CLOSED: POLL: The GT5 Photomode Competition: Week 7

[RetroGiant]

Ah, but the fault in the plan is the definition of "expert". In the name of fairness how can you say who is and is not an 'expert'? Take video games for example - critics are thought of a 'experts' yet when one remarks about a game that others disagree with, suddenly their 'tools' or 'idiots' that 'are paid,' Irrespective of whether a critic is paid for an opinion (look at gameinformer hard for that one), there's some modicum of heartfelt experiential knowledge that goes with it. the long short of that is, until you get to quantum mechanics, everything follows a pattern, and subjective experts will show a pattern in time to those paying attention. I, try and pay attention as I'm sure do others. This plan would survive maybe a month and serve to only agitate and repress members looking to compete fairly. Let's not poison the well, eh?

The best plan is to leave it open to the public so that the metric slides with the current trends. If we pick a panel of judges and discover they lean a certain style, then everyone's creative energy goes to appeasing the judges rather than acting in accordance with honest creativity.

It's true, seemingly, that certain members have a set style they revert to and they're identifiable based on that style. Moglet seems to go for a washed out image and pulls it off well, while RG likes color harmonies and contrast with a-bit-of-a 50's "is is touched up with color pencil?" or "hey, this sort of belongs on a Trapper Keeper (popular 80's notebook in the US)" feel - and pulls it off well. Despite these patterns, I find it somewhat difficult to compete with some of the more experienced member's work because I'm not on that level yet. I'm okay with that though. Members like Moglet, GTPhotography, and several others have the challenge to incorporate what they are comfortable with into various themes and I have a personal goal of trouncing at least one of the contests soon, and because if I do then I know I've gotten better with my tools. There are no hard feelings in art - its personal expression with a set of responsibilities.

I think if people look at the competitions as a manner of improvement rather than a system of revolving kudos, no sound arguments will find a place in the discussion about the superficial aspects. No system is perfect but not every system can be 'gamed'.

To the people that consistently (at least since I've been here) complain about "why didn't I get in" or "my shot was better than the winning one"... perhaps to you it was, but from experience when I have felt that way in the past, I have to ask myself several things:

• Have I been concise with my presentation? (don't blame the audience for misunderstanding a poorly executed message, blame yourself).
• Is there anything I wouldn't take away? (It is my experience that I know I'm done, not when I have nothing left to add, but when I have nothing left to remove).
• Can I look away for a couple of days and then return and derive the same message as quickly? (sometimes investment into a project for a period of time clouds perception. Take a break and come back to it with fresh eyes and as the observer, not artist).
• Is this something I'd want my name associated with? (years later you may look back and feel negativity toward some pieces, but if you note progression over time through it, then the piece is simply part of a natural path).

If the answer to these is "no" then the conclusion is that you're not done, not good and need to practice, or have too low a standard and probably shouldn't waste people's time with less than your best - take your pick.

I get that this is just a game and for some, no big deal. I would however, argue that if I'm not going to accept less than my best from things that matter, it makes no sense to accept it from things that don't; there is no sound argument for doing anything half-assed.

This should be the first post after the polls go up for every comp. Absolutely perfect post! I'm already bracing myself for the all the complaining after I pick this weeks 2.0 entries.

 

[Sam_Fear]

Ah, but the fault in the plan is the definition of "expert"....

That was my point. Personally, I think the system in place is excellent. If there were cash prizes involved, I would think different. There aren't, so we can just have fun with it.

The photo in the lead, is a good pic and really catches the eye, but after about 3 seconds there isn't much to keep you involved. If you look long enough, you'll notice most of the picture is just brown. At first glance though, it's a powerful punch of feeling. And I remember being told in grade school that good art should make you feel something (besides bored).

I guess the game is to figure out what the weeks judge wants to see, and then strike the correct balance between classic art and distracting shiny thing.

 

[Nlmkiii]

We also have a fun little catch-all clause in the rules each week for polls "Don't try to sway the poll". Having a bunch of friends join up just to vote seems an awful lot of work for a video-game-based photo competition, no?

You don't have to have people sign up to do that. Hell, I have around 40-50 friends on GTP already that I could get to vote for me if I wanted to do that.
It is blatant that it has occurred a number of times already in these competitions.

