we have now.

Picking a small number like 5 won't really make a difference. The few images that happen to gain some votes early in the process would leave other images as outsiders for the remainder of the contest. The votes might spread out a bit, but it won't change the overall dynamic.
Go to
Apr 19, 2012 06:00:30   #
I know. The current system is the best one from the mathematical point of view. But it's boring, and it favors random change to a high degree.

I noticed that once a few pictures get 3-4 votes each and climb to the top of the ratings list, they begin to receive even more views (and possibly votes), while other pictures are largely ignored.

Another way to structure the contests would be to sort pictures according to number of views. Pictures with the least number of views would be shown first. But this might backfire in some way.
Go to
Apr 19, 2012 05:37:32   #
I'm thinking about changing the way the contest system works.

Instead of allowing only one vote per user, I would like to allow unlimited votes with a 5-point system.

Any user would be able grade as many pictures as he/she wants and assign a value from 1 to 5 points/stars/etc. to any picture.

Now the question is how to determine the winner?

Going by the average score won't work. For example, one picture might get 10 votes of 4 points, and have the average score of 4. While another picture might get one vote of 5 points and get the average score of 5. Obviously, the latter isn't necessarily a better picture.

Going by the product won't work either. One picture might get three votes of 4 points for a 12-point product. While another one might get two votes of 5 points for a 10-point product. The former picture would win with such scoring system, while it would be apparent that the latter picture is the better one.

Any suggestions?
Go to
Feb 17, 2012 22:47:30   #
ianhargraves1066 wrote:
Its funny to me, many PM's indictaed that you and jackinthebox where one and the same imbacile. Point proven, we have sucessfully found your computer address! Watch out the men in the white coats are coming for you


Jackinthebox hit the Register button to create his account on 2011-11-10 at 23:51:27.

Coincidently, English_Wolf hit the Update button to edit the contents of this post http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-10693-1.html#118883 on 2011-11-10 at 23:51:30. The post he initially created on 2011-11-10 at 23:50:05.

We have activity logged by two different users with different IP addresses, cookies, browser versions, etc. within a span of three seconds.

So unless English_Wolf is an evil mastermind that uses multiple computers connected to different ISPs (or via proxies), and replies to messages and registers new accounts at the exact same time, there is no way Jackinthebox and English_Wolf is the same person.
Go to
Jan 26, 2012 14:08:17   #
new section test
Go to
Jan 26, 2012 06:44:34   #
I never used Picasa, but you need to make sure the image file is on your computer (or a network share) before you can upload it here.
Go to
Jan 24, 2012 03:30:53   #
Indi wrote:
A suggestion about the new User-Managed sections. Actually, it's a matter of format.

Keep the sections that you see when you get your Forum Digest email, but just add links, no sub categories or topics, to the bottom. That way, anyone who see's a category that tickles their fancy will see what's available and then click that link and see a list of what's cookin' for that day.
It'll be good for the newbies who aren't aware of many of the other sections.
Only a suggestion.


I'll look into it. Thanks for the suggestion.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 ... 46 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.