Discussion Forums
There have been lots of suggestions to create discussion forums (message boards) on ShutterPoint to help photographers
communicate more efficiently, and we listened: the
forums are now available online. We used popular message board
software provided by FuseTalk Inc., and integrated it into ShutterPoint to make your experience with forums as simple as
possible. You will find that the look and feel of our new forums is the same as on many popular websites on the internet,
which should make it easy to use forums especially if you have used similar layouts elsewhere on the web. Below are some
things to know about the new forums:
- In order to post messages, you will need to login to your ShutterPoint account. Any visitor with or
without an account can read all messages.
- When browsing forums, some text-based ads may be shown to visitors who are not logged in. No ads will be shown
to the logged in ShutterPoint members.
- Forums are moderated - please see the rules before posting.
- Forums software provides a private messaging mechanism similar to existing private messaging on ShutterPoint. In
order to keep the single integrated private messaging, we will phase out our existing private messaging in favor of
features provided along with the forums. We encourage all members interested in private messaging to start using it
via forums, and save any valuable information from their existing inboxes to avoid losing it, as it will be deleted
before the end of August 2004. All links to existing private messaging will be converted to point to the new
system shortly, and the only way to access your old inbox will be by typing its direct
URL: http://www.shutterpoint.com/PM-inbox.cfm
(this link will also be taken offline before the end of August 2004).
- Forums may still require some tweaking on our end, and
we welcome your feedback if your experience problems.
Please note that since the software is created by a third party, we may be limited in making some
functionality changes.
Various Updates
1. Two new categories were added to help better represent photos:
Nightshot and
Macro. If you have posted any photos suitable
for these categories, please feel free to place them there.
2. Our search engine now displays pixel dimensions and price along with the thumbnails of search results. Additionally,
a searcher can choose to have results sorted by price (either ascending or descending order). These additions can
make purchasing decisions easier for our customers.
3. By popular demand, we now ask photo buyers about potential use of photos they have purchased from our members.
Upon completing the purchase transaction, website presents an optional question about how and where the
photos that just have been paid for are intended to be used. If you have recent sales, you can notice the new
column titled "Usage" in the "Photo Sales" section of your
Sales and Payments page.
When a buyer has provided usage details, this column will show a link to usage information for each photo listed.
4. As you know, statistics and summary page can be a
useful tool to view the status of your photos. The status column indicates whether there is a potential problem with
the way your photo is described, presented or rated - it is the automated check meant to draw your attention to these
problems. The status is now verified right on each photo's main display page - and if there is a potential problem,
an owner of the photo will see a small section underneath the ratings summary informing him or her of the possible
issue with a photo. This status will only be visible to the owner of the photo.
5. Photographer's profile now allows 5000 characters, as the bug was fixed that previously incorrectly limited it
to only 500 characters. Unless you have already done so, now is the good time to
edit your profile information.
Rating System Survey Results
About one month ago, we ran the survey on the rating system and possible changes to make it better. We would like to
thank everyone who contributed time and thoughts into completing it, and we reviewed and analyzed every comment that was
made. Based on the survey responses, we intend to make several changes, which we will announce
shortly in the new discussion forums.
Below we present results of the survey, and some of the comments we received are
posted in the forums.
| 1
|
Do you believe that the rating system in its current state works well most of the time?
|
Responded: 396
|
| Answers
|
Responses
|
Ratio
|
 Yes
|
123
|
|
| No
|
273
|
|
| Total
|
396
|
100%
|
|
| 2
|
Revenge ratings are prevented by requiring to enter at least 10 non-repeating words in the comments field (as opposte to at least 5 otherwise) if the system suspects any possibility of the revenge rating. Do you believe the number of required words should be changed?
|
Responded: 394
|
| Answers
|
Responses
|
Ratio
|
| Keep as is
|
268
|
|
| Increase to 15 words
|
24
|
|
| Increase to 20 words
|
4
|
|
| Increase to 25 words
|
59
|
|
| Decrease to 5 words
|
39
|
|
| Total
|
394
|
100%
|
|
| 3
|
Should the members who have not submitted any photos be allowed to provide numeric ratings?
|
Responded: 397
|
| Answers
|
Responses
|
Ratio
|
| Yes
|
163
|
|
| No
|
234
|
|
| Total
|
397
|
100%
|
|
| 4
|
Currently giving ratings and comments is encouraged by the system of points, where most active raters are rewarded with free storage space extensions. Recently the system was changed so that no points are earned for ratings near the ends of the rating scale, and more points are earned for ratings closer to the middle of the rating scale. This change was intended to discourage tendency to over-rate and encourage more honest criticism. Which statements below best describe your opinion about the change in the points system?
