Dragon

Most ratings would work well too, I noticed today when I went to look there are some in the top rows that only have 1 rating, since it's a 5 they're in above alot of works that have 10 or even 15 ratings. Seems funny.

marg

thanks, Qsilv..
I think it was actually way before then, in a comment on one of the forum pictures we had last November or December.. but, I just thought with the Showcase pictures, it would be fairer to show them 'most ratings', 'cause I go and look at pictures I really like lots of times

Qsilv

mmm.... real credit goes to marg, who called it "accumulative" back in a "ratings" post on Jan.14th
; >

Dragon

I agree with Qsilv, it really would make the most sense for the total to determine the top pictures. Even if it couldn't be done retroactively it would be something good for the future. Good idea!

Qsilv

(smiles) gosh.. thanks, marg

I was playing around with some convoluted algorithms, but it ends up that the simplest is just to add the points and display 'em all in order.

The current problem is not so much one of people casting a 1-star vote, as it is in that vote getting factored in as such a huge part of the total.

Pictures with only 1 or 2 or 3 votes, but all 5-star ranked, wind up at the top. Now that does show off the newest ones well.... but.... just as an example, Jolly Roger had a dozen 5-star votes, and then one low vote knocked it down two pages! Pfft... lost in the shuffle!

If... IF.... the votes were simply totalled as we went along, 12 x 5 = 60, and a 1-point vote would = 61.

I don't think the numbers would get scary... typical winners run around 20+ votes, with a few going 50+ but at totals of 100 to 300 that's all still comfortably in the 3 digit range.

The biggest question in MY mind is can Rachel implement this retroactively? (I'd THINK all the figures would still be there... dunno her software.)

Anyway, each person keeps a 5 point maximum vote per picture, and they can spend those points as they please... including zero, no vote at all... and you'd still notice that less-than-whole-hearted votes had been cast, which would be interesting!