SummitPost.org

I just mean vote on pages and not on pictures. If something like that had been in place all along, do you think we'd have seen anywhere close to the silliness here that we have regarding photos?

Perhaps a good compromise might be to let photos be votable, but also worth zero power?

As said earlier, I don't care much either way about photo votes, but just throwing an idea out there.

Bob Sihler wrote:

yatsek wrote:

Bob Sihler wrote:I would do away with photo voting entirely and just vote on entire pages

What exactly do you mean by "entire pages"? Would the images embedded in a page be voted on or all attached pix, also those attached by others?

As to photo voting, I wonder if it would be possible to organize contests with a limited number of photos (1-3) submitted by the willing, instead of what we have now. Each voter would have just one or perhaps three votes, sort of what's on "Help Improve SP!"

I just mean vote on pages and not on pictures. If something like that had been in place all along, do you think we'd have seen anywhere close to the silliness here that we have regarding photos?

So does your idea of on-page voting on images mean that only the images displayed on a mtn/area/route/TR/article page would be able to acquire votes?

Scott wrote:Perhaps a good compromise might be to let photos be votable, but also worth zero power?

Since SP version 3, the power gained from photos is quite small now. Yes it's significant after a ton of photos (were talking thousands). But typically not much is gained from it, creating pages in my opinion are now an easier form of getting points. It's a good thing I'm not worried about that because I haven't been making as many pages these days.

yatsek wrote:So does your idea of on-page voting on images mean that only the images displayed on a mtn/area/route/TR/article page would be able to acquire votes?

That would be correct. This is to encourage beta photos. I'd personally would like to see this on canyons too considering that it is deemed an important part of the site.

Josh Lewis wrote:

Scott wrote:Perhaps a good compromise might be to let photos be votable, but also worth zero power?

Since SP version 3, the power gained from photos is quite small now. Yes it's significant after a ton of photos (were talking thousands). But typically not much is gained from it, creating pages in my opinion are now an easier form of getting points. It's a good thing I'm not worried about that because I haven't been making as many pages these days.

yatsek wrote:So does your idea of on-page voting on images mean that only the images displayed on a mtn/area/route/TR/article page would be able to acquire votes?

That would be correct. This is to encourage beta photos. I'd personally would like to see this on canyons too considering that it is deemed an important part of the site.

Perhaps the answer is to allow photos attached to any object be voted on and not allow it for those only in albums.

yatsek wrote:

Bob Sihler wrote:

yatsek wrote:

Bob Sihler wrote:I would do away with photo voting entirely and just vote on entire pages

What exactly do you mean by "entire pages"? Would the images embedded in a page be voted on or all attached pix, also those attached by others?

As to photo voting, I wonder if it would be possible to organize contests with a limited number of photos (1-3) submitted by the willing, instead of what we have now. Each voter would have just one or perhaps three votes, sort of what's on "Help Improve SP!"

I just mean vote on pages and not on pictures. If something like that had been in place all along, do you think we'd have seen anywhere close to the silliness here that we have regarding photos?

So does your idea of on-page voting on images mean that only the images displayed on a mtn/area/route/TR/article page would be able to acquire votes?

Canyons, too, but yes, that's what I'd like to see. I don't know if it will be implemented that way, though.

Edit: I see Josh answered this.

I agree with the 5 star system.
Thanks

Scott wrote:

I just mean vote on pages and not on pictures. If something like that had been in place all along, do you think we'd have seen anywhere close to the silliness here that we have regarding photos?

Perhaps a good compromise might be to let photos be votable, but also worth zero power?

As said earlier, I don't care much either way about photo votes, but just throwing an idea out there.

I don't think people submit pointless/off-topic/silly photos for power but for views, votes, and comments. My gripe is not that they are submitted (they can easily be ignored) but that they have often made their way to the front page, which has affected the way some people have viewed the site and felt about it. I know of two or three former contributors who left largely because of it, and they were people who put up technical routes.

Bob Sihler wrote:

yatsek wrote:

Bob Sihler wrote:

yatsek wrote:

Bob Sihler wrote:I would do away with photo voting entirely and just vote on entire pages

What exactly do you mean by "entire pages"? Would the images embedded in a page be voted on or all attached pix, also those attached by others?