|
Responded: 397
|
| Answers
|
Responses
|
Ratio
|
| This change was in the right direction – it will help achieve better balanced ratings.
|
41
|
|
| This change was in the right direction; however it is failing to achieve desired goals.
|
145
|
|
| This change can make those who give lower scores appear as if they were hunting for more points.
|
86
|
|
| This change is controversial – no one should be encouraged to rate any certain way.
|
82
|
|
| This change is not helpful, and it should be reverted, so that points are assigned equally for any ratings.
|
99
|
|
| Total
|
453
|
100%
|
|
| 5
|
There is a strong tendency to rate only "good" photos, bypassing the ones that need comments and feedback the most. What is the best way to encourage ratings of any sorts of photos?
|
Responded: 306
|
| Answers
|
Responses
|
Ratio
|
| Use the average given rating within last 30 days as the benchmark of rating patterns. If the benchmark is below 5, restrict ratings lower than 5, if it is above 8, restrict ratings higher than 8. This will normalize the given ratings across all raters.
|
56
|
|
| Require each member to rate one or two random photos after every login.
|
79
|
|
| I agree that something needs to be done, but I do not welcome any of the solutions proposed above.
|
129
|
|
| There is no need to encourage ratings of photos if raters do not wish to rate them.
|
116
|
|
| Total
|
380
|
100%
|
|
| 6
|
A group of photographers can organize in a team and rate each other's photos very high regardless of their actual technical or artistic values. This creates an unfair advantage over other photographers in terms of placing photos in the "Featured" and "Highest Rated"
sections, top of categories, as well as cultivates dishonest approach to ratings. Currently ShutterPoint has no way of preventing this kind of behavior. Please choose statements that best describe your thoughts on what should be done in this regard:
|
Responded: 390
|
| Answers
|
Responses
|
Ratio
|
| Photographers should not be allowed to rate each other’s photo highly very frequently. There should be a limit imposed on how many 9’s or 10’s one photographer can give to the same other photographer within a certain period of time.
|
95
|
|
| Photographer should not be able to rate another photographer’s photo with 9 or 10 if his/her photo was rated 9 or 10 by the same photographer within a certain period of time.
|
39
|
|
| Disallow "return" ratings for X number of days, regardless of the rating given: Photographer A cannot rate any photos by photographer B, if B rated A within the last X number of days (also helps address issue mention in question 2).
|
160
|
|
| There is no need to do anything to address this issue.
|
117
|
|
| Total
|
411
|
100%
|
|
| 7
|
Individual ratings and comments are shown on the website along with the name of the person who supplied the rating. Should the steps be made to disassociate the rater from the actual rating he/she gave to encourage more honest exchange of opinions and lower the possibility of any ratings retribution?
|
Responded: 394
|
| Answers
|
Responses
|
Ratio
|
| The rater’s name should be associated with the comments, but not individual numeric ratings.
|
67
|
|
| The rater’s name should be associated with the comments, but instead of the actual numeric rating given, the site should show an up/down/neutral indicator to demonstrate how the given rating compares to other ratings given to the photo.
|
191
|
|
| There should be no names displayed next to each individual comment or rating.
|
22
|
|
| Leave as is – anonymous numeric ratings will cause more problems than they may solve.
|
114
|
|
| Total
|
394
|
100%
|
|
| 8
|
If the steps above are taken to disassociate raters' names from their numeric ratings, do you believe this can cause high number of extremely low, unjustified ratings:
|
Responded: 395
|
| Answers
|
Responses
|
Ratio
|
| Yes - people will rate much lower knowing they can get away with it.
|
150
|
|
| Not sure - It might happen.
|
134
|
|
| No - I believe no good photo will be down-rated due to "just because I can" mentality.
|
111
|
|
| Total
|
395
|
100%
|
|
| 9
|
If the steps above are taken to disassociate raters' names from their numeric ratings, will that alter the way you rate photos?
|
Responded: 391
|
| Answers
|
Responses
|
Ratio
|
| Yes - I will rate more photos and express my thoughts more freely.
|
168
|
|
| Yes - I will rate mostly good photos but I will be open and critical about them.
|
27
|
|
| No - I believe I already rate the way I want to now, and the change will not alter it.
|
160
|
|
| No - I rarely rate any photos now, and I don’t intend to rate more.
|
36
|
|
| Total
|
391
|
100%
|
|
| 10
|
Which statement best describes your opinion about receiving ratings in general:
|
Responded: 391
|
| Answers
|
Responses
|
Ratio
|
| I can take criticism quite well, and I welcome honest exchange of opinio
|
|
|
|
Cart
