I would like to propose a change in the photo system at Club Hombre. The number of photos on the site has doubled since I became a member. These photos are the product of a lot of money, time and effort from the members who captured and decided to share them with all of us and have made Club Hombre one of the best sources for photos of real working girls on the internet. I believe all who provide the photos take a lot of pride in what they submit. The desire of all of us to share our experiences through photos as well as words is what makes this board such a valuable resource.
When we make a post it bears our name. When we upload a photo our name is available for all to see. When a trip report is done its no secret whose report it is and it should be the same with voting on photos your name should accompany your vote.
This would remove all the mystery from the process and help us all to see and understand just exactly what’s going on. If someone gives photos from a certain person or country all ones then it will be plain for all to see. If someone gives 10's to a poor photo it will be plain for all to see. If you give 3's to a photo that everyone else gives 7's to it will be plain for all to see. It would be easy enough to have a history button as the photo window comes up that reveals the names and ratings that each member gave to a submission. All the mystery would be gone. Voting patterns would become obvious. I believe the voting would then become more thoughtful and deliberate and a pattern of voting that was clearly outside the range of all the other votes would be obvious and easily discounted by all members. This would finally give true and real meaning to the voting system that to date is senseless by almost all accounts. IMHO, it’s time to let everyone know what only Hombre knows and make the voting transparent. Hombres own words are quite telling on this subject.

In Hombres own words:

“One of the things I've learned from the implementation of the rating system for photos is that it tended to attract critics more so than those that genuinely enjoy photos. In my analysis of voting patterns I strongly believe that many voters gave poor scores just for the sake of giving poor scores rather than any thoughtful consideration of beauty, composition, or the cumulative effect of a tendency of giving lower scores for photos than they deserve”

It Ironic to me that on this site we talk about all the intimate moments of each of our trips and many do in depth trip reports detailing every sex act known to man and all this and many other more serious subjects are open to and receives scrutiny and feedback from many members and this generates a healthy debate and is the life of the board yet our opinion on a photo should remain hidden and secret.

>>It Ironic to me that on this site we talk about all the intimate moments of each of our trips and many do in depth trip reports detailing every sex act known to man and all this and many other more serious subjects are open to and receives scrutiny and feedback from many members and this generates a healthy debate and is the life of the board yet our opinion on a photo should remain hidden and secret.


Hmmm....I guess if you put it that way, it does make a lot of sense, Bahtman.

Oh well, I wil go with the flow

Excellent points Bahtman and I second your motion. There is definitely a need to encourage thoughtful ratings, it's all for fun we keep saying, but how many of us pic posters can deny that it's discouraging for us when someone takes outrageous potshots at our work; there are consequences when some people's idea of having fun borders on childish destructiveness. I recall in high school how much fun it was to toilet paper my neighbors house until it actually happened to our house one day. I am willing to bet many pic assassins have never gone through the labors of posting a pic.

Based on my conversation and the private stashes I am getting from my buddies, it appears it has gotten to the point where malicious pic assassination is discouraging people from offering up some of their best stuff to the public. Why bother when all that hard work (and the risk of getting outed) is perceived by the pic poster as not being appreciated. Unfortunately, a few A-holes' actions speak louder than 99 supportive ratings or posts.

I still think use of the geometric mean rather than the arithmetic mean would solve the problem of outliers (or is it out-liars?) ruining the ratings. I don't know how difficult this would be to implement on the current software, but if the software is flexible at all, it shouldn't be that hard.

you mean to say, use the mean instead of averages?

I like bahtman's idea, but tossing out outliers would be ok too (let's say one standard deviation?).

However, why not get rid of the ratings! IMHO the ratings serve no purpose whatsoever... well cept upsetting the posters.

Don Marco: There was a time I could be more precise, but unfortunately one of the first things to go with a pre-Alzheimer's situation is the detailed knowledge of statistics. So, all I remember is use of the geometric or logrithmic mean diminishes the impact of outliers (and I'm not even sure I am spelling that word right). I also remember that the geometric mean was not terribly difficult to calculate.

As to getting rid of the ratings, I would not object but apparently others would. Then again I'm not a picture poster, and only rate the pictures when I am suffering from extreme boredom.