As to photo voting, I wonder if it would be possible to organize contests with a limited number of photos (1-3) submitted by the willing, instead of what we have now. Each voter would have just one or perhaps three votes, sort of what's on "Help Improve SP!"

I just mean vote on pages and not on pictures. If something like that had been in place all along, do you think we'd have seen anywhere close to the silliness here that we have regarding photos?

So does your idea of on-page voting on images mean that only the images displayed on a mtn/area/route/TR/article page would be able to acquire votes?

Canyons, too, but yes, that's what I'd like to see. I don't know if it will be implemented that way, though.

Edit: I see Josh answered this.

Wow, an excellent idea! But I think it needs more advertising. Still, IMO the thing should be accompanied by a modified competition for the "photo people", so that power points also go to the photos outside mtn/area/route/canyon/TR/article pages, but only to a small number of the best of them.

My gripe is not that they are submitted (they can easily be ignored) but that they have often made their way to the front page, which has affected the way some people have viewed the site and felt about it. I know of two or three former contributors who left largely because of it, and they were people who put up technical routes.

What about just canning featured photos in the front page?

Or since Josh seems to be making SP more customizable, maybe making it an option, i.e. if people wanted to see featured photos on the front page, they could, and if not, they wouldn't have to? Is this too much programming work.

Personally, I don't understand why so many people get so worked up about which photos are featured on the front page.

Scott wrote:
Personally, I don't understand why so many people get so worked up about which photos are featured on the front page.

Nowadays, people get worked up very easily, not just on SP but on other mountain sites as well.

It's absolutely a sign of the times. Technology has made us this way. We believe in perfection, but the only way to achieve perfection is to click on PhotoShop.

At least, that's the way some folks believe to be true.

Scott wrote:Personally, I don't understand why so many people get so worked up about which photos are featured on the front page.

I think Bob was referring to Photo of the Moment. In the past the issue was Photo of the Hour which lasted for quite some time. Some really awful photos make it into photo of the moment due to certain individuals deciding to vote a 10 on spam and such. To make it even worse, some really awesome photos actually don't make it due to them being buried and noticed later after the time is up. One of my favorite photos I posted this year did not make photo of the moment.

Regarding preferences, I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard to hide featured photos. But I don't think that is the issue at stake. Especially with featured photos almost always being good ones and it being at the bottom of the site. But speaking of preferences I do have some aces up my sleeve which I plan on bringing out on the table. Perhaps soon? The image insert panel is actually perhaps the biggest priority right now. It's almost 100% complete but I want to do a little bit more work to it to make it look better on the older internet explorers and such.

SP Version 4 is already in motion, 5 changes had been made yesterday (small, but good ones).

I haven't been around much the last few years, for a variety of reason, so take my opinion with a grain of salt. I don't really see any use in *any* voting system, except maybe for the purpose of content sorting. A simple up/down vote similar to Reddit/Imgur would be fine for that. Have the ability to sort stuff by rating, views, submission date and be done with it.

Josh Lewis wrote:
I think Bob was referring to Photo of the Moment. In the past the issue was Photo of the Hour which lasted for quite some time. Some really awful photos make it into photo of the moment due to certain individuals deciding to vote a 10 on spam and such.

Thanks for the explanation. I was under the impression that the "Photo of the Moment" only lasted a moment, but now I notice it keeps repeating itself
in a somewhat "ANNOYING" time loop.

Can we completely eliminate POTM, but hang on to POTD and POTW ? I think this feature was added to encourage voting, but is being ABUSED just like
everything else associated with the WWV ...... wide world of voting.

lcarreau wrote:I was under the impression that the "Photo of the Moment" only lasted a moment, but now I notice it keeps repeating itself in a somewhat "ANNOYING" time loop.

lcarreau wrote:Can we completely eliminate POTM, but hang on to POTD and POTW ?

We should not remove Photo of the Moment because it is the most unique part of the frontpage in terms of freshness. However I would not be opposed to tweaks being made if this trend keeps on going. Fact: The bad photo of the moments often only have one vote. So if the system required two votes to make it in, this might fix the problem. The unintended consequences to this is that popular people might have a serious advantage to everyone else making them stay on the frontpage (no offense to the popular folks). I may have a few other ideas to help combat this issue.