I qute agree about certain issues to do with the contests. I would favour anonymous voting, if only to silence those who think that we favour friends in voting. I made a suggestion to TPTB (which went unanswered) that the number system for votes should be more clearly labelled. Instead of "best" and "worst" which implies that you only vote for the top ten, they be relabelled to better indicate that this is a scale.

In fact, while certain people have made unkind comments about some of us who happen to have friends whose work we appreciate, I would point out that those people who I give high votes to I do so because I genunely like their work.

Others have suggested that people should only submit "professional photos". I would argue that Fotki is a place where many of us are not professionals and we should have the right to appreciate a photo for its content, not necessarily its quality. After all, photography, even amongst professionals is a highly subjective art-form.

A documentary photo which accurately and movingly captures a scene cannot be judged by the same criteria as a studio-enhanced image which is perfectly framed and polished.

Judging from some of the comments which accompany votes, I can tell that some people do not understand the history of photography itself and don't understand, as in the case of the black and white contest, the concept of tints and tones of black and white and dismissed images which they saw as "colour" which were merely a different tone of black. The same with those people who dismiss "photoshopping" of images to enhance color or texture. Anyone who has ever actually worked in a darkroom knows that most of the "photoshop" techniques are the same as are produced in the darkroom. My grandfather,s who was a photographer in the late 1800's and early 1900's would have been very happy and comfortable using "photoshopping" to more easily manipulate his images. If we are going to dismiss "photoshopping, we should prevent anyone with a digital camera from entering.

Again, voting is a subjective thing. There are a lot of people who seem to give everything but the top three a single star. If this was "expected" they why bother with a range of 10 points?

I would also state that there are some people who have taken it upon themselves to make derrogetory comments about the quality of photographs or the content. Others use the comment field for what it is intended, to make positive comments or to make suggestions as to improvements. Still others use it to make snotty comment about "Oh. Another moon photo... 1 star" (as though the person entering could have known that half the other entrants would include moon shots).

Judging from some of the comments which accompany votes, I can tell that some people do not understand the history of photography itself and don't understand, as in the case of the black and white contest, the concept of tints and tones of black and white and dismissed images which they saw as "colour" which were merely a different tone of black. The same with those people who dismiss "photoshopping" of images to enhance color or texture. Anyone who has ever actually worked in a darkroom knows that most of the "photoshop" techniques are the same as are produced in the darkroom. My grandfather,s who was a photographer in the late 1800's and early 1900's would have been very happy and comfortable using "photoshopping" to more easily manipulate his images. If we are going to dismiss "photoshopping, we should prevent anyone with a digital camera from entering.

Again, voting is a subjective thing. There are a lot of people who seem to give everything but the top three a single star. If this was "expected" they why bother with a range of 10 points?

I would also state that there are some people who have taken it upon themselves to make derrogetory comments about the quality of photographs or the content. Others use the comment field for what it is intended, to make positive comments or to make suggestions as to improvements. Still others use it to make snotty comment about "Oh. Another moon photo... 1 star" (as though the person entering could have known that half the other entrants would include moon shots).

I certainly think that there could be improvements in the contest (I would also point out, however, that there is a handy little feature at the top of the contest screen which allows one to look at the photos in the reverse order of entry.... and that, no matter how they are organized, if people are too lazy to look at all the photos when voting, those at the end will invariably get fewer votes). I would also note that those voting have to take some responsibility for the failures of the system. Making unkind and unpleasant comments is only going to piss people off and make them less likely to give you a vote in the future.

I would also note that those that accuse others of voting high for friends and thanking others for having appreciated our work in order to "get good votes" haven't really thought it out. Firstly, it is only polite to thank people for appreciating one's work. As well, if I give high votes to 10 people "in order to get good votes" and those 10 people all give me a high votes, along with their 10 friends, no one is actually "winning". In fact, I the people who have been personally attacked for trying to "buy votes" happen to have real talent and the only reason they are getting high votes is because of the quality of their work.