Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PETE, Time to stop the rot.

Attention!

This topic is locked.

Reason : question answered


10 Apr 2005 7:00AM
Pete --- On different "click" or "comment" threads I have read recently several members saying that they are becoming reluctant or even scared to leave comments because of a small vociferous minority who are opposed to what they refer to as the serial clickers or reciprocal clickers. Members on both sides of the argument have left the site in a huff. This intolerant attitude has the potential to ruin a very successful site and could even cause a huge loss of income to youthe owner.

As so much bandwith and capacity on the database has been used up with no chance of agreement in discussion of both points of view, surely it is time for Pete (the owner) to set the matter straight. Please note, I am requesting a response solely from Pete. not the proponents of either persuasion.

So, Pete, please could you give a definitive answer to the following questions to indicate the policy of the management.

1. Do you wish to abolish the practice of serial/reciprocal clicking favoured by so many?

2. Do you wish to stop the simple nice pic, great detail type of comment, again as used by the majority ?

3. Do you require that all comments are of the constuctive criticism type or to form a mini discussion of the picture?

4. Do you agree that their is room for members of all types on the site, serious learners, technical types, social members and fun seekers?


I realise that at the moment you have a lot on your plate but the number of threads running recently about "clicking and commenting" is becoming ridiculous.

Peter

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

covey e2
10 1.7k Ireland
10 Apr 2005 7:08AM
I think your point no.4 answers the other 3.

T.
patters e2
10 1.8k 1 United Kingdom
10 Apr 2005 7:13AM
why such interest, why do you care?, people enjoy rabbiting and clicking! Sundays are great, I have a cold beer, and you either get Heartbeat or The Royal, shame about antiques roadshow though! Oh, and we've got a bit of topside for us tea Smile (contented sigh)
starstriders e2
10 1.6k United Kingdom
10 Apr 2005 7:21AM
By posting this on the public forum you are automatically inviting people to join in. If you have a private question for Pete then I suggest you e-mail him.

Here's my view on it...


Quote:
1. Do you wish to abolish the practice of serial/reciprocal clicking favoured by so many?



"Favoured by so many"...and unfavourable to so many.


Quote:
2. Do you wish to stop the simple nice pic, great detail type of comment, again as used by the majority?



Again, the "majority" is a rather broad sweeping statement that I see little statistical evidence for.


Quote:
3. Do you require that all comments are of the constuctive criticism type or to form a mini discussion of the picture?



Probably not a requirement no, but a preference if the site is to retain its already high level of credibility...and no, not of "the discussion type" but yes of the "constructive criticism" type.


Quote:
4. Do you agree that their is room for members of all types on the site, serious learners, technical types, social members and fun seekers?



Yes!

No offence to you Peter, I'm just giving my opinion, as you are.
10 Apr 2005 7:23AM
If 1, 2 or 3 - are you volunteering to police everything, then, Peter?
rletham
10 890 United Kingdom
10 Apr 2005 7:30AM
It seems to me that a lot of people who get so uptight about this are people who feels their work deserves more attention but constantly see the serial clickers backslapping each other and constantly getting RC awards with photos that are mediocre at best. Personally, I choose to ignore it most of the time and get on with my own photography. Sometimes when Im feeling a little wicked, I actively seek it out and have a good laugh at the comments (bad Rab).

Diversity is what makes the world go around. If people get enjoyment out of congratulating each other on their photographic efforts without the benefit of giving an in depth critique, then fine. Leaving the site because of such insignificant things seems a little extreme to me. Its a bit like saying, Stop the world, I want to get off because its not quite what I want it to be.

What we dont need is an editorial decision of how we choose to enjoy our photography.
Bernie 11 2.2k
10 Apr 2005 7:32AM

Quote:I realise that at the moment you have a lot on your plate but the number of threads running recently about "clicking and commenting" is becoming ridiculous.






Peter with all due respect have you not just started another one.



Lock it....
starstriders e2
10 1.6k United Kingdom
10 Apr 2005 7:32AM
Well said Rab. You put it so well.
10 Apr 2005 7:37AM
and so well Wink
csurry
12 9.2k 92
10 Apr 2005 7:37AM
Rab, so good, he said it twice.
10 Apr 2005 7:42AM
I can see peter's point and it's quite a fun topic to discuss.

I just wonder how Peter would actually do the policing:-

would point 1 mean that if someone clicks you shot, you are then blocked from clicking theirs? For how long, just that day, a week, month or year?

Point 2 - would you have a minimum length of comment? A string search mechanism to block certin phrases?


I'm just thinking of the mechanism you'd have to code to do this. I've done quite a few ASP websites (I think this one's Cold Fusion though) and you'd need quite a chunk of code to impliment some of the things you're suggesting.

So that would cost a lot to develop. I suppose the alternative is to employ someone to police the site. Another cost.

I agree with a lot of what you've said, but I think, logistically, there's very little can be done to enforce your first 3 points without a lot of time and money - and do we want to be shackled by lots of new rules anyway?
starstriders e2
10 1.6k United Kingdom
10 Apr 2005 7:46AM
I think the complaints about the site are more to do with the culture and ethos of the site rather than of strict rules and regulations.
KathyW e2
11 1.8k 12 Norfolk Island
10 Apr 2005 7:51AM
Oh no, not again...
starstriders e2
10 1.6k United Kingdom
10 Apr 2005 7:51AM
Unfortunately yes.
ejtumman e2
10 2.8k England
10 Apr 2005 7:55AM
AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!

AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!

Someone find me my tablets..........