Also, you said that "As a moderator those kinds of things are very easy to suss out". Yet there are examples where I know it has happened (I mean I do know, not just think it seems likely) and you have been none the wiser.

I'm with the people who enter this competition, not expecting to win, but for the enjoyment. For me however, the enjoyment is taken away when voting often isn't reflecting what people believe.

 

[speedthrill]

That's indeed why i suggested anonymous sending the final entry through pm to one poster, who posts them all without names on it. For example.

Bulletproof, in half the part, the week of voting eventually wouldn't if people posted those foto's in their personal gallery.

 

[s-oso]

That's indeed why i suggested anonymous sending the final entry through pm to one poster, who posts them all without names on it. For example.

Bulletproof, in half the part, the week of voting eventually wouldn't if people posted those foto's in their personal gallery.

That wouldn't work. If I wanted to cheat, I'd just tell my friends which picture is mine.

The system is fine, we're not talking about huge prizes or anything like that. If people want to cheat for e-penis let them. What I'd do is make people explain their vote. Just a sentance would be enough so the rest of us would see why people like it.

 

[Bram Turismo]

Voted for the second image 👍

A lot of entries were superior to it in terms of execution, especially the C4 with the blue hue which I assume comes from Moglet judging on the style was very nice, but there wasn't that rally feeling to it like in the second image.

Whenever I view the second image, it takes me back to the days where the old Imprezas would fly through muddy corners and your whole screen went black because it kicked up so much mud you couldn't see the car any more. That is rally to me, and that entry captured the feeling perfectly! 👍

Sure, many entries might be more artistic, but I can't relate those entries to rallying just because there's a rally car in the shot.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

You don't have to have people sign up to do that. Hell, I have around 40-50 friends on GTP already that I could get to vote for me if I wanted to do that.
It is blatant that it has occurred a number of times already in these competitions.

Also, you said that "As a moderator those kinds of things are very easy to suss out". Yet there are examples where I know it has happened (I mean I do know, not just think it seems likely) and you have been none the wiser.

I'm with the people who enter this competition, not expecting to win, but for the enjoyment. For me however, the enjoyment is taken away when voting often isn't reflecting what people believe.

Feel free to give examples if you're positive a poll has been swayed. Since, as you just said, you know it's happened. I've watched the voting and I have yet to see any hard evidence to support that.

The problem is, even if it does happen... it's really, really hard to prove. Who's to say a friend is lying if they think, as an example, my image is the best in the poll? Again, the fact art is subjective kind of makes this a gray area.

I would love to hear from you if you think a poll is being swayed. It'd be disappointing if people place that much importance on winning that they'd do that, but I'd want to know, because that's completely against the spirit we've set out to attain here.

ejronin's post is exactly how I feel on the subject. I know these are "Competitions", but for me personally, it's more about how I can improve my own work, not "OMG must win!"... perhaps I'll put a halt to prizes.

 

[Sloth27]

Whenever I view the second image, it takes me back to the days where the old Imprezas would fly through muddy corners and your whole screen went black because it kicked up so much mud you couldn't see the car any more. That is rally to me, and that entry captured the feeling perfectly! 👍

Sure, many entries might be more artistic, but I can't relate those entries to rallying just because there's a rally car in the shot.

This is exactly what I think as well, although I didn't vote for the Impreza...

 

[ejronin]

You don't have to have people sign up to do that. Hell, I have around 40-50 friends on GTP already that I could get to vote for me if I wanted to do that.
It is blatant that it has occurred a number of times already in these competitions.

I'm not sure we have the same concept of what "blatant" means. My impression from Oxford is that 'blatant' basically means "obvious with negative intent." This implies people are doing this with the intent of a negative outcome and are forthright in the action. Perhaps "well known to some", or "apparent to me" is what you mean?

Also, you said that "As a moderator those kinds of things are very easy to suss out". Yet there are examples where I know it has happened (I mean I do know, not just think it seems likely) and you have been none the wiser.

There is a huge issue in this statement - it's loaded. If the mod was truly none-the-wiser then he's deficient in his duties thus, unfit for the position. If he actually did know, then he is either directly or indirectly party to the behaviors by letting it go and again, unfit. This isn't the big issue in the statement though. The issue is your premise, "I know it has happened."

