It's times like this I wish polling was secret or nonexistent ...

... until the results were final.

I've now watched the Photography contests carefully for the last two monthly contests, and one disturbing "herd mentality" shows up each time.

At the outset, the results are relatively well-distributed across the choices. At the point where two or three leaders show up, people seem to abdicate their own individual preference and start engaging in a 'contest of leaders only.' I can only assume that folks subordinate their own personal preferences to the notion that they'd rather have a role in determining the "winner" rather than honestly expressing their individual choice.

I think this phenomena goes a loong way toward substantiating the need for some form of IRV. Polls just don't seem to reflect the profile of preferences. Indeed, I must wonder whether it works at all some of the time - if "works" means highest in rank-order preference.

Does this make sense to y'all?

look at the polls. Participating, not winning is what is important. I have no idea how my photo is doing. Winning or losing, eh, so what.


Pushing creativity is what is important.

I think, so that voting is not based on who is involved in which faction, flame war or what have you.

That said, I agree that particpation is the best reward.

That's not what I was getting at. I think voting for 'photographer' in lieu of 'photograph' is probably lost in the noise. Sure, it probably happens. Just as people will vote for subject matter instead of the artistry and expertise (composition, depth of field, texture, color balance, etc.) in taking the photo itself. In other words, I'm sure some folks would vote for a mediocre photo of some emotionally evocative subject rather than a higher quality photo of a less evocative subject. But that's not what I'm observing either.

What I'm seeing is people largely discarding their 'favorite' of ALL the photos and restricting their vote to the front-runners, at some point. Thus, there seems to be a far greater range from least to most votes than might otherwise be the case.

Further, in so restricting their votes (in order to not "throw it away" on a "loser"), such a migration of the voting criteria employed between the beginning and latter stages of voting may even tip the final tally between the largest vote-getters.

Esoteric observation, I guess. :shrug:

He/she can then post them by picture title or a generic title like "entry 1" Submitter IM's should be saved to verify that if one didn't make it in time, they can know for sure.


It would save bandwidth.

the host would then post the entries with a poll.

Sometimes I see the results and just go "wtf?"... but generally, in any given poll, the two or three pics that have the higher percentage of votes, really are the two or three that I would be considering my first choice vote out of.

An example would be the contest where my "road trip" photo is doing fairly well. I understand perfectly why the "point reyes" photo is giving it such strong competition. It sucks, cuz my pic was a "made" picture, using a 4x5 camera, strobe lights, propping... and all of this was 20 years ago and several photographic first for me, while the "point reyes" photo was done with a consumer point and shoot low megapixel digital camera (if I read/remember correctly). Nevertheless, it's a beautiful picture, and this is all just a general photography contest; there are no specifications the viewer is supposed to quantify in the photo; it's just "what image do you like best?".

One of the polls going right now does have me confounded: I don't understand the results of the poll that has raginginmiami's photojournalistic photo in it. I just really don't "get" why that picture is doing so poorly.

:dilemma:

It does make sense. It appears that the final nine are now a lock. 24 hours ago it was spread out a little more. I guess we should consider that this is a political site. Just like everyone got behind Kerry (well, most did..) .... because he was the "chosen" winner. It does seems to come down to what perty picture stands the best chance of winning.

My favorite photograph won't crack the final nine. Does that mean I suck at "judging" or is it because your theory is correct?
:shrug:

Wannajump makes a good suggestion. Submit blind. Some of us have the capacity to handle something like this, but not everyone. Oh, and speaking of submissions..... why was Longgrain's photo excluded from the contest? Jus askin'.

My hosting site has the capacity to receive hidden votes.



I could make the page private so it's not displayed in public searches. On a contest thread.... list the photos then list a thumbnail of each photo. People would vote by clicking on the thumbnail which would then record a unique hit on the original photo. Just like DU, people would not be able to vote more than once. My host records unique hits which I can view for each specific photo in any one gallery.

But, maybe this would be too complicated? And you'd have to trust me to give accurate numbers.
:evilgrin:

On Edit: I think it would have really helped on this contest if there had been a theme.

On Edit/Edit: how the hell did that extra word get in there?

I might even call it the "voting into the wind" effect. :evilgrin:

It's pretty clear that, by far, the values and principles Kucinich represented in his positions are the most common among DUers ... if the repeated Political Compass results are any indication ... and the many discussions on particular positions is any kind of barometer.

Once he was successfully slimed as "unelectable," we saw far less support articulated for him as most representative of our individual ideologies. I can't help but wonder if IRV or another kind of rank-order voting wouldn't show him as far, far more popular and demonstrate a far more balanced political orientation in the electorate. I think this is only amplified by "winner take all" attitudes.