Bahtman,

I totally see understand your propsal and I see how it will possibly deter a guy from submitting a malisious vote, but what if a guy gives an honest vote that one disagree with.

A guy can give a 1 for many reasons.

I can see threads turning in to "why did you vote this way" and then a rebuttle post to perhaps defend his vote. Maybe people would like to read it but I would rather not have threads get hijacked on why one guy voted one way or another.

May this won't happen and guys will vote more honestly, what is your propsal for a guy who still gives a low vote and you think he is voting in spite. Probation? Ban the member? Not let him vote? Just curious.


(Message edited by frontbc on September 06, 2005)

Hi Frontbc,

As Hombre said when speaking on the subject and I quote:

"many voters gave poor scores just for the sake of giving poor scores"


And as I pointed out in my post:

"a pattern of voting that was clearly outside the range of all the other votes would be obvious and easily discounted by all members. This would finally give true and real meaning to the voting system."

I think a person should be free to rate another persons photo any way they want except in secret!




(Message edited by Bahtman on September 06, 2005)

(Message edited by Bahtman on September 06, 2005)

(Message edited by Bahtman on September 06, 2005)

I used to spend more time pondering the scores and the scoring system on CH. However, I think there has been a strong trend where people are simply abandoning the scoring system. It's now very rare to see a photo that get's more than 50 votes. Hell there are photos with scores well into the 8's that aren't even getting past 30 votes. Much like the US people just don't vote anymore.

What I think would be more informative would be a count on the number of members who have viewed a photo. You could also add a button where a viewer can recommend this photo for viewing. Then you can report the percentage of viewing members who recommend viewing this pic.

Personally, I would rather see a larger viewing window for the photos. The current window is too small to form a good opinion of the girls.

Bahtman wrote:
And as I pointed out in my post:

"a pattern of voting that was clearly outside the range of all the other votes would be obvious and easily discounted by all members. This would finally give true and real meaning to the voting system."

I think a person should be free to rate another persons photo any way they want except in secret!


Bahtman,

ok, I think I understand it better. You would like to see a list of the votes submitted.

for example:

(5) 10s
(3) 7s
(13) 1s

a poor example, but at least you could tell which votes were out of line and perhaps disqualify them.

but you also would like to see the voter name attached to the vote as well, correct?

Hi Frontbc,

As I said in my original post:

“Your name should accompany your vote”

I agree with Merlin, I think the current system has discouraged members from uploading
because the voting system encourages and continues to give safe haven to the photo
assassins by letting them remain anonymous .
The current system has taken its toll on many of the great photographers on the site who in many posts
will essentially say I used to care but I don’t any more. What a sad state of affairs. The fact is all of
us who post photos do care or we would not have taken time to post in the first place.
The effect of changing the system would be to
encourage many of the great photographers on this board to post some of their best work. The
current system has most of us emailing our best photos to each other.


(Message edited by Bahtman on September 07, 2005)

Bahtman,

To be honest, my main focus on CH is the TJ section. So I consistently view TJ photos and occasionally view interantional photos.

I usually vote when I like a photo and abstain when it does nothing for me. Because I vote one way it isn't consistent but it's how I do it.

I still think there are so many levels of degrees on how one votes on a photos. I only have one. "How turned on am I by the photo." It's that simple for me. Face or not face. nude or not nude.

I would love to see faces and full frontal naked bodies, but those are very hard to attain in TJ. And if one gets those, one most likely won't post it.

I also think another degree of voting is whether one has physcially seen the chica too. I've seen in person most of the TJ Bar chicas posted. Some don't photo well, some photo better than in person.

For example, Sylvia AB, Malena AB, Paola AB, have good pics but they look much better in person to me.

I've tried very hard to get photos for CH of TJ hotties like Deyanira CC, Sonia CC, Fernanda de Monterey AB, Jenny de Santa Ana AB and haven't had any success. I can't even get just a face shot(no body).

IMHO, because they have no photos posted and the degree of difficulty to get these photos, they should get a 10 if I ever do. Just kidding.

So because of this difficulty I've given up trying to get photos all together, so I apprecriate any photos posted.

It's unfortunate someone would use the photo voting system as a means to "player hate", but my only advice would be to not let it bother you and share your photos on CH regardless.

