There are some absolutely gorgeous photos on this site, but the highest ever vote is 8.6? Jesus. Some of the women are clear 10s.

I think that the photos score lower than they should because of mischeivous voting. I watched one of my photos that averaged 7.4 for the first 15 votes then plunged to 7.0 with the next 2 votes. The math on that means 2 consecutive voters gave it an average of 2. What kinda hound do you give 2 to? I'm not complaining about a 7 as I didn't think it would do as well as that, but it shows the potential.

I suspect what would level out the voting system would be some sort of accountability i.e. allow access in a seperate window to the individual voting results against voters names. It wouldn't be too difficult to do that on a database system and would have the following advantages:

i) Voters would vote more responsibly or be seen not to (either higher or lower).

ii)Members would know who voted them low or high on a particular photo and it might open up some photography discussion, which would be a great plus on a board like this.

Rakitt

(Message edited by rakitt on May 19, 2005)

I've said before that to the extent we are interested in "accurate" photo ratings in which the outlyers (sp?) do not skew the ratings, something like the geometric mean rather than the arithmetic mean should be used. However, this assumes the ratings really matter that much. While I can understand the frustration some feel when their pictures (or other pictures they particularly like) rightly or wrongly do not score as high as they believe they should, IMHO the ratings are for fun only, and should not be taken all that seriously. OTOH, the quarterly photo competitions may mean more in that there is actually a prize for winning, and the method used in the competitions is less amenable to outlyers influencing the results.

I think, an adjusted Olympic scoring system could be used. You throw out the bottom 25% of the scores, as well as the top 25% of the scores and average the middle 50%. This would likly increase the curve, IMHO.

Val

I think the same result could be found with clipping the top/bottom 5 scores. There's really only a few pricks that fuck this up.

E

How many discussions on photographic technique have you seen on the board? It could be a whole new angle.... glamour photography! For example, in Epimetheus' classic "Photo Lessons", the composure is superb, the bird is playing well to the camera, she's stunning, she's done her makeup for the shot, there's a cute thing going on with her hair on the left hand side, but she's incomplete in that her right arm is missing. In my book the photo rated 8-9, but would have got a 10 for photography if her right arm and hand (which I am sure are beautiful) were in the picture. That's just my opinion, others may disagree, but at least open scoring allows the option of discussion where appropriate. The anonymous system actively discourages it.

Given the ever-tightening grip of Bushism, I suspect we need to look more and more to photo quality as a means of getting our visual kicks http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/17/childporn.regs/index.html....

The logistis of clipping outliers are significantly more complex than straight reporting of the results i.e. a mathematical function would have to be written as a sub-routine to the main software. I do not believe that is easily achievable, whilst straight reporting should be, given that this is a database.

If there are a few pricks around, let's see who they are. Anonymity allows them to act with impunity and silently implies that photo opinions are secret.

(Message edited by rakitt on May 19, 2005)

(Message edited by rakitt on May 19, 2005)

(Message edited by rakitt on May 19, 2005)

Well, I threatened to do this, so here goes. I belong to another community of practice that votes. It's complicated at first reading, so bare with me and read it again if need be. Here's how they vote:

Some people's votes are worth more than others; they have earned voting prestige that makes their votes count twice or three times normal. Voting prestige is earned by voting close to the weighted average of all votes.

In other words, if you score a picture close to the total weighted average of all votes, you earn prestige (or voting power).

Voting example: if the weighted score of a picture is 7, then any vote from, say, 5-9 is a fair and reasonable vote. Makes sense, right?

Every time you vote within that specified margin (say plus/minus 2), you earn prestige points that make your vote worth more. Someone with high prestege has their votes counted twice or three times more than "normal."

So, to put it in practice here, let's say you have to be within plus or minus 2 from the weighted average. Every time you do so, you earn a point. Every time you deviate, you lose two points (penalty for messing around). Once you earn a hundred points, your vote is worth double. When you hit 200, you're worth three votes every time you cast a ballot.

So, fair voters will rule the day and spoiled sports's votes will have no significant impact.

The math gets horrible very quickly here because voting never really ends so the weighted average changes slightly over time. There are other shortcomings, but I'm sure those more mathematically astute hombres can come up with the proper algorthym to make it all happen.

