Originally Posted by - Paul -
That's an easy one - I like how it's been forever. New one is convoluted and contrived imo. It excludes entries and will put people off. All my opinion of course.
convoluted - maybe, contrived I really don't see how you can say that but you're entitled to your opinion.
I thought it gave a better selection pool of images and elminated those rouge votes we end up seeing EVERY time we run a contest of 2 or 3 guys who come in from nowhere and vote on 1 image that its blatantly obvious isn't among the top 50% of the entries.
Again, I'm not married to this method or trying to push it on you guys, I (along with Chewy's advice to try it out) just thought it'd be worth a shot to see how it went. If the majority didn't like it that fine, if we want to give it another shot with a more general theme, maybe it'll be better - who knows
I don't mind people voicing dislikes of it because it was experimental, I just want some kind of a clear and detailed explanation as to why they don't like it and what exactly about it doesn't work for them so its not just - meh I don't like it but I can't really give any valid reasons as to why it doesn't work.
Many website contests base themselves on these kinds of formats where you submit a photo to a contest and are either accepted or not and then the members vote on the accepted photos for a winner. The benefit is you get a good quality pool of finalists, the down side is some photos get left out.
You guys know like 2 months ago, I was one who liked the way the old votes were, multiple and public. I felt like the law of averages usually gets the best photo picked (or at least one of the best). I guess it's probably just safe to say no matter what voting method we use someone is going to not like it and there will always be a debate that the best photos are winning. It's a subjective content so it's probably just the nature of the beast.
Either way, thanks for hanging in there for this one and should we run a lightning round or is Mark conceding to Rodi?