Group: IPERNITY - Ambassador Images
August 2022 - News / Aktuelles / Actualités
|
1. A look back
This group was created by Arlequin Photographie on February 1, 2021. The objective was to present the spectrum of our community's work in the greatest possible diversity to visitors. Therefore it was linked directly to the main menu of the landing page Explore. By definition, it is not another 'best of'- group, but is intended to show visitors "a selection of the most noteworthy photos of our members".
Arlequin Photographie has been very involved in setting up the group and the jury, as well as in the weekly jury meetings. In the past 18 months, under his leadership - with active support from his co-administrator raingirl - a very noteworthy collection of photos has been created. This has increased the attractiveness of ipernity for visitors. The objective was fully achieved.
Therefore, thanks to Arlequin Photographie for his initiative and engagement, but also to raingirl and the jury, as well as to all those who have contributed with their photos. In this context, the achievement of Rob Stamp should not go unmentioned, who succeeded in linking the group to the menu in such a way that the contributions are presented in random order when visitors access from the 'Explore'-menu. In this way, all contributions appear on an equal level, regardless of the time they were posted in the group.
Arlequin Photographie retired from the administration at the end of July 2022. At the handover he pointed out the following problems:
1. The jury has too few members. Not all of them can always be present.
2. The desired two-thirds majority for the inclusion of pictures was therefore not realisable.
3. The intended rotation of the jury members was also not feasible.
4. Discord as a voting tool is too cumbersome, unmanageable and prone to errors.
5. The voting results were often not well founded for the reasons mentioned.
....................................................................................................................................
2. Status as of August 1, 2022
(in brackets as of November 1, 2021 = half-time, figures provided by raingirl)
Number of group members.......... 82 (78)
Postings...................................... 928 (566)
Postings from group members... 376 (232)
Postings from non-members...... 552 (334)
The group has barely expanded further in terms of number of members. In terms of contributions, the growth momentum has slowed down by about 20% in the second half of the year. Neither of these is a problem in itself, because the group's objective - to present the work of our community - is being fully met.
It is rather thought-provoking that in the past 9 months only half of the group members (44) have been active. Only 144 new contributions came from them. In the meantime, 37 group members are inactive. Therefore, the following problem has to be added:
→ 6. The vividness of the group has diminished.
Furthermore, it was noticed that the rule of not being allowed to suggest one's own works is circumvented in several cases. Buddy groups have been formed to suggest each other's images. This problem affects more than a quarter of the proposals. It causes distortions in the evaluation.
→ 7. The rule 'no own suggestions' is circumvented. This causes distortions in the evaluation.
Currently, 3 proposals per week are allowed (156 per year). Only professionals, pensioners or people who have a lot of leisure time for other reasons can produce such a number of really excellent photos. Working people, single parents or people with little free time, reach the limit of what is possible with just one picture per week. They are disadvantaged by such a high number.
In the build-up phase, it made sense to accept this disadvantage. Because it was important to quickly provide the group with sufficient volume. In the meantime, however, the group is large enough, so that a less discriminatory limit should be set. This would also relieve the burden on the jury, because it would receive better presorted proposals from the multi-submitters.
→ 8. The current number of proposals allowed (3 per week) disadvantages people with little free time and burdens the jury.
Until now, it was important to get as many posts as possible to be able to present an adequate portfolio to visitors. In the meantime, however, we are approaching the 1000 post mark. In order to view them completely, a visitor needs 30 to 90 minutes (with 2-5 seconds of viewing time). Even with good will, this is at the limit of what is possible. That's why older posts are hardly ever viewed.
→ 9. More than 1000 pictures in the group are not necessary to achieve the group's objective. However, permanent updating would be desirable to further improve the outward impression.
....................................................................................................................................
3. Further steps & solutions
The group will be administered by Bergfex and raingirl from now on. For the problems mentioned, possible solutions are presentated below.