Have you shared your "knowledge" with anyone who could effect the condition prior to now? If not, why not - If so, do you have a PM or post number that you can pass to a mod so they might look into it further? You mention 40-50 'friends' on GTP. Are they aware you could 'get them to vote for you'? Have any offered? If so, have you turned them in (since this seems to be a hot button item for you)?

Personal opinion, it sounds a lot like you just implicated yourself as an indirect affiliate of the behavior since you 'knew' it happened previously, especially if you know it was 'blatant'. If the mods are as you say, none-the-wiser, you should have made them aware when you found out but didn't since it's brought up as a new instance. Of course, I'd have to assume you knew before and haven't said anything to anyone to this point. Would I be correct in that assumption? No? I sure am glad we're not in the habit of throwing assumptions, right?

See, I like my facts like I like my guns - high powered and deadly accurate.

You may wonder where my dog in this fight exists - simple - you put in the public arena that cheating happens but provided no manner to discern fact from fiction using valid, but not sound logic.

What if I suddenly don't want to participate anymore because I believe you? As a new user I'm now going to be faced with a series of questions: "WTF is going on? Is the command structure is hosed? Do the mods play favorites? Is there a 'good ol boy' system?"

Would you tell me that these questions would never cross someone's mind? They just did - mine.

Fortunately for me, I'm of average intelligence and things of that nature don't run wild. But, I don't assume everyone is just like me - what about other new users who may happen across your comment, lurking, trying to see what is offered and get a feel for the community before participating (because people do that); people who, without an existing knowledge of who and what goes on in this site (like myself), sees a user claiming contests are about who you know instead of what you can do. When we see that, we have to question our willingness to participate and draw assumptions about people before we engage them - or in simpler terms - engage with apprehension and prejudice.


^___ That, that right there is my dog all up in your fight.

I'm with the people who enter this competition, not expecting to win, but for the enjoyment. For me however, the enjoyment is taken away when voting often isn't reflecting what people believe.

Quick question: How can you simultaneously be IN a group and OUT of it? What you've said is "I'm in a group (people having fun competing) that I'm not in (I'm not having fun)."

Would you be kind enough to elaborate how this works?

All complaints revert to something else, usually a plea for help in fixing an issue. I can't speak for others, but I wouldn't be very helpful if I was accused without proof in public...

 

[speedthrill]

Very good thinking Ejronin.

It's maybe just fine as it is now. I always vote for what i personal love in a pic btw.
Never check who voted on wich one, and so on...
But again that's personal.

 

[Nlmkiii]

Ejo, some interesting angles, although the conclusions you come to are very much incorrect.

The word "blatant" is close enough to what I meant, your description of its meaning is incorrect. I believe a more accurate description would be "obvious with negative outcome", lets avoid arguing semantics though? Its not very often fruitful.

There is a huge issue in this statement - it's loaded. If the mod was truly none-the-wiser then he's deficient in his duties thus, unfit for the position. If he actually did know, then he is either directly or indirectly party to the behaviors by letting it go and again, unfit. This isn't the big issue in the statement though. The issue is your premise, "I know it has happened."

You think people are unfit for a position purely based on one minor oversight? Thats not how the world works. If your statement were true, none of us would have a job. I for one have complete confidence in the mods here and appreciate what they do.

it sounds a lot like you just implicated yourself as an indirect affiliate of the behavior since you 'knew' it happened previously, especially if you know it was 'blatant'.

Attempting to show that I am implicated is a clever way of trying to bolster your own argument by tarnishing my credibility without needing to use those deadly accurate facts you claim to be so fond of. However, if I was implicated, it would of course only go to show that I was right all along, that it does happen. Am I actually part of this behaviour? No, but that is a seperate discussion entirely.

Would you tell me that these questions would never cross someone's mind? They just did - mine.

No, why would I tell you that? The whole point of my posts has been that those questions have been crossing a lot of peoples minds for a while, with or without people posting on the subject.

^___ That, that right there is my dog all up in your fight.

Can you please keep your puppy on a lead, or get a bigger dog? I'm scared I might accidentally hurt it, and I like animals.

