Who was the last person to vote?! Please own up!   ;)

  Heh, ok, it could have been me today...  

   ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

St. wrote:
>Who was the last person to vote?! Please own up!   ;)
>
>  Heh, ok, it could have been me today...
>
>   ~Steve~
>


WHAT??!?!?  Submit???  Already?!?

Oh... whew! I still have time!

Well, if you've already submitted you're ahead of me!  I'm still making
comments.

RG

Post a reply to this message

"gonzo" <rgo### [at] lansetcom> wrote in message
news:web.3f66244bf2b09f41a0c272b50@news.povray.org...
> St. wrote:
> >Who was the last person to vote?! Please own up!   ;)
> >
> >  Heh, ok, it could have been me today...
> >
> >   ~Steve~
> >
>
>
> WHAT??!?!?  Submit???  Already?!?
>
> Oh... whew! I still have time!
>

  Heheh, well, I get scared around the middle of the month. I always
think I'm going to be too late to submit my votes and comments.
Perhaps a cut-off time/date would help for voting submissions? I don't
know, has this been discussed before?


> Well, if you've already submitted you're ahead of me!  I'm still
making
> comments.

  I feel terrible about my comments, I never feel that I'm qualified
enough to comment. I can score ok, that's not a problem, I can score
good and I can score bad (that car on the roof was the worst image
I've ever seen! ;)  And I sort of feel that my scoring 'is' my
comment. I just can't comment on 'every' image. Somebody mentioned
recently that they scored 20 for some images, well, I just can't do
that unless it's truly exceptional (imo), which does happen from time
to time. :)

   Anyway, I enjoyed this round in all of it's aspects.

   ~Steve~


>
> RG
>
>

Post a reply to this message

St. wrote:
I can score
>good and I can score bad (that car on the roof was the worst image
>I've ever seen! ;)

You mean the "hate this because I hate it, I only submitted it so I could
vote" image?  Yes, the aesthetics do seem to be negatively enabled.

After seeing his comments in the last round I suspect he meant "I only
submitted this so I could comment, and then me and my friends can sit
around later reading my comments and laughing our immature little butts
off"

RG

Post a reply to this message

"gonzo" <rgo### [at] lansetcom> wrote in message
news:web.3f6776fbf2b09f41a0c272b50@news.povray.org...
> St. wrote:
> I can score
> >good and I can score bad (that car on the roof was the worst image
> >I've ever seen! ;)
>
> You mean the "hate this because I hate it, I only submitted it so I
could
> vote" image?  Yes, the aesthetics do seem to be negatively enabled.
>
> After seeing his comments in the last round I suspect he meant "I
only
> submitted this so I could comment, and then me and my friends can
sit
> around later reading my comments and laughing our immature little
butts
> off"

    Yeah, "whatever". Hmm... I have to admit that I didn't have time
to read any of the comments for the last round, so didn't see his
comments. Seen them now though. He needs to leave his pee-wee alone
for at least 23 hours of the day...

    ~Steve~


>
> RG
>

Post a reply to this message

"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message news:3f68b226@news.povray.org...
|
|     Yeah, "whatever". Hmm... I have to admit that I didn't
| have time to read any of the comments for the last round,
| so didn't see his comments. Seen them now though. He needs
| to leave his pee-wee alone for at least 23 hours of the day...

Hmmmm. I though that there were worse images than his this round, and
*somebody* needs to call it like he sees it.

This judging has just really taken it out of me, and I still have just a
bit more to go. I think this is the last time I will vote. 103 images is
a *lot*.

 -Shay

Post a reply to this message

"Shay" <sah### [at] simcopartscom> wrote in message
news:3f69d831$1@news.povray.org...
>
> "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message
news:3f68b226@news.povray.org...
> |
> |     Yeah, "whatever". Hmm... I have to admit that I didn't
> | have time to read any of the comments for the last round,
> | so didn't see his comments. Seen them now though. He needs
> | to leave his pee-wee alone for at least 23 hours of the day...
>
> Hmmmm. I though that there were worse images than his this round,
and
> *somebody* needs to call it like he sees it.