Wombat,

I'm sure they could (in fact I could), but implementing it seamlessly on top of a piece of host software would be a lot harder than the math.

Open voting does much more than expose the outliers - it would encourage discussion of photography, which can only raise the standard of the photos we see on the site. In fact, with open voting, a whole new area of glamour photography would emerge, with textual comments being valued higher than votes.

Rakitt

Could be, but open voting (and the suggestions you ... uh, suggest) are certainly a whole 'nuther Pandora's box (Epimetheus?)

I find that on the average, I am within a point, maybe a point and a half of the average I see when I first view a pic. My problem with your proposal Rakitt, is that I have a right to decide how any given picture should be rated. I have seen some pics of girls here that had a much lower score than I felt it deserved.

Conversely, I have also seen pics that had a much higher score than I personally would have given it. I does not happen often, but it does happen. I don't want to find myself in a flame war with whoever posted the pic because she just did not do anything for ME.

I also don't want other Hombre's flaming me for giving a high score to a gal that just struck me as sexy for some reason, when everyone else did not like her.

In my opinion, ridding the site of the anonymity will open the door for ongoing flame wars and in the end, since no two people are likely to agree on a preponderance of photos, will create unnecessary friction between members over a topic which in the big picture is not that important.

If I cannot handle the fact that some people will not share my assessment of a pic's beauty, then I should not open myself up to the possible disagreement.

The pic rating thing is just not that important. If I found a woman beautiful, and I had a great time, what do I care if someone else does not find her as beautiful as I?

I just think this is not worth the problems it will create. If we determine that some change is necessary, then I agree that an averaging, or weighted system is a far better solution.

Valtereekian,

I was looking for a learning experience within an accountable system, which is quite the converse of not being able to handle criticism - in fact I welcome it.

However, perhaps you are right and there is potential for undesireable flaming if this were introduced across the whole forum.

How about an additional Hombre section entitled "Photo Critiques", specifically for discussion of glamour photography, where tips and comments were encouraged.

It's actually the comments and discussion that I'd like to see, the actual voting numbers are unimportant. But currently there is neither a voting system that encourages photo discussion, nor a specific photo discussion forum.

The latter might work better as only those photo critique would submit their work to the relevant section.

Rakitt

(Message edited by rakitt on May 19, 2005)

A while back, I asked Hombre to give me the vote data from Photo Lessons 12. Of the 42 votes (at that time), here's the results:

8,8,6,9,9,9,8,6,10,9,3,6,9,8,8,10,10,7,7,2,10,9,8,8,10,8,6,8,5,10,8,10,7,7,8,8,7,10,8,8,10,10

Early on, someone decided that pic was worth a vote of 3. Another person decided that pic deserved a 2. Since then another shitvoter or two blasted this pic, but it still holds a decent score.

I wonder how many OTHER people voted low on that pic since this census was taken... and why? Do they really hate me? Perhaps it's just that the pic is from SEA, or maybe they just like being a dick to EVERYBODY.

I say let those who contribute to pics on this site be allowed to vote. Not one, or two, but someone that's put up 25 or 50. The photos can be viewed by all that have access, and voted on for quarterly/yearly competitions, but only people that have provided content for others can vote for a pic.

E

THe voting is clearly not accurate as too many diffences in tastes.

Some guys think TJ chicas are dogs. I rate photos of actors and actresses for a living at times. I think many of the girls I've seen from PI or Thailand and even other countries that I like are dogs, fat, old etc as well. Its all in the eye of the voter.

Gaining prestige by voting near the mean is a good idea in theory but is not fair overall and proves nothing to me. JUst because rio lovers love a girl with a big ass and vote her a 7.5 and I vote it a 5 I am to be penalized? Just ridiculous. Just not a god idea with the varying tastes between countries and tastes on this board.

I think the pics are more for entertainment and sharing but do think it sucks that some really good pics lose in the cash award due to people rigging the voting.

Also some people vote pics on the looks of the girl while more advanced voters vote the pic on the quality of the pic, the angle, the creativity of the pose etc.

Voting categories? a) attractiveness of woman, b) sexiness of shot, c) quality of photography?

I'm suggesting a greater emphasis on photo quality because the days of porn are numbered - the link below may have much wider applicability than its title suggests...