Quick question: How can you simultaneously be IN a group and OUT of it? What you've said is "I'm in a group (people having fun competing) that I'm not in (I'm not having fun)."
Would you be kind enough to elaborate how this works?

You cannot be IN a group and OUT of it, that would be quite crazy. Thankfully, I never said anything of the sort, but I will gladly show you where you went wrong
I am entirely in the group of people who compete purely to have fun. I am not having fun in this competetion at the moment so I am not competing. It's quite simple, see?

Considering most of your post was dedicated towards me personally, and not the topic itself, the majority of what you said and what I have now said in response misses the point of the conversation that was taking place. Hopefully we can avoid this in the future and keep the topic a little more on track?

 

[ejronin]

Ejo, some interesting angles, although the conclusions you come to are very much incorrect.

The argument is based on the misinformation you provided. Enjoy

The word "blatant" is close enough to what I meant, your description of its meaning is incorrect. I believe a more accurate description would be "obvious with negative outcome", lets avoid arguing semantics though? Its not very often fruitful.

I can loan you a dictionary if you need it (though, that won't guarantee you'll use it). I dunno, I do new glasses - maybe you can show me where there's an indication of "outcome" in there...

You think people are unfit for a position purely based on one minor oversight? That's not how the world works. If your statement were true, none of us would have a job. I for one have complete confidence in the mods here and appreciate what they do.

So perhaps you'd care to explain your claim? You say the mods were 'none-the-wiser' - a dysphemism (phrase used to impress greater negativity than actually present; opposite euphemism), and suggest that the claim "easy to suss" with regard to people attempting to game the system is not factual or at least not in practice within this site - and you "KNOW" these things as a truth, a testament to yet unrepresented facts about your claims - and now you backpedal by stating you have confidence in the ability of the mods. You're sending some strange signals my friend... strange indeed and I'm losing faith that I should view your statement with any merit.

You can keep your waffles, thanks.

Attempting to show that I am implicated is a clever way of trying to bolster your own argument by tarnishing my credibility without needing to use those deadly accurate facts you claim to be so fond of. However, if I was implicated, it would of course only go to show that I was right all along, that it does happen. Am I actually part of this behaviour? No, but that is a separate discussion entirely.

You made the initial argument with some jacked logic, not me - so, you implicated yourself. Perhaps arguing semantics isn't fruitful in some cases, but semantics (the definition of words) are important - otherwise, get used to this:

I didn't say you were party to it, I ask. I even went so far to say that I'm not throwing assumptions (about your character) but I do question your motive based on your method. Skepticism, if you will.

Yes, if you were part of it, it would mean that you were right. The point was that by stating you "know" this happens, you implicate yourself but only if you haven't previously reported it. If you "know" because you were told my someone else, that's second hand information and you're misrepresenting what you "know."

No, why would I tell you that? The whole point of my posts has been that those questions have been crossing a lot of peoples minds for a while, with or without people posting on the subject.

To answer the question: An act of honesty. Why did you ask?

And my point is that such claims have no merit without evidence. Am I, or anyone, supposed to just take your word for it? Okay, so people are complaining about the polls - guess what? I wasn't very happy when Obama became POTUS. I would love to chalk his election up to block voting but it is intellectually lazy of me to do so. I can claim he was elected based on race, and news reports claimed that record number of minorities voted the year he was elected. Fortunately I'll let you in on a well known secret - correlation does not imply causation.

Can you please keep your puppy on a lead, or get a bigger dog? I'm scared I might accidentally hurt it, and I like animals.

Hurt it with what? Tin foil hats? a pointed stick? oh I know... jedi mind tricks - "I am not the droid you're looking for."

You cannot be IN a group and OUT of it, that would be quite crazy. Thankfully, I never said anything of the sort, but I will gladly show you where you went wrong
I am entirely in the group of people who compete purely to have fun. I am not having fun in this competetion at the moment so I am not competing. It's quite simple, see?

Yes, you did a good job of repeating what I just said. And, yes it's simple.... when you actually say what you mean rather than jumble a bunch of words together and make a Chewbacca defense

Considering most of your post was dedicated towards me personally, and not the topic itself, the majority of what you said and what I have now said in response misses the point of the conversation that was taking place. Hopefully we can avoid this in the future and keep the topic a little more on track?