     Yeah, well, I guess I was a little harsh, but, you know,
something makes me think he's a little older than 11 years old, (I'm
probably wrong though), and it was a failed attempt to get him to
reply to me in here for a bit of jovial banter.  ;)

  Still, I appreciated his better image of the two. If he's at all
interested in CG, then he must learn to critique a lot better than he
does. <Says the Master Commenter...> <g>


>
> This judging has just really taken it out of me, and I still have
just a
> bit more to go. I think this is the last time I will vote. 103
images is
> a *lot*.

    Well, the amount 'is' a lot. I don't think that bothered me so
much, but sometimes when I look at an image, I just don't know *what*
to say about it - like I said above, I'm not qualified enough to
comment on most of them. But I'm working on it.  ;)

   ~Steve~


>
>  -Shay
>
>

Post a reply to this message

"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message news:3f69f98c@news.povray.org...
|
|     Well, the amount 'is' a lot. I don't think that
| bothered me so much, but sometimes when I look at an
| image, I just don't know *what* to say about it - like
| I said above, I'm not qualified enough to comment on
| most of them. But I'm working on it.  ;)

I feel like I need to treat each image as if the person worked very hard
on and put a lot of thought and feeling into it. This becomes difficult
when I know that 2/3 of the images weren't really meant to be more than
a chance for the person to learn the software or try out some particular
technique.

I wonder how it would go over if the entries were split into two
separate categories (selectable by each entrant), competitive entries
and display entries. All entries could be commented on, but only those
in the competitive group would be voted upon. I am very proud of the two
IRTC entries which I have sent in, but neither was meant to be
competitive, and I feel that whatever time people spent voting on them
was pretty much wasted. I do enjoy seeing if anyone got anything out of
them, however, so I would have entered them as display entries.

 -Shay

Post a reply to this message

"Shay" <sah### [at] simcopartscom> wrote in message
news:3f6a05dc@news.povray.org...
>
> "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message
news:3f69f98c@news.povray.org...
> |
> |     Well, the amount 'is' a lot. I don't think that
> | bothered me so much, but sometimes when I look at an
> | image, I just don't know *what* to say about it - like
> | I said above, I'm not qualified enough to comment on
> | most of them. But I'm working on it.  ;)
>
> I feel like I need to treat each image as if the person worked very
hard
> on and put a lot of thought and feeling into it.

     Yes, and this could be my problem with commenting. I feel that I
don't want to disappoint them after the effort they've put in if I
don't like it, or something about it. I dunno, perhaps I should start
doing press-ups and grunt a little...


This becomes difficult
> when I know that 2/3 of the images weren't really meant to be more
than
> a chance for the person to learn the software or try out some
particular
> technique.

   I read all the text if I'm in the competition. I'm amazed at what
people use, and I quite often try to imagine me using their techniques
and programs.

   'What' would I do? Phew! I'll find out one day, I'm sure...  ;)


>
> I wonder how it would go over if the entries were split into two
> separate categories (selectable by each entrant), competitive
entries
> and display entries. All entries could be commented on, but only
those
> in the competitive group would be voted upon. I am very proud of the
two
> IRTC entries which I have sent in, but neither was meant to be
> competitive, and I feel that whatever time people spent voting on
them
> was pretty much wasted. I do enjoy seeing if anyone got anything out
of
> them, however, so I would have entered them as display entries.

    Now, you could have it solved here Shay. I mentioned in another
post that maybe there should be a cut-off time/date for commenting,
voting. Maybe a change 'is' needed? I don't know, if so, then it could
*only* be a change for the better, and if not, I don't mind the rules
as they are, they work well for me.

   ~Steve~


>
>  -Shay
>
>

Post a reply to this message

I think that ultimately people entering a public contest such as this 
have to be responsible for their own feelings and expectations.  Also of 
course, if you treat people insensitively, your going to be seen as 
insensitive and your remarks will be correspondingly devalued.

When voting I have come to accept that there is going to be a fairly 
undifferentiated group of work in the middle with some extreme examples 
both high and low.  The three voting categories offer a little more 
chance to differentiate, eg. though you still end up in the middle, 
maybe a lot of people favored your concept.  Personally I have 
streamlined the voting for myself by assigning scores in steps of four.
4, 8, 12, 16, 20.  I find it helps me make clearer decisions.  I've 
concluded that trying to decide whether a work merits a score of '10' or 
'11' out of a range of 20, and relative to a group of 100 other entries, 
is just more detail than I can manage.

-Jim

Post a reply to this message