IMHO-- people should post and take pics because they enjoy the hobby, not because someone may or many not give it a high score... I personally think BM, epi, etc, are taking things wayyyy too serious and personal. Yes, you guys contribute greatly to the site, but that contribution is not a function of pic scores...

Does someone giving a pic a higher score increase the pleasure you had screwing the subject? Does it ruin the experience if folks thinks you screwed a fugly? I think not.

DM, I was just trying to stay focused and on point for a few posts and make a clear and compelling case for Hombre to correct a flaw in the photo voting system that is obvious to everyone. I guess he’s taking an extended labor day or maybe he’s in New Orleans helping with the hurricane relief. Either way I’ve made my point. I think most of the 40 or 50 guys that post here regularly know where I stand. I won’t apologize for taking my photography seriously and taking pride in what I do. And finally I promise to keep screwing fugly girls where ever and when ever I can.

DM, I'm not a serious photographer, it's a hobby for me, but I do understand where Bahtman is coming from. I don't think it's high ratings I am seeking, it's just a matter of common courtesy IMO, the serious photographers (more so than me) put in a lot of time in their work and it must be that much more galling to see how easy it is to wreak "ratings graffiti" on a pic. As the Republicans say, just give us a fair "up or down" vote. It's way too easy to deface a pic on this site.

BM,

I don't think I said not to take your photography seriously, I said don't take the ratings seriously...

Right now is a busy time. Support and maintenance is taken care of daily and usually on a short-time frame. Maintenance in particular is much more intensive than most would imagine and almost certainly requires more work than all of our competitors combined due to the heavy customization and unique features of CH. As a result, busy times lead to less time for moderation and discussion participation, such is the case here.

I have an alternative idea to the one proposed, but I don't know when I could implement it. When I have some time open up, I would like to put more development into features that simplify the process of researching and preparing for trips. I think some of CH features and organization make it the best site for research and preparation, but I think I can make it better. I have plenty of ideas, but I do not detail them to avoid competitors from implementing them first.

The rating system was designed and implemented for the viewers more so than the photographers, and more so for entertainment than actual statistical analysis. The non-serious nature can be seen by the rating key, eg "03 - Even Mum thinks she's a dog".

Because of the non-serious nature, it was made simple. Everyone understands, or should understand, a simple average. Throwing out outliers or including details on the median or standard deviation would give the rating "game" more credit than it deserves.

This doesn't mean I'm unsympathetic, though. In fact, it really annoys me that "pic assassins" exist. A couple weeks ago I suspended voting on a couple accounts that had unusually high votes of "1" until I implement a better solution. Together these two accounts were responsible for nearly a third of all 1 votes (22% & 10% respectively).

There are a number of a factors to consider besides the anonymity of the rating process
1. The demographic of voters is different with EACH pic
2. The voters themselves are likely to change how they vote at different times (good day, bad day, change in preferences)
3. Voters use completely different criteria on how they vote
4. Many of the low voters do not post photos or reports, knowing who they are is relatively meaningless

If "pic assassination" is really leading to photographers not posting photos, I really would like to privately know who, ie an email or PM stating that I (have/would have) submitted photos but (won't/didn't) specifically because of the rating process. If that's the case, it would be better to eliminate the ratings.

My alternative solution is to create a "panel" of qualified judges to rate photos that are specically requested to be judged in this manner. This limited number of judges could then be held to vote on agreed criteria and would likely be willing to provide valid praise and/or criticism.

Identifying the individual votes for the most part will only provide targets to blame, and really do nothing to improve the photography of those that take the ratings more seriously. I think FrontBC provided a good example of the unintended consequences and the difficulty of deciding what to do, if anything could be done.

I also must point out an unfortunate truth. As long as ratings are open to everyone, the Asia photos will always score lower than Latin and Caucasian photos. I love Asians and lots of great members and reporters here do too, probably more so than the general population. But if you want to know how Westerners in general feel about the attractiveness of Asians, simply stand in front of the magazine rack of any large bookstore and count the number of Asians you see appearing on the covers, or think about the number of popular Asians the average American could name.

The only way to eliminate the Asia bias is to have judges that do not the subject's race into account when judging the photo.

current system has taken its toll on many of the great photographers
As mentioned earlier, if this is true I would really like to know who stopped submitting photos for this reason (as opposed to other reasons).