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/17/childporn.regs/index.html

Who cares ?? I gave up even looking at the ratings for my photos long ago. I do not post pics to get a good rating or an award. What's that all about anyway - an ego massage? I post pics to enhance reports or to allow others on this board to see what my tastes are like so if they have never been to a place they can consider what I say in light of the type of girls I am attracted to.

Fuck the ratings. Most of my pics I will admit are with Da as the main subject. I defy anyone to say she is not a gorgeous woman. Epi certainly will attest that she is a breathtaking girl. Her pics have a hard time getting 7's.

After I saw that I realized that the rating system was not based in reality but in some twisted sense of perfect beauty that is unattainable.
I would bet Merlin's house that 999 out of 1,000 dudes on this board would fall all over themselves to get at her if they saw her in person but her picture here ts a 5 or 6 !! Gimme a break !


BTW

If you are interested in big numbers - at least temporarily - I would venture to guess NOW is the time to post your pictures. The dudes who dole out the 1s and 2s routinely are probably all lined up to see the Revenge of the Sith !!

It looks to me as if there is a fairly wide dissatisfaction with the voting system as it stands. Personally I am not bothered about what ranking my photos get, but only in why they got the rank they did.

i.e. I'd like to hear views and have photographic discussions.

One of my suggestions in the past would certainly be useful for the smart photographer -- a histogram of the vote distribution.

As was pointed out, the best looking gal on the board received an 8.6. So, when you're considering your own photo's score, a 7 is actually pretty darn good. Weird, huh?

I still reckon that an open voting system, perhaps limited to within a "photo critique" section only (seperate from Trip Reports), would make for interesting discussion.

Rakitt

Funny topic in an ironic way because Sampson and I discussed this just last night while in TJ land of beautiful Mexican ladies (Right Maximus?!). Actually, I showed him a a girl who is rated in the 4's here on CH - and IMO she is a flawless perfect 10 when you see her in person.

Oh well, at least no one else is chasing my "10's"

I generally don't even look at pics here, unless they are imbedded in a thread or trip report that I'm reading or if someone brings a name up. I used to check out the pics while in the field, every morning I would check to see if any of the girls from the day before were in the pic database or not.

Personally, I could care less what the ratings are, and for that matter, that there are ratings at all.

There are a few good photographers here, and I appreciate that. Epi's pics do demonstrate his skill.
And to the extent that a better photo or better photographer can show us a better representation of what we are likely to encounter in our travels then composition of the pic matters.

But this is not a photography web site.
Neither is this a porn web site.

The guys who are voting on the level of nudity don't get it.
The guys who are voting on the talent or expertise of the photographer don't get it either.

This web site is about information.
This web site is intended to help us make travel decisions, know how to behave abroad, how to stay safe, how to negotiate, etc. The pics are about knowing what to expect of the beauty of the women available in different locations.

As such, we are voting on the desireability of the woman.

I have seen my votes raise on a particular girl as the clothes come off. Sometimes an outstanding body can be masked by the clothes.
More likely my vote drops as the clothes drop and I start seeing the imperfections.

And yes, I vote on an unrealistic scale. I'm not sure I've ever given a ten.

Someone here once said that a ten is an eight with a rich daddy. To an extent I have to agree.
Much of what makes up the last point or two has to do with the woman's presentation...personality, posture, posturing (different) and the sophistication of the way she uses her make-up or selects her dress,...her personal presentation.
It's almost impossible to get these qualities across in a still photo.
If you CAN, then yes, your photo skills will result in higher scores.

I have no problem with there being photography contests on this site...it might be fun.
But I don't want the rank amatures to stop posting photos because their skills don't hold up.

To demostrate that I'm with the majority on this, check out the pics and scores of a guy who couldn't hold the camera level. https://www.clubhombre.com/gallery/showpic.php?showme=19249

EJack1 has some good points. If you actually look at the rating guide when you vote for a pic, the suggested way to assign scores is solely based upon how attractive you think the girl is. It has nothing to do with the asethics of the compostion or the amount of skin showing. Although those things can certainly help a girl look more or less attractive. Frankly, I pay more attention to the scores than I should. But for the most I think intra coutry rating are most informative, then intra region, and you will just pull you hair out if you want to compare rating across regions. However, I am starting to go the way of Catacony - in that I mostly look at pics when they are imbedded in a trip report. Once they hit the gallery, the little viewing window and cropping just take too much away from the pic.

