Share
Sticky 

Most Favored Group Changes

admin
ski 9 Posted 2 months ago
The Admins have been concerned for some time about the steady increase in the number of images qualifying for the “Most Favored” group. At last count, over 32% of submitted images qualified. In comparison, the average was around 24% three years ago, and that was a rise from years past.


The Weekly group operates as a form of social media, and in that environment, people can feel the pressure to conform creatively, as well as the need to post comments and critiques that steer clear of the negative. In many instances, individuals will simply bypass images, in order avoid posting comments/critiques which could be construed as negative. Though understandable, Weekly has always been a place to post your images in the hope of learning what other photographers honestly think of the result…good, bad or indifferent. Learning happens in that process.

With that said, the Admins have decided to make a change to the Most Favored criteria, upping the minimum comments from 5 to 8. We will see what impact this change has and, if warranted, we may continue to make further changes in the future. The new rules are as follows:

▪ Photos that receive:
- a minimum of 8 votes and up to 10 votes ... require all keeper and zero freeflights.
- 11 or more votes must have 10 or more keepers than freeflights (11 keepers - 1 freeflight, 12 keepers - 2 freeflights, etc), will be invited into the The Weekly Group's Most Favored Images group.

This rule change will go into effect starting next week (Week 1057).

Additionally, we have been thinking about giving members the ability to post a limited number of images anonymously each week...with the goal being to keep the focus on the image itself, without worry about offending another member. Let us know if you like the idea, and if you’d like to participate.

Please feel free to comment.
Thanks
dappsull Posted 2 months ago
New rule: good decision!
How to submit anonymously?
Andrius Kirkliauskas Posted 2 months ago
The idea is very interesting. I was wondering what I could post anonymously that would offend someone's feelings? Maybe it's something rated 18+? This could lead to something else entirely; anonymity breeds permissiveness and irresponsibility. I think there's no need to be afraid to post your experiments. In my case, I often don't fully understand how people will react to my interpretations, and it's even very important to me what they say about my outrageous behavior. Another interesting point: I always pay close attention when someone gives my work a FREE FLIGHT. When it's not anonymous, those who have seen my work before might hint, "Dude, you've taken a wrong turn."
When one of us posts a photo and understands it will receive more negative reviews than positive ones and expects honest criticism, that's a good thing. Many of us know each other from past work, look forward to new work from others, and follow the progress of one or another member. All of this can be ruined by publishing anonymous work from these members.
Regarding the fact that there are fewer negative ratings than positive ones, yes, that's true, and it's understandable. For example, I sometimes prefer to simply ignore work that I might give a negative review to, fearing offending someone, especially if they're new to the group. After all, FREEFLIGHT is perceived as a negative rating.
I think the situation could be improved by introducing another term. We have KEEPER and FREEFLIGHT. We could also add the term ABSTINCT, which would be equivalent to FREEFLIGHT but wouldn't be perceived as something negative, but rather as—well, it fell a bit short of KEEPER.
Of course, these are just my thoughts out loud, which I'm simply sharing, and I don't ask you to take them as a request or advice.
Roberto aka Nomadfoto Posted 2 months ago
ski 9:

I propose, alongside with rising the requirements for access, also accepting ALWAYS 1 FF (max) .

Explanation:
If I understand correctly, the problem seems to be that members tend to skip pics they would rate negatively, ( you don't say, but I add also for fear of retaliation? and therefore not being able to access the "most favorite" ) This also create a "watering down" of the Most Fav Group.
If this is the problem, having this small allowance accounting for the feared "revenge FF" might give more "courage" to some?

This week, for no particular reason, I decided to force myself to comment on ALL the pics in the group. Oh, boy!
What did I learn? Skipping is blessing.
1- Yes, the fear of appearing "too negative", is there. The ones you skip, obviously, are not the one you love most. If you sum up all the skipped ones to the ones you do FF, well, you make up a big treasure.
2- BUT I do find that you skip the ones you find indifference for: do I want to write " sorry I find flowers boring" five times a week? Or I force myself to admit " this flower is on focus" and therefore contribute sending a flower to the Most Favorite?
3- If a photo has a low number of review, well, this is an indicator of low interest. If I get low interest, I conclude "this pic of mine is lame" and this, too, is a valuable feedback. Not always we need words.
Roberto aka Nomadfoto Posted 2 months ago Edited by Roberto aka Nomadfoto (member) 2 months ago
Another solution could be sending to the Most Favorite the (5? 10? 15? ) that received the MOST KEEPERS this week, independently from the number of FF.

Re the anonymous posting: I don't understand what we would achieve.
Ideally, ALL posting would be anonymous, and all reviews. ABOVE ALL, previous reviews should be invisible at the time of posting one. This until the end of the week, when everything becomes transparent, to avoid all shortcomings correctly identified by Andrius.
I don't see how to do this within Flickr infrastructure, beside burdening there admins with unbelievable work.
dappsull Posted 2 months ago
Normally on Sunday evening (my time) I check the pictures with the least comments and try to add my points of view on them.
Anyway, since the 2 posts/week rule I am a bit overwhelmed by the amount of contributions.
John-Pa Posted 2 months ago Edited by John-Pa (member) 2 months ago
I have no objection to the proposed process changes, although I don’t understand the value of “anonymous posting”. For one thing, after a few weeks, I can often identify the artist from the work anyway (I usually try to look at the image before the name). Some of us have developed a very recognizable “personal style”, use a specific camera technique, or concentrate on a subject specialty. On the other hand, if someone does find value in being anonymous for some reason, I guess that this is OK too. I do find myself “grading on a curve” relative to past work after I know the name, which is usually beneficial to the artist.

