posted this on March 26, 2012 17:20
Currently, when a photo is in negative for 7 days, it is removed automatically and the nominator loses 5 points. With the new system, it has become next to impossible for us to track our photos like before. Also, the perennial problem of just one person determining the outcome of the nominated photo, especially for less popular articles remain. Now, with no penalty for down voting, unless one voted wrongly, there is even less consideration for down voting. In fact, the current system further encourages one to down vote a negative photo in knowledge that it will be removed in 7 days and the down voters will earn extra points. We really cannot expect every member of the community to vote with conscience all the time, especially in an environment where points have become so much harder to earn. Whilst points are not everything, looking at the recent feedback, it is also not nothing and we have to be realistic about this.
I would like to suggest that the 7 day limit be removed. In the current system where every 2 down votes translates to -1 point, which is equivalent to 5 up votes, the decision should be given to the nominator whether he/she wants to keep the negative photo in the article and for how long. Should the nominator decides and hope for a turn around, he/she would have paid a price if the photo gets down voted further. Most importantly, in the process, the nominator can be convinced, and is allowed to be, that the photo indeed is not good enough in a consensus opinion and not on the basis of solely 1 voter.
However, we do not at the same time want the site to be clogged with negatively voted photos. This is especially so in situation where the nominator has disappeared for a period of time, or forever. We can set a negative point limit at say -10, which is 20 down votes. At this point, the nominator is at least assured that the decision was decided by several members. The automatically removed photo should also not be further penalized with -5 points as sufficient point penalty would have been exacted on the nominator by then. More importantly, it frees us up from having to monitor every photos so closely, which is time consuming, counter productive and it simply serves no purpose. We need a system to penalize for bad photo nominating decision, but not to the point of discouraging members of nominating in the first place.