Also, I am still scratching my head over the comment that there is vote rigging in the Photo-contest. Plurality voting does can in theory be manipulated but not under the circumstance present here.

I don't think there's any rigging goes on, although there may be competition at the higher levels (that does not include me) and some silly people may vote a picture very low just for the sake of it.

However, I still think that the board could have another small section where photographers could submit pictures for the sole purpose of discussing photography issues i.e. outwith Trip Reports. That wouldn't impact the rest of the board's functions to disseminate information and show pictures, but it would provide a small forum for those interested. My reasons for this threefold:

i) I'd like to learn more about shooting women on camera i.e. by discussing, not just looking.

ii) In the current political climate, anything that can be used as a defence against a feminazi or legal charge of "porn site" might come in useful in the future and

iii) the existence of such a small section would provide an additional learning and discussion resource for members that would tend to shift the emphasis away from "porn" and towards "glamour" (which can still mean naked).

The above could be achieved without making any changes to things as they run at the moment and simply with an additional section entitled "Photo Critiques", in which members were encouraged to submit photos for discussion. I suspect that the discussion there might attract preople who don't normally contribute as well as those Trip Reporters interested in the subject.

My last few thoughts.

I think there used to be a skew in the ratings but not any longer. I used to have 20 of the top 30 rated PI pics and they were in the mid 7's....now I have like 5 in the top 50. The ratings of the Asia pics are much higher than they were before and here's why:

1. Better photgraphers are going to Asia.
2. More Asian mongers now on this board than before and its tipping the scales that were once heavily favored towards SA mongers.
3. Mongers in general are just easier on rating girls. I have seen girls that I took pics of 2 years ago get 6's and now a couple of the girls have new pics that are the highest rated Thai pics ever.
4. Nudity. If a girl is nude and she is average looking, she gets an 8. A stunner in clothes will get a 7....at the most.
5. Lately the pics of the girls from SA have been of extremely low quality with girls havingbig asses and horseheads. Before all the SA guys would give them 10's and the scores would be unreasonably high but now there is balance in the force and thus the balanced scores.




(Message edited by blazers on May 20, 2005)

MongerX raises a valid point
"Once they hit the gallery, the little viewing window and cropping just take too much away from the pic. "

I've had a ball learning about photography and videography in the years that I've been on this site. But to see a photos that are cropped, shrunk and put into a little teenytiny 3" box takes away the majority of the impact of the photo in the first place.

Now... at the rate of $5/MONTH, ClubHombre ain't really making enough to afford the bandwidth to deliver every photo in full sized glory. Factor in phatphotos from guys like MasterBates, and you can see why this site isn't about delivering photos.

All kidding aside, there is some remarkable talent in this board. I'm continually amazed by the quality and quantity of content that some of you members post.

Personally, I'd like to see Hombre offer an upgrade to provide more explicit photos/videos on this site. If contributors complied with federal requlations for model releases and proof of ID, and Hombre maintained the records it would all be legal. In return for members paying an increased fee to view the 'better' content, the site could offer some great 'amateur' pics and vids.

Girls could then use this site as 'free' advertising, and could promote themselves and the quality of their services to our membership. Trust me guys, this angle works with the majority of girls in Brazil.

The voting issue is of little significance in the long run. What really matters is how this board facilitates the open exchange of information. Perhaps the ONLY reason for voting to be more accurate might be to compell more members to contribute their pics AND their opinions on a given destination

DG

Epi said-"I say let those who contribute to pics on this site be allowed to vote. Not one, or two, but someone that's put up 25 or 50. The photos can be viewed by all that have access, and voted on for quarterly/yearly competitions, but only people that have provided content for others can vote for a pic. "

Epi-That is one hell of a good idea. Those of us who have invested the time, effort and money to be contributors on this site can certainly appreciate the efforts of other contributors....both written and photographic. For those lurkers who are bashing the photos, it literally takes hours to acquire the photos, many more hours of editing and a significant investment in equipment. (not to mention the cost to travel to the acquiring destination)

With Epis approach, at least the people who are putting in the effort and have a little understanding of what was involved in acquiring and posting the photos will be the same people who are appraising the work of others from a photographers perspective.

