"gregjohn" <pte### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> One of the most offensive scores I got on an IRTC submission was 10 10 10.

>...This basically means that ...No one put any thought into the vote.
>
> For a vote to be meaningful, it has to COST the voter something. ...
>
> For the Short Code Competition,  I came up with a voting scheme where you cite
> your favorite six entries...
.....
> As far as WHO votes,  I'd be more inclined to have real people vote than male
> nerds who use freeware graphics programs. (DISCLAIMER: I'm one of the latter.)
> Maybe it's impractical to line up a set of artistic, educated, and/or
> interesting people, but that would be the coolest.

Although I'm very sympathetic to the sentiments that you express here and
recognize that they are thoughtful and well-intentioned, I nonetheless feel
compelled to mention a few problems that I see with the particulars:

Systems under which a judge votes only for a few favorites tend to leave
everyone except a few elites out in the cold with no constructive feedback.
This bodes poorly for developing the community and building up the skills of
the up and coming.  I guess this really comes down to a question of goals and
priorities.  *ARE* we interested in building community and encouraging



Also, sadly, one of the things that must be considered is how a system might be
abused by those who do not share your good intentions and desire for fairness.
If I'm more interested in influencing the outcome in favor of my best friend or
my own little clique than in judging the entries fairly, I can do much more
damage by concentrating all 100 of my points than I can by being just one voter
with a skewed motive.  (I freely acknowledge that NO system solves the ulterior
motive problem entirely, but voting only for favorites exacerbates it. )


effort.  Not only should voters be required to vote on ALL entries, but also to
leave at least one coherent comment on each entry AND to explain why any image
was given either the highest or lowest possible rating.  To those who would
suggest that this is asking too much of judges, I would reply that it's nothing
compared to the effort of preparing a serious entry.

As for the WHO of voting, (and this is merely personal feeling with no real
objective logic behind it) I share your desire to get feedback from both inside
and outside the world of those who produce ray trace images, but I would require

don't give a rodent's rectum how people who rush home from their marketing jobs

would rate my work.  Also, a significant percentage of the judging will have to

about how one can improve.

Respectfully,
Mike C.

Post a reply to this message