The TrekEarth Forums

The TrekEarth Forums (
-   General (
-   -   Improving critique quality? An idea, thoughts? (

Davids 03-21-2007 05:37 PM

write helpful critiques to 'bad' photos
Lets start by writing helpful critiques to 'bad' photos, not to photos with enough critiques saying how nice they are.
say something about notes, processing, themes, how it fits in the portfolio.
just a thuoght. . .

Davids 03-21-2007 05:45 PM

Re: Improving critique quality? An idea, thoughts?
what a beautiful rant.
you just gained a friend . . .

"to write crap critiques myself."
is the best critique you could have ever written.


flagman 03-21-2007 07:08 PM

Re: write helpful critiques to 'bad' photos
Kevinos kind of summed it all up really, so unless the admins want to do something about it, that kind of activity will only continue.
Unfortunately any good intentions by the few of us who improve our own critiques in the hope that others will follow will be wasted. TE is far too big for such a small group of people to do anything.
Bring back the 'not useful', that's what I say! :)

BobTrips 03-21-2007 07:13 PM

Re: 10 thoughts
"The TOS are there for all to see, if people don't want to conform, they should go elsewhere."

What we don't seem to get in these periodic discussions on critique quality and the point system is input from Adam. (Perhaps he has spoken up and I've missed it.)

I remember (perhaps incorrectly) that he established this site as a serious (semi-serious?) critique site. It certainly was a critique site in it's early days. But over time it has grown to be a high traffic site and serious critiques seem to have become a small subset of the activity.

It seems to me that a lot more people are interested in showing their pictures and collecting points. I could be very wrong on this one. All I've got to go on is subjective, no objective data.

Adam must be enjoying the popularity of the site. It's got to be a huge ego stroke. I doubt if he wants to take any action that might chase away the majority of members.

flagman 03-21-2007 07:29 PM

Re: 10 thoughts
Good point, Bob.
The more visitors, the more ad income :)


BobTrips 03-21-2007 08:29 PM

"Not useful"
Not useful and scowling faces have caused hurt feelings and problems in the past on this site. Not everyone (perhaps only a small percentage) want "real" critiques. Lots of folks want praise, even if it isn't deserved.

AdrianW 03-21-2007 10:01 PM

Re: 10 thoughts
> Adam must be enjoying the popularity of the site. It's got to be a huge ego stroke. I doubt if he wants to take any action that might chase away the majority of members.

I don't think that's fair, not even close. Adam's always fixing bugs, and he works damned hard on the sites. Personally I know I wouldn't want a small kid, a full time job, and have to deal with the overall moderation of TE/TL/TN as well - that's a massive amount of work. I wouldn't have time to sleep, let alone significantly change things based on a few bits of feedback.

Feedback is what I'm trying to provide though, positive feedback - not carping on about much better life would be if...

I'm trying to come up with a concrete proposal, and then attempt to get the community's backing for it. If it's a success, then I'll ask Adam. If he refuses, that's fair enough, it's his site. There's always a possibility that I'll code it myself in that eventuality - but first I need to get the concepts right. That's what I'm asking here. Is my concept correct, and do you (collectively) think it'll work as intended if implemented?

BobTrips 03-21-2007 10:15 PM

" Adam must be enjoying the popularity of the site. It's got to be a huge ego stroke. I doubt if he wants to take any action that might chase away the majority of members."

"I don't think that's fair, not even close."

I don't see anything at all that's unfair about what I wrote. Are you sure you are reading it correctly?

Adam's got a very popular site. Lots of people set up sites that don't get a tiny fraction of the traffic that this one does.

Sure, it takes some work to maintain. And I doubt that he's making any significant money from the site (he might even be a bit out of pocket).

Given that my financial assumption is true, then there are only two reasons that I can think of which would explain his continuing to run this site.

First, he enjoys its popularity. That's the "ego stroke" part.

Second, he anticipates/hopes that some well-funded entity purchases the site from him for significant money. (That just happened to one privately owned site with which both you and I are familiar. The existing traffic made the owner "rich" - his word.)

As for your concept, I'll address that separately in a different post.

BobTrips 03-21-2007 10:23 PM

Re: Adrian's original post: Improving critique quality?
Something along this line might work well. For those who want to write "real" critiques.

(I wouldn't necessarily leave the photographer out of the system.)

The problem, as I see it, is that you've (probably) got a large percentage of people on this site who thing "pretty picture" is a great critique. I would even guess that they outnumber the "serious" critiquers.

How do you keep them from controlling the process? What if the "you should straighten your horizon" critiques get down rated by those who operate from a speak-no-evil stance?

greg 03-21-2007 10:39 PM

Re: Adrian's original post: Improving critique quality?
It could be possible to set it up so that a moderator (i.e. Adam) could weight the critique ratings of selected users who critique in the desired way, and these weights could filter through to those approved by these critique writers... and so on. With the right tweaking, this might handle the problem Bob mentions.

You'd then have a dilemma about making the weightings transparent or not: if yes, they would become as bad or worse than the points for competition. So probably no... but some won't like that either.

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:07 AM.

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.