Just remember that most great artists are never fully appreciated until after they are long dead.


I have always thought the rating system is ,was ,and ever shall be useless as any kind of true reflection of the quality of the picture or subject. Why waste so much energy and thought on the process ? Post more pictures and enjoy them -forget about the numbers. The serious photographers have had all kinds of verbal praise heaped on them. That is a much better comment on their efforts than any rating number that is generated by far less than 1% of the members of this site.

Nuff said . I for one am really tired of the whole subject of picture ratings. It ain't never gonna be unbroke.

Hombre, it's clear that a lot of thought and effort has gone into this. The few times I've had issues or problems, I've gotten a very quick and helpful response, and it was appreciated.

The ratings are good -- don't deep six them. Sometimes I browse and out of 50 pictures of a girl only want to see the better ones.

Suspending voting privilages of abberant voters seems like a good solution, especially for the cases you cite. It's a good thing that the highest rated pics get more votes, a case of "if you can't say something good don't say anything at all." Most voters are probably fair, if not consistent. I tend to vote nude pics with faces higher than without, but I have exceptions.

Anyway, your efforts to make CH a most useful site are worthwhile. I feel like I'm brown nosing, but it is true.

Hombre, Thanks for taking time to consider my request. I'd hoped that you would consider making the voting system transparent so that we could all see the data and be free to form our own conclusions. I can only speak for my self but keeping the names of members who offer opinions on photos a secret greatly effects my desire to post pics.

At the risk of sounding like a suck-up....

The careful, logical, rational treatment Hombre has just dispayed in responding to this strangely
volatile issue along with his stated goals of making this site even more functional and valuable are exactly why this is the best site of it's kind on the web.

Thanks Hombre,

eJ

Hombre, unfortunately, I must honestly admit that despite my prolific pic posting nature, I currently am posting about 1/2 the number of pics that I usually post (prev. up to 50 pics) partly because of outing and equally so because I've personally witnessed "1s" being given in the past to pics that eventually breached the 8.0 ratings.

I personally have spoken with 2 or 3 mongers that I hang out with that post few or no pics at all despite having an arsenal of pics larger than my own.

Ratings are disabled until I figure something out.

Seriously, the ratings are not supposed to be serious.

The whole photo thing is nice, but I've never found it to be an important feature/component to the web site. To me, it's all about obtaining information to make my travels better - less stressful, more cost efficient, safer, happier, etc.

I guess the best part the photos play is to help me judge (for myself) a person's opinion of "hot" - so I can then decide if a recommendation or advice is applicable to my individual tastes.


Anyway, like all problems American, I'd say the best way to solve it is to come up with a value-add that involves money. In this example, implement something more complex (such as the statistical analysis or distribution plotting or whatever) but make it only accessible to those that pay or pay a slightly additional premium fee... and thus any extra support/maintenance form the technical side has its merrit. A win/win for both sides, and a win for those who don't really have need for a change. ...just an idea.

Indeed...folks, ratings are not supposed to be serious and shouldn't be taken seriously. Those who get upset by low ratings need thicker skins. It's not as though the people giving those 1's and 2's are world-class judges of beauty or photographic skill. These people are mostly just losers looking for material to whack off to! Why would you give their judgments--or anyone else's, for that matter--even a moment's consideration. The only judgment that matters is your own. If you're happy enough with the pic to post it, well, fuck 'em if they don't agree. Who appointed these others the arbiter of your taste in women?

Maybe it's for the better that the ratings go by the wayside, but I liked them and found them of some value. There's no system that can't be abused by guys with a bias for or against one type of girls or another. There's no statistical system that can make sense of something as subjective as ratings of beauty/attractiveness/sexiness (or whatever the hell criteria guys here use). So it makes no sense to waste a single second worrying about the ratings someone has given your pics.

Frankly, I find the "outing" issues that Merlin mentions much more serious, having been outed myself by a "CH brother." Unfortunately, I can't think of a thing we can do about that other than "outing the outers" and letting community peer pressure run its course.

My motto in life is "fuck 'em if they can't take a joke." That applies to the guys that don't share my enthusiasm for the women I like.

Well put Bwana. See you in Rio soon ;)

Every one keeps throwing the word serious around as if it’s bad to be serious.