Yes, typically when I write "you" I have a specific person in mind. Also, direct quotes.

That is all, I don't want to further muddy waters for users lurking before participating - its apparent you're not even thinking about the implications of what you've said and the effect it may have on what I've heard is an influx of new users. It is obvious it has had an effect on the mods since they've suggested that no prizes will be awarded for a bit to keep the competition less troublesome as a result of your claims. I also enjoyed that total avoidance of the main point. That said - 👍 but you're deflecting, so 👎

 

[Nlmkiii]

Yes, typically when I write "you" I have a specific person in mind. Also, direct quotes. 👍 but you're deflecting, so 👎

Yes, I am deflecting away from your desire to make this topic a conversation about me. I don't know what it is that made you want to talk about me so much, but I would prefer to talk about actual facts, I'm just not that self indulgent. The rest of the drivel you wrote, I just don't have the desire to entertain it, so lets say you "won"! Congratulations.

So I'll leave it at that, back on topic anyone?


Edit: In response to the recent edit of your post.

its apparent you're not even thinking about the implications of what you've said and the effect it may have on what I've heard is an influx of new users. It is obvious it has had an effect on the mods since they've suggested that no prizes will be awarded for a bit to keep the competition less troublesome

I assume then that this is the real problem for you? It is the negative implications of what I said. I have to admit that on this matter I agree with you, stating my concerns so publicly was probably not the best course of action. For that, I apologise.
Again, I have complete confidence in the GTP moderation team and I have made no claims about their competance or desire to make this a great fun and fair community event. My only issue has been with the intrinsic problems of a public voting system, this is a problem with a system, not with a person, or people.

 

[Moglet]

Moglet seems to go for a washed out image and pulls it off well

Thanks!

Not sticking to my normal style backfired on me this week though

 

[ejronin]

@ Moglet

Yeah.... its happens. I'm still trying to figure out what my style is...

 

[4ntimatter]

Thanks for answering those questions for me tupacrules.

 

[Nicknamealguem]

Remarkable, we got past the 300 voters mark. I think it is a new record for the competition.

Also, congrats on the win jamiebird.

 

[Moglet]

Also, congrats on the win jamiebird.

It's not over yet! I reckon there are at least 90 people sat waiting to vote for my entry but they haven't done so yet

 

[Nicknamealguem]

It's not over yet! I reckon there are at least 90 people sat waiting to vote for my entry but they haven't done so yet

You may want to tell them to hurry up registering.

Edit: Too late.

 

[Moglet]

You may want to tell them to hurry up registering.

Edit: Too late.

All of their internets broke. At the same time.

 

[ejronin]

It's not over yet! I reckon there are at least 90 people sat waiting to vote for my entry but they haven't done so yet

<sarcasms> Let me guess, 45 of them are you with alternate accounts and the other 45 are your 'friends' whom you've told to vote for you and no one else. I KNEW IT. Don't ask me HOW I knew, I just did and that's all you need to know.

GOOD DAY SIR! </sarcasms>

 

[Northstar]

<sarcasms> Let me guess, 45 of them are you with alternate accounts and the other 45 are your 'friends' whom you've told to vote for you and no one else. I KNEW IT. Don't ask me HOW I knew, I just did and that's all you need to know.

GOOD DAY SIR!...............I SAID GOOD DAY!!!! </sarcasms>

Fixed, although non-Americans may not get it.

Anyways, I wish some people would get confused and vote for the 3rd pic instead of the 2nd(Yes, it happens to be mine).

 

[atlop]

I'm still trying to figure out what my style is...

Don't. That would be my advice anyway. Just do what looks good to you and the style will come.

Congrats on the win jamiebird! 👍

 

[jamiebird]

@atlop: thanks for the congratulations and thanks for setting a good theme.

 

[ejronin]

Fixed, although non-Americans may not get it.

- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKG07305CBs

@Jamiebird - congrats. good job.

 

[Doth1s]

Willy Wonka was a fixture in America until the remake came out.

 

[TeamLotus_Espri]

some of them photos look real

 

[raif330]