Nothing in the least against pro_junior as I love most of the stuff he posts but, should a picture probably be up on the site for more than ~12 hours before being chosen as IOTW?

Nope. I believe the IOTW is a subjective choice of DK, so if he likes it it doesn't matter how long it had been up.

Actually it's subjective of me When I chose it, it was at the top of the week's voting section of the Top List, and it's a cool pic, hence it was chosen.

MOSTLY I choose them from the previous 7 days, but it doesn't matter when in the last 7 days.. though I'm not against choosing them from any time in history (I consider it more a 'featured image' than 'image of the past 7 days').

That said, feel free to suggest some.

As ya wish [plus613.net]

pulse Wrote:

> That said, feel free to suggest some.

I thought that by voting that is what we were doing, suggesting some

Onyma Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> pulse Wrote:
>
> > That said, feel free to suggest some.
>
> I thought that by voting that is what we were
> doing, suggesting some


I agree with you Onyma. The voting system is meant to be users choosing what images stand out among others. Unfortunately me and pulse disagree if this should define what images are chosen for IOTW.

I'm gonna side with pulse...at least for this week

As I said, I believe it should be a 'featured image' rather than 'best image uploaded this week'. That's what it was since the site was created.

Besides which, the measures you use (the SQL query) will ALWAYS side with an older image (as it will have had more votes if uploaded on the 1st day of the week than the 5th) which means your results will always be skewed.

Before you did IOTW for the 2 weeks, I always treated it as a featured image (I doubt I ever chose one uploaded in that week). I try and choose them from the past 7 days now, but still I don't like the popularity vote as it will never work out properly. The older the image, the more votes it has, thus the more chance of IOTW status. It doesn't work. Plus using that method has resulted in some REALLY fucking crap images being chosen by the system as 10 x 1 vote ranks higher than 9 x 5 votes.

Think of a way to bypass that issue (and no I don't think average votes per day is useful either) & I'll consider it. Until then,

also consider...there have been several times where I have posted, or seen others post, 5 to 10 or so pics in a row and almost immediately some douchebag gives them all a 1...
now I understand voting a 1 if you don't like the picture, that's fine...but alot of the time when I post a string of pics, they are completely unrelated to one another so it would seem a bit strange that someone would dislike them all...
this would suggest that the voting doesn't necessarily always indicate the quality of the picture so much as the popularity of the uploader...

Yeah, it's all very subjective. There's a LOT of things at play with image votes & ratings, such as age of image, uploader of image etc.

For example, we always set it so that an image had to have a certain amount of votes (I think 20?) before it would appear in the 'top list' for highest rating images, otherwise every image that gets a single 5 star vote would be in there. It just can't work effectively like that.

I've proposed to DK we rename IOTW to be "Featured Image Of The Week" (FIOTW) and possibly in the write up for it we can have a link to the highest AVERAGE rated image of the week as well (in a similar way to how we have the "click here to upload your own images" type of link) .. otherwise maybe we could have a small thumbnail or something below the current IOTW box showing what it is, I don't know.

I'm happy to change what it's called & the way things go, but I'm not likely to change my opinion on what the main portion of the front page should consist of, and that's a GOOD image, not just one that's been voted high, otherwise it's simply too easy to be abused.