“SERIOUS implies a concern for what really matters, thoughtful or subdued in appearance or manner, requiring much thought or work, not joking or trifling, being in earnest.”

Some people take photos for fun and some people are serious photographers. Both are a function of your natural inclination. The person who does it for fun isn’t overly concerned how it turns out. The serious photographer takes great pride in his work and has a much higher standard.

My bottom line is who wants a sign with a number on it hung around their work put there by someone they don’t even know??

I'm a CH member who has ZERO pictures posted so my opinion probably doesn't mean much in this thread.

But I understand how personal it can be to have your work undermined. It is very unfortunate that "pic asassins" exist.

But from the varying opinions in this thread alone you can see how tough it is for Hombre to please everyone. I think it would be impossible.

The only thing that would work is if people could respect one another and another person's hard work. Then we wouldn't be in this situation in the first place.

I know it irks some members that a person that has traveled little and has yet to post any pics would have the audacity to voice an opinion on this subject, but....

I think the solution is incredibly simple.
I made the suggestion almost four months ago in one of the other long threads on this subject. But the thread went cold and maybe wasn't noticed.

So I guess I'll repeat myself.

**********************************************

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

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

**********************************************

The privilege could take the form of:
a) a panel appointed by Hombre.
b) a panel voted in by members.
c) a special prize for posting x number of pics.
d) any number of other methodologies.

The point being that the gallery vote is for content only, while the Showcase scoring would be for composition and photographic skill.

I think the solution is almost too easy.

eJ


PS
I agree that the larger danger is that of the pics falling into the wrong hands,
and that is largly why I have yet to post any pics from my one and only trip to Rio and Bogota.

Ejack1 wrote: "I know it irks some members that a person that has traveled little and has yet to post any pics would have the audacity to voice an opinion on this subject, but...."

I respectfully apologize for not being as financially well of as the well travelled members of CH.

I have also stated that I have tried to get photos from the little traveled monger city I've been too. And because of this diffuclty I have a great respect to those who do contribute photos.

But I am a paid member of CH so I was entitled to vote as well as express my opinon. And I believe I've shown no disrespect in expressing my opinion.

If my tone came of as audacious then please accept my apology.

Maybe the rule should be that a member can't vote unless he contributes pictures. That would take me out of the equation then.

LOL...

Frontbc,

I was refering to myself, not you.

I guess I stepped away from the computer for a while as I was writing my response and you posted your comments ahead of mine without me seeing them.

EJack1,

We're twins. j/k LOL....

The timing sort of made it look like it was refering to me but it's all good.

My apologies for the mix up.

I rarely view photos anymore unless they are inserted in the thread and are visible to see in the thread.

When I do vote it is usually a thumbs up or down (1 or 10). If I'm ambivilent about the girl I vote whatever the rating is at that time. Not too scientific and I don't rate whether there is excellent lighting or whether they used the best f-stop or aperature for the lighting.

I have posted a few pics but for some reason I never get credits for them but I usually post them where they are visible in the thread and maybe that's the problem.

I mainly monger in Brazil and would only look at those pics anyways when I did or do vote but quite frankly what one person views as a knockout may or may not be to the next person.

I'm in Brazil right now and was eating dinner at TA in front of Help the other night with someone who was telling me he was wating for this stone cold knockout to meet him there and they were going to go back to his apartment and rock the world. About 20 minutes later this garota with a big ass and acne rolls up and plants a huge one on him. He introduced us to her as the garota he's been waiting for. His opinion was that she was hot, if I had to vote I'd say she was a -4.

I go into terma 4X4 and occasionally sit in the the lobby in front of the cashiers counter to get away from the smoke and crowd and watch guys walk out with some real fuglies. Maybe they look better in the dark or their performance is great and I just don't know but for me the attracton isn't there.

As for the outings that Bwana Dik was talking about. I like the fact that when I'm in Brazil I can't access any pics here. Reduces the chances of getting outed by some rat bastard showing off.

A question for Hombre:

If I post where they are in the thread will these show up in brazil?

Snooky has convinced me maybe the notion of having ratings should just be scrapped since there probably is no hope at all.