Kinda like "earning your way into a club". Post photos and join in with your opinion. Donīt post....no problem, but you donīt get to fuck up the polls with your uninspired and untrained ranking!

Go Epi!!!

Should we also have a rule that those who don't contribute trip reports should not be allowed to comment on them?

LAGuy

When we start rating trip reports anonymously on a scale of 1-10 we'll be comparing apples to apples.

Currently, we vote in the monthly and annual competitions for TRs and pics have quarterly and annual competitions. This process of voting for the monthly annual awards is in no way compareable to ratings on pics.

The amount of time sunk, transportation hassles, and capital invested in equipment to bring ANY of my pics from the last year+ to this site are significant. I've got close to $9000 in camera equipment (two cameras, lenses, tripods, speedlites, etc), another $2000 in a travel laptop and various other "gadgets" that add to the mass and cost of travel for me. I've sunk hours into classes/books and websites trying to learn more about photography. Let's add in the baht/piso/rupiah needed to get some of the girls to pose for pics. Now, I drag all this equipment around, put those pics up here on the board so some shiteater paying $50/year can give my photos dirt scores? Better yet, some of these paying customers are going out and showing the pics to the girls. I'm risking having some trike driver giving me the Nancy Kerrigan treatment for P200 from a bargirl that's irked I shared her pics with the people here and that same ass is giving me a ONE?!?! If this is really how my pics are to be treated why should I bother to post at all?

I have a friend that's a lurker on this board. He'll never post anything here as he doesn't partake in our hobby, but he has some very interesting observations he shares with me from time to time. One of them is "why do you waste your time posting pictures on Club Hombre? It's pearls before swine." I post because I think there are people that take time to actually look at the pics and give me their honest opinion. I post pics seeking approval from my peers.

If a fellow hombre takes the time to drag around a camera on his trip and cajole a girl he hooked up with to pose for pics and then he posts them for others to critique, he will have SOME idea of what goes into the making of my pics.

People laugh at Porker's pics (thumbs and all), but he's ALWAYS walking around with his camera and taking pics of bars... girls... whatever. He understands what kind of work I'm putting into my pics a LOT better then someone that doesn't even have a passport handing out low scores like it's motherfucking gold.

Priew is another one that was addressed earlier in this thread. Yeah his pics are askew and scans from 4x6 pics done at SavOn, but he took the time to actually take those pics, scan them and place them in his reports so he could better share his experiences with us. Do I think the pics have ridiculous scores? Yeah, some do. I remember checking a few months back and his highest rated photo was of a girl's ass while she laid on the bed. When I last checked (2 minutes ago), his highest rated pic is of another girl's ass. The picture is underexposed, she's just standing against the wall, and his flash is evident in the mirrors on the wall. This pic has an 8.2 vs. the 8 my Photo Lessons 12 currently sustains. Now the scores of his pics may have changed dramatically over the last few months, but would I wish the "1 monster" to pay a visit to his pics? No. By placing those pics in his report he opened his trip reports to a level of scrutiny words alone do not warrant. He was lucky that people responded favorably. Others here are not so lucky...

Sandman

Glad you like the idea.

Blazers

I still believe that pics are skewed toward Latin countries.

Rakitt

I was planning on approaching Hombre with a minor reorganization of the site gathering threads like this under a new topic labeled Photography. We could then use this place for dropping interesting pics, discussing pics and chatting about photography in general.

Cat

"Personally, I could care less what the ratings are, and for that matter, that there are ratings at all."

You have 13 photos in the gallery, I have over 1800. You don't really care about scores or how the pics relate to others people have posted - they are just there to add to the trip report. That's OK - that's the way it should be for most people on this site.

E

Epimetheus,

Wow... a like mind!!! That sounds like just what I was suggesting a few posts ago - a dedicated photography forum that forms a small addition to the site. Having just invested close to $3000 on a camera, lenses and a tripod (none if it used for photos shown so far), I also feel that this level of investment from members (not to mention the time it takes to crop, resize and post pics) shows that there are some members who do care about their photography.

