ED or EDWARD
its all subjective!

I thought I'd go through a few contests, but I couldn't stop myself. Some great stuff going on back then.

I admit I only skimmed this thread so I might have missed something.

He titled this "How to increase participation", and wrote, "If you sift through the contest archives , you'll see that there was greater participation back when there was a greater diversity of images."

I simply tried to Illustrate that, if you took a sample of source images from the height of PSCs glory days, you'll quickly notice that the above statement is completely false.
In fact, if you like drawing direct correlations, you might actually conclude that the best way to increase participation is to increase the amount of statue, sign, and old car images.

Yeah, I did the same thing and agree!



Nope didn't miss much... just a bunch of people trying to tell him he wasn't looking at the big picture. And him calling us morons saying "You stated that you did not agree with my analysis but you did not express any reason why".



yeah... I know. and you did a damn fine job.

I don't claim to have all the answers, but I know for certain that this site needs more people like you telling me I did a damn fine job.

You did a damned terrific job!

That's not offering a reason why you think my theory is wrong, that's simply offering a different theory. There is a difference, and if you don't know what that difference is, then you're an idiot just like all the other people in here who don't know the damn difference.


You cannot simultaneously believe that the problem is that people simply don't have time and that the solution is to spend more time taking better photographs.

Don't want me to call you an idiot? Stop saying idiotic things.

Tell me the error I have made, tell me what is wrong with my examples, what is wrong with my analysis. Don't tell me I'm wrong just because you think it's something else. That is not a valid critique.

THIS is an appropriate critique of my argument. Jesus FUCKING Christ, it only took 15 god damn pages.

Pothead- I think the major issue here is that no one thinks that you are totally wrong. You want us all to disprove you before stating our piece, and it's not happening because no one thinks that your idea is completely without merit.

We've taken pieces of YOUR IDEA and tried to expand on them, but since we're not saying that you're totally WRONG and telling you WHY you're unhappy with our points.

I'm probably going to start something I don't intend with this, but it's like the constant religion debates I've been seeing over and over lately in other places.

Believers-" There is x deity"
Atheists- "Prove it."
Believers- "Prove there isn't!"
Which of course, is ridiculous.

In this situation, YOU hold the burden of proof. Prove WHY your idea is the solid one and CONVINCE US.
We don't need to disprove something that you've pulled out of thin air as the standalone end-all reason for lack of participation.

A lot of people don't like to chop if they don't have a good idea, or if the only ideas they have have already been done 100 times over. Your pseudo-intellectual appeal to some nobility of the artist who chops of his own volition, terrible sources be damned... doesn't fly. Let's see what happens if PSC posts literally the exact same image every day. Do you really believe that such a scenario would not make a difference in participation?

"Impossible!"

Idiot.

You're still wrong.

Many people have said that I am wrong, flat out. I have addressed those people and asked them why they think I'm wrong, but only one person has actually understood what that even means. Kudos to badcop for having an ounce of intellect.


Of course I hold the burden of proof. That's why I presented my argument in the very first post, with evidence to support it. But very VERY few people addressed my actual argument. Instead I got a lot of "You're wrong" with no reasoning behind it. When I got annoyed by those people, and when I responded to THEIR insults with some of my own, you took their side just because you don't know who the fuck I am. So why don't you take a step back and reevaluate exactly what the fuck is going on here.

Me: X is the problem, here is my reasoning and evidence
Others: It's not X. It's Y.
Me: I'm glad you have your own theory, but why doesn't my reason and evidence support X?
Others: Quit bitching!
Me: Fuck you, you're an idiot.

Answer the question. If every day we got the exact same image, what would happen to participation?

I never said we would be just fine using the exact same image every day. Who, exactly, are you arguing? I said the source image doesn't supply the motivation. The motivation needs to be there first.

When I play charades, I don't burst out, "Is that all you people got? Movies, books, and quotes?"

If I had the honor of meeting Terry Gilliam, my first question wouldn't be, "Didn't you get sick to death of statues when animating for Python?" I don't think he did.

Every beat up junker is a different beat up junker with different backgrounds, different vantage points, and different lighting.

For every chop, I have at least three other ideas I wish I had time for. Sometimes the inspiration comes three weeks too late.

People used to spend more time at their computers. Now they roam about in the real world with iPhones and other mobile technologies. When chopping becomes really convenient to do out and about, interest may rise again. Not many people sit at a desktop anymore. I think that is a big part of it.

We've already had this argument... I get it..
You don't want to hear why PSC is failing, you want to hear why your 'theory' is wrong...
SO I actually decided to give you examples the past few pages as to WHY you're wrong....
BUT since you glossed over it AGAIN. I'll make it bigger for you. so maybe it will be easier to read while being stoned.



Did ya get it that time pothead? we could vote for a car 15 days in a row... that doesn't mean that 15 days in a row we're going to see cars on the calendar. AND if we don't vote for what we like.. EVERY image approved by PSC will end up getting chopped eventually... Because again... WE as PSC users proved PSC with Stock Images for FREE. We have since I've been here... ONLY difference between 2006 and now is our ability to say NO, we don't like that image. PSC isn't in control of images either, and I don't think they were back in 2006. PSC allows a random generator chose the next 'approved' image.

If you want that changed, there will need to be someone at the helm doing that. Are you going to offer your free time to do this for nothing? Or would that get in the way of your bong time? So again, the argument is flawed. Advantage users have no control over WHEN a picture comes up on the calendar. We only control what images we like or dislike (disliked ones never make it to the calendar). So saying that we keep voting for the same sources over and over again is the ONLY reason why attendance is down is FALSE. Had you actually seen the images we had voted on the past few weeks, you'd know that you were wrong. But you have no IDEA what images are coming up for us to vote on, so you're basing YOUR FACTS on on some pot induced THEORY. Look, I used to smoke pot back in the day.. and boy I could come up with some great theories on everything... that doesn't make them TRUE.

Here's where taking different kinds pictures comes into our argument we are having... and IS a valid point... BECAUSE it is the advantage end user who provides these sources to PSC for FREE. IF we take different sorts of pictures than what's been the 'norm'... THEN we'll have different sources to chop... eventually. Will that bring back the masses? no, it will not. Again, there are much larger problems than your little source image voting here. Many to do with PSC, many not to do with it...

Like Cringer said. You could do 15 cars, and they could each have different vantage points, different subjects thus different ideas. Just because your brain is limited by your pot smoking, doesn't mean that this whole place is desolate because of ONE thing. If you truly believe that... you sir are a dumbass, and one hell of a strawman arguer.