On second thought, an idea came to me that might represent a good compromise. Perhaps we eliminate the notion of rating all the photographs, but have a more extensive picture competition each month or quarter. By more extensive I mean rather than voting for favorite picture, we could vote for our three favorites (or 4 or 5) perhaps in rank order; perhaps not), In addition to providing information about the winners, Hombre could provide raw statistics on how many votes each picture received, either in total, or broken down by first place votes, second place votes, etc. Perhaps Hombre, or a panel deemed reasonably objective by Hombre, could select the 10 or 20 pictures to be included in the competition, perhaps after screening pictures nominated by the general population.

This would provide feedback for the quality photographers on how the hombre population views their pictures while essentially eliminating the impact of picture assasins. It would not, however, provide much feedback about one's "photo gallery," only about those photos deemed towards the top of the collection.

If one of the reasons Hombre disabled the picture ratings was because of a fear some have decided not to post pictures because of the pictures assassins, etc., this would eliminate that disincentive, while providing an incentive for the finer photographers to continue contributing (and an incentive for the lesser photographers to improve their photos so as to qualify for the competitions). What do you think?

No offense Laguy and I don't want to be flamed by every serious photographer on here but a majority of the viewers on here aren't photo editors. They are just horny bastards that want to see hot women that may be available to them in a country they are about to visit. The ratings aren't on the quality of the photo but of the woman.

I don't think CH is the venue where you'd get validation of your photography skills.

My little brother is a professional sports photographer as well as a photo editor for ESPN magazine. Albeit, it is a different environment than a photo shoot with lighting which he does as well. At a football game he'll shoot over 1,000 frames and if he's lucky only 2 or 3 are marketable they may not be the best 2 or 3 photographically of the 1,000 but they are of a star player.

My point is, he could have great quality pics of some relatively unknown 3rd down running back catching a pass going across the middle that he thought was his best photograph of his carreer, a decent quality pic of Terrell Owens shaking pom pom's in the endzone will make him the $$$.

The same goe here on CH. You have to work to your audience. You could have a so-so quality picture of a hottie with a great rack with over-saturated lighting that gives her shiney cheeks and has red-eyes vs. an incredible quality photo of a so-so looking woman with great composition, backlighting, etc. the majority will rate the hottie higher than the great picture.









(Message edited by abramom on September 10, 2005)

No offense taken Snooky, as I do not myself contribute photos; my contribution is primarily in the area of trip reports, guides, and so forth. But, there clearly are hombres here who are offended that they post pictures here only to be subject to the picture assassins. After originally dismissing this point of view for reasons similar to yours (one should probably seek other venues for validation of photography skills, or even "girl-picking skills" and not take the ratings here so seriously, as they are inherently limitied in their value), I note the point of view persists and I believe is not frivolous, even if I don't fully agree with it.

OTOH, it does not help things when hombres such as yourself state you use the rating scale as an "up or down" vote, using primarily 1's and 10's, contrary to the rating scale explicitly posted by Hombre. IMHO, it shows disrespect for those who post pictures on the board, and contributes to a problem many of the picture posters find sufficiently troubling to consider not posting their pictures.

Please tell me if I have mis-understood anything about your posts.

Actully my up or down is primarily for the fuglies and the hotties. If I'm not sure either way I voted with the flow, whatever the rating was at the time and rounding off. Not intending to disrespect just gave my rating as I saw fit. I would say that my votes were probably 75% 10's, 20% go with the flows and 5% 1's. In all actuality I probably increased most ratings for people so I skewed it the other way.

I usually only rate in countries I have been to so I do have a perspective of what is attractive for that locale. I am color blind so it is not racial. I like fit and attractive women.

I'm not a ratings assassin but when you throw up a fugly, I calls it as I sees it. For the most part most people don't post pics of the dogs they do.

Hombre,
I agree that ratings should not be serious, so why devote anytime to it at all and why not just leave the system the way it was?
1-10 is as simple as it gets.
how do the new options relate numerically?

I initially thought that the rating system should be scraped because several people who post pics easily become insulted when their very good deed gets pissed on. I can sympathize with this.

However, the only reason why I'd like us to keep the photo rating system is because it allows a quick sorting the highest rated pics of the most "likely" beautiful women...to the top...it saves all of us time...especially when we go back into the photo archives...sorting all of the country's highest rated photos to the top for quick review is great fun and saves time!