The great things about a "Photography" section would be that it would be easy to implement, would NOT affect the running of the rest of the site and I'm sure that discussions specifically on technique and effects would enthuse others as well. Those who didn't wish to participate could simply ignore it and carry on exactly as normal.

To hell with the popular ratings - I want expert critisism.

p.s. it's "Rakit" but the site insists on 6-letter handles, hence "Rakitt".

Epi,

Shit, I didn't even know I had 13 on here! It's funny, I have some great 35mm shots from the pre-digital age that go back to my early monger days - lots of stuff from Germany, Spain and Holland, a bunch more from Japan, Korea, Panama and believe it or not, the Middle East (mostly Thai and Filipinas). Back then, I took a good deal of time with my pics; these days, even though with digital I should be taking more, I rarely take my camera out for non-tourist stuff.

With Brasil, that could be self-preservation - my GF stays with me, so bringing a camera back every evening after an afternoon out with the guys and having terma pics and whatnot on it, well, the last thing I want to get is the Lorena Bobbitt treatment.

However, even when I hit border towns, when I was in Guatemala and Mexico City earlier this year, all of my recent trips to Montreal, even from Tel Aviv last year - I keep my camera in my bag and never take it on monger runs.

It's weird, I'm certainly a monger but porn doesn't really do to much for me. Scratch that, I follow a number of boards like this, but that's primarily for information. I certainly appreciate a nice pussy pic but since I passed the 1000 bodycount mark, I'm a little jaded and unless it's a warm body, I don't pay too much attention.

I agree with most of the vets here - pics are really, really subjective. As I stated somewhere on here when this topic came up before, if I see a pic of a girl I've been with, the session quality and everything comes into play when I judge the photo. That's natural, if someone shows you a photo and you instantly remember a quadruple-nut evening with every sick twist you can imagine, you might rate that photo a little more high than the guy who hasn't.

I do despise keyboard hobbyists who comment on shit they have no firsthand knowledge about. Getting a lap dance from a topless dancer in bumfuck Ohio does not in any way qualify a guy to make any comments other than "wow!" when they interject into a trip report or discuss or chat thread on any of the places discussed on this board.

By the way, before she moved out of the local area, Lorena Bobbitt did one of my ex-girlfriend's nails about once a week at the beauty shop she used to work at, and they had lunch a few times. I met Lorena once and thought she was a nice chica - until she cut her dipshit husband's dick off

I enjoy hanging-out with a few guys who have absolute opposite taste in women than I do. Where ever we go I never have to worry that we are going to compete for the same chica.

Unfortunately the same rule seems to apply on this board when scoring chicas. Most of you who post pics regularly really have some truly great pics that scored a little lower than I thought they would.

I'm not sure what the best answer is for scoring pics...but typically I only score the ones that I think are truly awe inspiring...this keeps it simple for me...if I like it I score it, if I don't like it, I ignore it.

Maybe if Hombre could limit the number of positive votes paying members have on this board we could achieve more realistic ratings?

For example:

If each of us have only 10 (or 5 or 20) positive votes per month (no negative votes)...most of us would be a little more selective which pics get our votes.

This would eliminate those who routinely give 1s or 2s (negative votes) to pics that ought to score higher in most of our books. Low scoring pics would get little or no votes because who wants to waste their limited positive votes on an ugly pic?

Naturally the best pics would get the most positive votes...very easy.

At the end of the month...the top picture(s) with the most positive votes win the contest, or they are posted in the Hall of Fame, or she becomes our she-goddess for the month...whatever.

End of the month you must use or lose your votes. Then on the 1st of every month...our profiles are reloaded with up to 10 positive (personally valuable) votes.

This indeed would better control reckless voting and make it a little more fair for everyone...either we like it...or we don't.

Alec

Alec

I have posted some UGLY women and they deserved the 3s they got!! As for limiting the # of positive votes that can be given out (no negatives), all you'd see are pics lining up along "party lines".

Cat

"if I see a pic of a girl I've been with, the session quality and everything comes into play when I judge the photo."

I understand that, in principal, but what this does is takes some rather unsavory looking ladies and catapults them up into the 8s. From the PoV of a gent that's never been farther south then Ensenada, can you understand how positively, fucking nuts the votes for some of these Brazilian whores look to me? I'm seeing a girl uglier then most of the members of CH stuffed into a dress but with 7s and 8s.