Click on the links to get more information and to read the arguments:
Item ❶: Reduced workload due to Poll Unit and change of the rating period to once a month. ✅
Item ❷: The acceptance level of 50% should be kept until experience with the revisions is available. ✅
Item ❸: This matter should be reviewed in 6 months' time. ✅
Item ❹: A new and more efficient voting tool should be introduced. ✅
Item ❺: Voting results will become more reliable by applying Poll Unit. ✅
Item ❻: An incentive 'Picture of the Month' could be created. ⛔️dropped
Item ❼: The rule 'no own suggestions' should be reconsidered. ✅ Modified
Item ❽: The limit should be set at 1 proposal per 14 days. ✅ Modified: 1 per week
Item ❾: The group size should be limited to 1000 posts. The oldest should be replaced by newer ones. ⭕pending
....................................................................................................................................
If anyone thinks of any other issues that need to be clarified, feel free to mention them in a comment below this thread.
This group was created by Arlequin Photographie on February 1, 2021. The objective was to present the spectrum of our community's work in the greatest possible diversity to visitors. Therefore it was linked directly to the main menu of the landing page Explore. By definition, it is not another 'best of'- group, but is intended to show visitors "a selection of the most noteworthy photos of our members".
Arlequin Photographie has been very involved in setting up the group and the jury, as well as in the weekly jury meetings. In the past 18 months, under his leadership - with active support from his co-administrator raingirl - a very noteworthy collection of photos has been created. This has increased the attractiveness of ipernity for visitors. The objective was fully achieved.
Therefore, thanks to Arlequin Photographie for his initiative and engagement, but also to raingirl and the jury, as well as to all those who have contributed with their photos. In this context, the achievement of Rob Stamp should not go unmentioned, who succeeded in linking the group to the menu in such a way that the contributions are presented in random order when visitors access from the 'Explore'-menu. In this way, all contributions appear on an equal level, regardless of the time they were posted in the group.
Arlequin Photographie retired from the administration at the end of July 2022. At the handover he pointed out the following problems:
2. The desired two-thirds majority for the inclusion of pictures was therefore not realisable.
3. The intended rotation of the jury members was also not feasible.
4. Discord as a voting tool is too cumbersome, unmanageable and prone to errors.
5. The voting results were often not well founded for the reasons mentioned.
....................................................................................................................................
2. Status as of August 1, 2022
(in brackets as of November 1, 2021 = half-time, figures provided by raingirl)
Number of group members.......... 82 (78)
Postings...................................... 928 (566)
Postings from group members... 376 (232)
Postings from non-members...... 552 (334)
The group has barely expanded further in terms of number of members. In terms of contributions, the growth momentum has slowed down by about 20% in the second half of the year. Neither of these is a problem in itself, because the group's objective - to present the work of our community - is being fully met.
It is rather thought-provoking that in the past 9 months only half of the group members (44) have been active. Only 144 new contributions came from them. In the meantime, 37 group members are inactive. Therefore, the following problem has to be added:
Furthermore, it was noticed that the rule of not being allowed to suggest one's own works is circumvented in several cases. Buddy groups have been formed to suggest each other's images. This problem affects more than a quarter of the proposals. It causes distortions in the evaluation.
Currently, 3 proposals per week are allowed (156 per year). Only professionals, pensioners or people who have a lot of leisure time for other reasons can produce such a number of really excellent photos. Working people, single parents or people with little free time, reach the limit of what is possible with just one picture per week. They are disadvantaged by such a high number.
In the build-up phase, it made sense to accept this disadvantage. Because it was important to quickly provide the group with sufficient volume. In the meantime, however, the group is large enough, so that a less discriminatory limit should be set. This would also relieve the burden on the jury, because it would receive better presorted proposals from the multi-submitters.
Until now, it was important to get as many posts as possible to be able to present an adequate portfolio to visitors. In the meantime, however, we are approaching the 1000 post mark. In order to view them completely, a visitor needs 30 to 90 minutes (with 2-5 seconds of viewing time). Even with good will, this is at the limit of what is possible. That's why older posts are hardly ever viewed.
....................................................................................................................................