Finally, just a suggestion I'd like to make that may help improve this system. I recommend limiting the number of photos of the same chica. 5-7 pics of the same girl is typically enough for us to get an idea how hot she is. 10 or more pics of the same girl, IMHO is over-kill.

For example, I prefer to see a pic of the chica fully clothed so I have an idea what she looks like out in public, then a couple pics of her partially nude, finally a pic or two of her fully nude. Even 8 or 9 pics would be okay if the poster has the chica in significantly differing content...such as in a bikini at the beach, in a night club, then back at the hotel. But 10 pics of one chica's pussy from the rear is IMHO 9 pics too many.

Thanks to all of you who take the time to post pics...know that your efforts are appreciated by a majority of us.

AJ

I have to agree with aj, sometimes there are 30 pictures of the same girl, clothed in similar poses. That is when the old rating system was most usefull to me, just check out the higher rated photos. I appreciate all who contribute photos as I have only sent in a handfull.

This is probably the only complaint I could think of for this site.

Drevil
Does someone force you to look at every picture?

Why complain about too many pictures?
Your PAD lists your " handful" as ZERO !

AJ seems to have a similar number of pics and yet wants to request certain poses and degrees of dress as well as locales !

Some of you guys are too much !

You guys are way too sensitive. I guess I shoudn't have used the word "complaint", it was merely an opinion that for me I would rather not look at 30 pictures of the same girl. Instead I would use the old system to pick out the higher rated ones to view.

As for my pad it's not a true reflection of my history as I changed my handle a few months ago, which resets everything back to zero. Also prior to that I didn't get credit for 4 or 5 I submitted years ago from TJ.

For any one that missed it, a new photo scoring system is in place. Besides disarming pic assassins and careless ratings, the new system allows for analysis based on both picture quality and subject attractiveness. Photo popularity should also be more apparent.

An unfortunate casualty is the Rating Game, a fun utility I designed that I liked and was proud of. The old ratings can still be analyzed and I may come up with something similar for the new scoring, but I don't know if I'll be able to come up with a solution that effectively links the two sets of data for analysis.

I'll point this out. It seems common sense to me that ugly starts at 4 (arguably 5). The lower the vote below this point, the greater the insult, both to the photographers that share their work and to my own efforts to encourage photo submissions. Oh well, no more photo sniping.

good job hombre!

Hombre, one suggestion and one that may fit some basic needs for sifting.

Right now you have two choices, 1 for great pic, 1 for hot babe. Points are added up. How about four choices?

thanks for submitting (.5 points)
great pic (1 point)
HOT girl (1.5 points)
HOT girl and great pic (2 points)

Keep the # of votes for each cat-- love that.

Report the average. Just an idea to ease some of egos and help prioritize...

Hombre,

Thanks for the hard work. I agree with DM's suggestions. Since I am barely going to vote on Pic quality I really only have one choice "Hot Babe".

So I would suggest "Cute Babe"(1.25?) as an option. I usually put the chicas into these two catagories "cute" or "hot". ie. Sonia CC "cute". Deyanira CC "hot".

Again this is just a suggestion. I know you worked hard to set this new system up and it hasn't even had a chance to get up and running.

We'll see how it goes.

I think the "Hot Babe" option was recently switchced to "Attractive", so my post above won't make sense to most.

The old system, despite its flaws, had the advantage of serving as a screen to select the board's best photos for a quick view. When someone posts 30 photos of the same girl, it was nice to know which was generally considered the best, and you could expand your viewing from there.

The current system strikes me to be similar to the lower levels of little league where they don't keep score so everyone can feel themselves a winner.

Gotta agree. This is like the Special Olympics where everyone gets a trophy.

The old system was far more enjoyable and at least had some meaning. Sorry Hombre , I know this is a major headache for you but this seems to be a giant step backwards. You can't please everyone and should not try. I agree with you that your old system was workable if everyone just kept to the scoring system you outlined and used those criterea. If everyone uses their own system to judge pics then nothing will work or be equitable.

To those Hombres who want their photograpic skills and not their subjects judged- I suggest taking your pictures to a photography site not a mongering site.

No flames or personal attacks meant -- just stating an opinion.