I guess one of the differences between Asia and SA is most of us have not fucked these same girls. The amount of girls working in the "biz" here completely boggles the mind. Yes, some overlap, but most of us haven't plumbed that same box. Yes, we may have had the "givergoddess, pulled 8 loads in 8 hours" girl but how do I convey that through my pics? Is it really fair to apply those standards? SHOULD those things be factors in voting on pics? Well, I don't think so, but then again how do you adjust it out...?

E

Epi -

What about those 8s you posted and some guy comes along, and just because he can, he gives them all a rating of 1 or 2?

If this same guy had only 10 positive votes...he would likely ignore your pics and cast them against the pics he likes.

Granted, if he does this, your pics have nothing to gain. But equally he cannot skew your photo's rating lower than where a majority of the board think it should be.

This way those with a bad eye or perhaps a vendetta do not unnecessarily skew a great photo down.

There is no right answer...but, I think a limited number of positive votes (no negative votes) would improve upon the current system.

IMHO.

Alec

why not just toss outliers?

DM...has it.

Honestly I think this discussion is a waste of time, to each his own and everyone's taste is different (thank god for that).

But in the interest of "fairness" and "consistency" you could do as DM suggests. The question only becomes whether you should do 2 standard deviations or less. Based on what I have read you may want to trim it to 1.5 or less (just a gut call no actual computations performed)

Personally I base my ratings on "sex appeal"...do I want to be next to her right now and jump her? And believe you me...clothes or no clothes has nothing to do with it.

Concarne-- well said and I totally agree. Simple to solve it by tossing outliers. What would make it interesting is in an individual's profile, list the # of outliers he's accumulated

Even more interesting if the votes were no longer anonymous

With the number of voters vs. the number of pics, there would be a LOT of pics that didn't get ANY votes. Also, just limiting votes to "positives" excludes the possibility, and PROBABLILTY, that some of those pics will indeed suck and can be appropriately labeled as such.

Diversity needs to be maintained and people need to be able to vote with honesty, not some preprocessed honeyglaze, but it would be more to my liking if I knew that people passing judgement on my pics were people actually out there taking pics of their own...

E

Like with anything, it's human nature to NOT appreciate something or give a rats ass if a privilege is just doled out to anybody who shows up. These guys that get this voting privilege for free and don't post any pics are the ones that think it's cute to vandalize another's pic, they're the same ones that think it's cute to "out" another member. These nitwits have NOTHING vested in the system to stop them to ask themselves, "Hey, how would I feel if somebody outs me or assassinates my pic"?

Only a fellow-poster can "appreciate" what guys like Epi go through in terms of time committment, investment and the risks he assumes of getting "outed". Each photographer should be given a fair "up or down" vote for their troubles, once a photographer perceives his efforts and risks are not being appreciated, that's when we'll start to lose the valuable photo contributions that speak louder than 1000 words.

Whatever make this club better and more enjoyable...I am for it. And I would like to see those who contribute great photos get the recognition they fairly deserve.

I appreciate those of you who take the time to get the photos and post them for us. I can understand your dismay when a shiteater (I love that term Epi used above) comes along and intentionally down-grades your photo...just for the hell of it. I can understand why you would want to limit the privilege of rating posted photos to only those who have contributed...but that would be tantamount to one artist asking only fellow artists to critique his work...while the fellow artist may appreciate the technical aspects of the shot...the true litmus test is..."do the majority in this club like the photo (even including shiteaters)"? If you do not care what the majority thinks, then just share your pics via the personal inbox of those members that you know are credible critics. The vast majority of us will likely not know the difference.

As I said before, I usually do not rate a photo unless I really feel compelled. When I see a photo and I verbally say "Wow!"...then I will rate it 7, 8 or 9. Only two or three times in over a year have I clicked in a 10.

I've personally never posted any pics because I never owned a digital camera until just recently. This spring I bought my first Sony Cyber-Shot...okay...don't laugh...it's my first digital camera...cheap and relatively easy to use...just point and shoot. I just have not had an opportunity to use it yet to post any pics...maybe later this year if I can get away from work.