I don't know (or am even sure it's necessary) what alternatives make sense. I'm not even REALLY sure it's a "problem." I try to imagine how it might be different if the semi-finals were broken down into polls of three choices. But I only do such envisioning to better comprehend what I'm seeing and why.

Maybe the prevailing political ideology has something to do with the mindset that picks the winners? Maybe most DUers "see" things in a like fashion? This is getting way toooooo heavy for me.
:dunce:

I'm not discounting the appparent nine that will hit the finals. They are all great photographs. But, like you, I wonder if it would be different if everyone voted with their true "eye"?? Maybe not. Maybe the result would be the same. Because if the political ideology is consistent.. well, maybe that which most DUers find enjoyable as eye candy is consistent as well?

Excuse me while I go take an Advil. My head hurts from all this...
:silly:

BEcause I liked it, and it doesn't matter a single bit to me which one wins, there's no emotional investment in who wins a photo contest. It's just a picture, after all, and as you pointed out content can easily overwhelm technical and artistic merit.

A blind poll is the best solution I've seen offered here, because I'm seeing what you're seeing.

I threw out the 'themes' approach because it's inherently limiting and I wanted everyone to have at least one chance to put out their favorite work.

The winner, or this forum can decide on the next theme, or not, again it makes no difference to me.

but it probably isn't worth the extra trouble. I see the contests as a great way to attract attention for our Photography Group, and hopefully a way to excite some non-photographers into exploring photography as a hobby.

I doubt if the average person who votes in these contests spends more than a few seconds looking at each photo. Most voters are not photographers. They vote for whichever picture tickles their fancy...and that's fine. I suspect if the voting were restricted to Photography Group regulars the results might be very different (when I vote I take into consideration how challenging the shot was for the photographer). No matter, I enjoy the contests and understand why the photos that get the most votes appeal to the average voter.

I have to admit, however, that it feels good when one of the voters makes a nice comment about one of my photos.

I've found it's a tough addiction to kick. :silly:

I've been known to intentionally avoid voting for the leaders. :banghead:

I do believe that seeing the current standings does influence the way people vote.

I wish I'd said it that succinctly! Me and 'pithy' rarely cross paths. :silly:

One nice thing would be that the host wouldn't have to start a dozen threads to run a contest. All the photos could be put on ONE thread and the winner would be determined from that ONE thread.

I could give the host (or another neutral party) my password so they could confirm the numbers. Just as long as the don't start posting nude pics of DUers on my site.
:evilgrin:

Give me some time to work on something that we could give a trial run and everyone can either say... "oh, that really sucks" .. or "hey, I like it" .... or "what the hell were you thinking?"

:(

Oh well. Everything was fine cept' one minor glitch. I'm waiting to hear back from the site owner to see if there is some way to correct it. I'll keep trying. So far it's running.. "what the hell were you thinking".

That way you can make sure nobody votes more than once. We'd have to truth you will give a fair accounting of the votes.

The problem isn't voting more than once for one photo. The problem is voting for multiple photos. I think it can be fixed, but if not, it could only work if everyone was on their best behavior and didn't vote once for ALL the photos... throwing the numbers off.

Edit:
:think:
I just had another idea for correcting this problem. Will give it a try....

great idea, or a complete disaster.

I think it's mostly just interesting ... how we, as human beings in our culture, probably subordinate the honest expression of our own opinions and tastes to the notion of "winning" or being "on the winning side."

I think this sets up a cultural "hysteresis loop" where the results of such polls are subsequently (ab)used to "prove" stances that really can't be supported, given the basis on which people vote. We (people) have an aversion to being "not normal" or "outside of the mainstream" - but many of the purported indicators of "mainstream" thinking become anything bu when such motives are employed.

Maybe I should call it the "man-date syndrome"?? :evilgrin:

The "man-date syndrome" would incoporate both. Couldn't you argue that Pop-Culture influences Politics? The question is... which of these two is the most significant driving force pulling people into the mainstream? One. Both. Neither.

I'm fairly confident that I could put something together that would remove the "early exit polling" from the Contest, thus eliminating the political or cultural peer pressure of being on the winning side. Wasn't that your original concern?

Another photo forum I just lurk on uses a weighted point system for their contests. "Votes" are not restricted to just ONE photo. Maybe that's what we need. It would reduce the "winner take all" factor and wouldn't force people to make a choice that may or may not be driven by the cultural pressures of not being in the mainstream.

Hidden Votes. Weighted system that allows voting for more than one photograph. Wouldn't that "solve" the issue?

Damn. You gave me a headache again. Reaching for more Advil....
:crazy:

When I went there, it said "thread locked." :shrug:

The conservation movement is a breeding ground of communists
and other subversives. We intend to clean them out,
even if it means rounding up every birdwatcher in the country.
--John Mitchell, US Attorney General 1969-72