I've got your solution. Lemme update my stats thread.

This may be off-topic....but Deeshone is one sexy man.

WTF? I meant to edit my other post cuz I spelled badly. HAH.

Friggin' noobs.

I stand by this statement.

Striped jeans can do miracles

And no people it's not a good idea to have seperate contest for skills ... you learn the most from playing with the big boys ... or girls ... or whatever !

I agree with Desh...

funny thread !

These things are cyclical. It's the circle of life, young Simba.

Every so often, people complain that the quality has gone straight to hell.

The number of votes hasn't affected quality, it's just affected the number of votes. It's just inflation! Quality remains the same, it just galls many of you who remember what a gallon of milk used to cost. It does mess up the stats history, though, and those who used to vote almost indiscriminantly can now vote even more indiscriminantly than ever (and that shouldn't be encouraged - as badcop noted).

The number of votes does not refelct quality in the same proportion it used to, thats all.

"25 votes, downfall of quality!?" PFFFFFFFT!

Argh. I hope I'm not one of the problem newbies. I do try to submit quality chops, but on some days I look at the source photo and I can't believe the crap we are supposed to work with. On those days, I don't enter, but I do vote for those who manage to make silk purses out of sow's ears.

I agree that people should not get listed for using up all 25 votes. I never have; I doubt I ever will. Voting for its own sake is ridiculous, and I like to think that none of us do that. I also like the idea of anonymous posting, although I would miss the little comments, by the poster, about his or her entry.

What I think should change is that we should be able to cast up to three votes for a single post, one on each day a contest is open. So.. within a given 24 hours, you can cast up to 25 votes, but you cannot vote for the same person twice. But if you have some of your 25 votes remaining on day two, you can go back and cast a second vote for a truly exceptional entry, and the same goes for day three.

I didn't explain that very well. I hope that made sense.

Amen Fugue!!! and Amen Cynn!!!

Fugue is right.

What would 1 vote for each contest do? Would a person spend it wisely? Who the hell knows? If each person had 1 vote per contest, you may have a crappy post getting alot of votes (relatively speaking). I think this is alot of crying being done by those who think people are getting votes that they think shouldn't. This is really a stupid topic unless you can name names and show examples. Nacers appears to have a good point but has no proof because no examples are given. We are so politically correct that we can't use examples of things.

There are many different skill levels here. What is crap to Serps, Anfa, BTVS and other good choppers may be great to someone who can't dow what's been done. Who's been mad God to decide if the voter really was impressed by the chop? Just because somebody doesn't think it was worthy doesn't mean it wasn't worthy to someone else. There's no anonymous posting. Only anonoymous to those not in the "click". Reducing the number of votes isn't gonna change anything. I really think you should have to post a pic in order to vote. Comment all you want but post to vote.

"learn the most from playing with big boys and girls" ?
all you are going to learn is to lose. and you will continue to lose until you are
grown.
yes, you should try to improve yourself.
but until that happens you are still going to be the weakest kid on the playground.
that is why they dont put kindergartners in p.e. with sixth graders.
there is a definate difference between beginners and advanced photoshop users
and it is a problem to just say "learn or burn".
you can always take a good person and make them better, but starting from the bottom to get to the point to say "thats good" takes more than encouragement, you have to have done it for yourself, and as long as beginners are lumped in with more advanced users and are continually losing to the (obviously) better pics then the inspiration to quit will outweigh the inspiration to improve.
and yes there will always be people who will say "i saw what it was and tried harder" and that is good enough for them. but i think the majority of people need the incentive of the votes of their peers to continue to try harder, and with the better pics posted by the long time ps users (or the ones who have caught on quicker) the votes will ( and should) go to them.
a seperation of skill level would be an advantage to everyone involved.
my opinion.
t.

Would "Musical Chairs" be a fun game if you added chairs after each round instead of taking them away? I don't think so.

...it's got nothing on "Hungry-Hungry-Hippos" anyway. Boggle anyone?

Another point I would like to make about this is....
I frequently see Anfa and Serps among the highest voters in the last 7 days. I see 2 possibilities.
1. They are repaying votes. "Not buying"
or
2. They are simply voting for things they like.

I hope the second is true but I believe it is a combination of each.

As good as both of them consistently post, why would they vote for something of less quality than theirs? 99% of the stuff posted is of less quality than theirs but yet they can still vote for things.

I like to think they see the effort and time put in to things done by others and show some encouragment to less skilled people. Believe it or not, some people actually put much time and effort into "crappy posts",,,,it's called trying and learning. Have you forgotten? You're showing your age....no votes for the newbie cause I didn't get votes when I was a newbie. Rediculous.

Don't stop voting Anfa & Serps cause it does make a difference.

Someone had to say it. Supa-
Word to just about everything that has been said here. It needed to be said.
I just don't think the quality is going down, rather the amount of crap going up.
Old-timers should archive the pre-change stats and start fresh.
Newbies should stop posting crap just to vote sooner. If you're posting that, you're no great judge (no one in particular, rest-assured, but many.)