Also, I don't have a laptop...so I must figure-out how to upload my pics from an Internet Cafe down-range because I don't want to carry any media on my person when I re-enter the states after my trip...personal reasons.

Please keep in mind that many of us subscribe to this club to learn and share what we know so that we can help each other have a better, safer, and more enjoyable experience in the field. Some of you are true champions contributing in every conceivable way. Yet, others in this club may wish to contribute, but can't because they have no writing skills, no camera or camera skills, some may lack funding and convenience to go down-range, and some new green beans may be preparing themselves to go for the very first-time.

Again, I think the key to attaining "more realistic" ratings is to limit the number of votes we get every month to give the vote intrinsic value. If I get only a few votes every month...I will use them judiciously...only those photos I think are the best will get my vote. And it is very unlikely I will put my valuable vote on a pic that does not grab my attention.

Epi...yes, eliminating a number rating scale eliminates the negative vote. And yes, via this "limited vote" system the pics will receive votes according to party-lines...but that is happening anyway with the current rating system. (Guys who like Asians will like Asians more often than they will like Latinas or Morenas). Limiting the number of votes a member gets every month will deter any member from giving unfair low scores to pics that should clearly score higher. I'm not saying this system would be flawless, but it should reduce outright sabotage.

Alec

Sheesh, leave you fellas alone for a couple of days and a real conversation breaks out!

Cutting the outliers won't do much good; far too many voters hit the ones and twos (let's face it, if guys followed the rating scale, there would be very few under five). I've seen yet another site that provides a histogram of votes. The distribution is nearly always bi-modal. Most people give the subject due consideration and you'll see votes in the 6-7 range; down at the bottom, however, a considerable number of voters give the subject a 1! They were simply trying to lower the overall score. Beause there are so many of them, they're not outliers.

I'd thought of some other ways of keeping control on the votes, but they all fall short (e.g. giving extra votes to contributers). I'd dearly love to see some variation on the one I'd suggested, but haven't been able to come up with something workabe/sellable.

One method that would work is thumbs up/down system. Still, if we have to fall back to that, I'd rather just see a histogram and let me draw my own conclusion.

Alec
You hit the nail on the head.Not everyone has the time and/or ability to post trip reports and/or photos.I give all you guys that do so some serious props, I recently tried to post a trip report and it took all night(hours),but before I could finish I accidently erased it all(I almost cried,lol).So based on that I somewhat understand what you guys go through and really have a better appreciation for your work.That being said I don't think the rest of us are any less experienced than some of you guys,just because they don't post it on the net.Being that there is a best photo contest how does anyone know that someone isn't lowballing the score to give their photos an edge over another.

I personally don't vote, unless like Alec said I see something I really like.When I first saw the rating system implemented I though it was just for fun and not something that would cause controversy.This is a mongering info sight,I don't think most people paid to join just to critique photos.I agree some of the scores are mindboggling, but one mans trash is another mans treasure.In the end who cares as long as your satified and more importantly you enjoyed the chicas when you banged them.

Hey Alec I just recently caught up with the 21st century and got me a digital camara too, the sony cybershot.lol.I haven't used it on any trip yet.I kinda eased up on taking photos when I monger, unless it's someone that really stands out and is cool.Taking photos for me is one more extra thing I have to hassle with when dealing with a garota,I just rather get to business ASAP.

Anyways take care and continue to have fun out there.Peace...

I don't have time right now to read this entire thread, it's getting long... But reading between the lines, it appears as if a couple guys think I was slamming Priew.

I wasn't. I'm one of the guys that was giving him 7s and 8s. His Costa Rica pics didn't fair so well.

My point was simply to demonstrate that the voting was being driven by the content of the pics, not the composition.

There's a bunch more I'd like to say about the broader issues opened here....who belongs and who doesn't....who should talk and who shouldn't...and the fact that Hombre is running this site with a profit motive....who are his paying customers and what do they want....etc.

But no time now.

Simple suggestion though....

Keep the gallery pics ratings as a vote on content. Let the voting continue as is.

Add voting for skill and composition to the showcase version, and require some qualification for the priveledge of voting.

Easy enough??

eJ

Ejack1
"and the fact that Hombre is running this site with a profit motive....who are his paying customers and what do they want....etc."

Hombre makes a profit from this site ?? I want serious royalties !!