3. Further steps & solutions
The group will be administered by Bergfex and raingirl from now on. For the problems mentioned, possible solutions are presentated below.
Click on the links to get more information and to read the arguments:
Item ❶: Reduced workload due to Poll Unit and change of the rating period to once a month. ✅
Item ❷: The acceptance level of 50% should be kept until experience with the revisions is available. ✅
Item ❸: This matter should be reviewed in 6 months' time. ✅
Item ❹: A new and more efficient voting tool should be introduced. ✅
Item ❺: Voting results will become more reliable by applying Poll Unit. ✅
Item ❻: An incentive 'Picture of the Month' could be created. ⛔️
Item ❼: The rule 'no own suggestions' should be reconsidered. ✅ Modified
Item ❽: The limit should be set at 1 proposal per 14 days. ✅ Modified: 1 per week
Item ❾: The group size should be limited to 1000 posts. The oldest should be replaced by newer ones. ⭕
....................................................................................................................................
If anyone thinks of any other issues that need to be clarified, feel free to mention them in a comment below this thread.
The topic of this discussion has been edited by Bergfex 21 months ago.
You must be a member of this group to reply to this topic. (Join?)
Jump to top
RSS feed- Latest comments - Subscribe to the comment feed for this topic
- ipernity © 2007-2024
- Help & Contact
|
Club news
|
About ipernity
|
History |
ipernity Club & Prices |
Guide of good conduct
Donate | Group guidelines | Privacy policy | Terms of use | Statutes | In memoria -
Facebook
Twitter
raingirl club has repliedAlso, in regards to the emotions of submitters, you say yourself that "it is an inherent problem of all selectoin processes". Yes, that is true - but that doesn't mean that we should then highlight the problem! I still completely disagree with this. Perhaps it is a different way fo thinking from German culture to American culture, I don't know. But your advantages you point out still do not convince me that we should post this information.
Bergfex clubBut I promise you that it is on my agenda and that I am looking for a creative alternative that also takes into account American sensitivities regarding honest feedback as much as possible.
Bergfex clubAnd indeed, the US feedback culture differs significantly from the European one. The distinctive friendliness of the US-Americans causes that feedback is mostly only expressed in a positive way. More delicate matters are often not addressed because it could disturb the harmony.
In Europe, on the other hand, people also like to talk about weaknesses. Before Europeans buy an expensive product, they study test reports. Athletes analyse their weaknesses after games in order to improve. The largest European hotel booking portal www.booking.com asks every customer after a stay what they liked and didn't like about a hotel. All answers are public, the positive as well as the negative ones.
So, as a European photo platform with members from other continents, we are faced with the challenge of solving an intercultural problem if we don't want to lose anyone. That's why we can' t just take a vote on it. Rather, we have to try to build bridges and approach each other. This includes getting down to the other person's level and taking his or her arguments seriously.
So I looked at my first proposal from a different perspective. What could give the impression that it is not a selection process, but a competition? What might be frustrating or off-putting?
1. One immediately notices the golden the asterisks underneath each picture, as well as the green goblets and the word 'best' in some pictures. Poll Unit adds this automatically during the analysis. Unfortunately, I have not found a way to remove this. But with a Photoshop mask it can be done manually in an additional step.
2.The red outcrossings already mentioned several times are also very discouraging. They too were due to my convenience, because I wanted to avoid a more labour-intensive solution. If one omits them and combines the pictures concerned in a separate cluster, the above-mentioned advantage No. 2 is even much better achieved. By calling this cluster 'promising', one combines European honest feedback with positive American phrasing.
3. Thirdly, one can rearrange the presentation from vertical to horizontal format. This avoids giving the third cluster the impression of being at the very end of a long list.
4. One should avoid the colour red, which is an alarm colour.
5. One can eliminate the long-winded explanations and figures at the bottom of the chart. Without precise expertise, they confuse more than they clarify. Explanations can be better given separately because they can be phrased more clearly then.
This results in the following improved approach:
raingirl clubBergfex club has repliedOf course, the results will only be shared within the group.