I suppose that the other way to address the basic issue of too many “winners”, is to just tighten up our personal voting standards, and I have room to do that too. I often accept what I think are “minor issues”, or “with qualification” and maybe I shouldn’t do that anymore.

I would add… I find that explaining to myself why I have a gut-level negative reaction to an image is the most valuable part of Weekly. My comments are not trying to “instruct” or “mentor” the artist. My comments are not for the artist at all. I am just trying to analyze and understand my own feelings, because that is what will inform and improve my own future work. You teach me.
Teddy Alfrey Posted 2 months ago
I would love to comment on all of the photos, but I can't prevent myself from giving long-winded reviews, and I don't have time to do that for every single submission. It is a very noble goal and good-spirited! I will try to include more, though.

I either learn more myself by trying to explain my reasoning in a review, or I'm just talking to myself.
Before I retired, I used to be required to give long explanatory emails having to do with engineering data, because the engineers only supply yes or no answers to questions, and customers (usually architects and general contractors) want precise info. The poor sales rep is right in between.

Given that we aren't saving lives or money here at the WEEKLY, we should err on the side of what our feelings and the best of our knowledge tell us with reviews, and try to be helpful.

I do know a few people who are reluctant to post, in the WEEKLY, because they are intimidated by the reviews. I've been in a few review groups and some can be a little confrontational, but I rarely see anything that would scare people away in the WEEKLY. I think that some people don't want to get into the whole business of reviewing other people's, or their own, work.
Roberto aka Nomadfoto Posted 2 months ago Edited by Roberto aka Nomadfoto (member) 2 months ago
Sorry for writing too much. I thought at this, and I am now advocating for closing the "most favorite" group. The Weekly is not a contest, and we should post with the expectations to get a number of FF every week, regardless.
admin
ski 9 Posted 2 months ago
Some very interesting comments thus far. Over the years, the Admins have gone around and around on this subject....and will likely continue to do so ;-) We'll see how this small change works, and will continue to tweak it.... as needed. Keep the comments coming. Thanks


dappsull:
How to submit anonymously?


Drop a note to one of the Admins, with a link to the image you want to post anonymously. We'll take it from there.
axel hydre Posted 2 months ago
The 10 point advantage of KEEPERS over FREEFLIGHTS sounds like a good idea for keeping the most favoured pool clean. I tend to avoid commenting on shots where folks have already said all I would say (positive or negative) or where I can't put words around my feelings for the shot. The rule change would make me more diligent and the K & F count higher from me - albeit with less typing - which is nice :-)
@CHPhotography Posted 2 months ago
"- a minimum of 8 votes and up to 10 votes ... require all keeper and zero freeflights.
- 11 or more votes must have 10 or more keepers than freeflights (11 keepers - 1 freeflight, 12 keepers - 2 freeflights, etc), will be invited into the The Weekly Group's Most Favored Images group."

This is a good idea which I support.

“Additionally, we have been thinking about giving members the ability to post a limited number of images anonymously each week...with the goal being to keep the focus on the image itself, without worry about offending another member.”
I too do not see how this should work on a practical level. Not only do I agree with Andrius’ thoughts here, it will also create a lot more work for Admins. Having more admins to cope with extra images would not be a good thing.

So as you can guess, I’m not for this proposal.
foto.graphik Posted 1 month ago Edited by foto.graphik (member) 1 month ago
I think the change is reasonable, because being "awarded" too easily devalues the achievement. Depending on further development, the "accepting ALWAYS 1 FF (max)" proposal from Roberto might be a good compromise too.

Andrius Kirkliauskas:
Noone will stop you from leaving a comment & just add "i abstain" underneath.
Did this a bunch where i wasn´t sure or didn´t want to be the "party pooper".
I just made sure i left a additional K/FF vote for that.
Andrius Kirkliauskas Posted 1 month ago
foto.graphik:

Oh, thank you. I often have doubts about the adequacy of my rating of a participant's work, and I really don't want to "dump" someone else's work. I will now change my rating of one work this week. I like the design, but I have some questions about the plot.
ponzü Posted 17 days ago Edited by ponzü (member) 17 days ago
Nomadfoto thank you for summing up the issue and its psychological and logistical causes so well. I could not have said it better. I am as guilty as anyone of picking favorites and voting on them. It is less out of fear of retaliation, more out of concerns for people’s feelings. Very infrequently have I submitted a photo I did not care about and I assume others all feel their photos are good, heartfelt and thoughtful. I will say an unpopular thing, but I don’t come here to learn, I come to get validated and, well, be seen. I have been a member of another voting group for more years than I can believe. Their credo is “by default things are uncool”. Getting seven upvotes there before getting seven downvotes is incredibly hard*. Their version of “most favored” is a real showcase.

What have I learned from the group that prides itself on being hard on itself? Mainly to see my photos through other people’s eyes. And consequently to value my photos based on how impressive they are to … a small group who randomly gravitated together. Ultimately, to share fewer photos — not out of fear of being criticized but out of the sense that most of my photos are irrelevant or mundane and reflect poorly on me. I think it’s a fallacy but it’s hard to avoid it when facing harsh or dismissive criticism.

But you know what else? That group has been in decline for years. Almost dead I would say. And here is this softish group — thriving. Of course the admins here are like none other on Flickr or anywhere.

Ideally, when submitting a photo to WEEKLY, I would like to get 50 freeflights and 51 keeper. Getting 3-4 pity keepers feels just as bad as being pilloried. Well, almost. At the same time I am reluctant to produce the freeflights myself, I assume they are not wanted. I wish I could suggest a meaningful improvement to the rules or the process that would reward / encourage/ force more balanced — and more prolific — voting. But I can’t for the moment.

Upping the threshold of “most favored” is absolutely the right move. Maybe make it higher. Shoot for 10% not 24% “most favored” rate.

*made harder by the fact that almost no one votes anymore