Gallery Stats - let's revisit
View previous topic | View next topic >
Post new topic Reply to topic
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Admin Discussion
   
Author Message

Joined: August 23, 2004
Posts: 1491
Submissions: 0

Gallery Stats - let's revisit
Reply with quote
Posted on Sat Aug 02, 2008 6:12 pm || Last edited by Former_Gallery_Admin on Sat Aug 02, 2008 9:24 pm; edited 1 time in total
Link to Post: Link to Post

Hey guys, I know that some time ago (and before my time on the BOD obviously) the issue of adding stats to gallery submissions was brought up and a vote held to make it mandatory for all Gallery subs to have stats listed in their description. While I can understand that some people might find this helpful in order to duplicate something in the Gallery, or figure out how to make it, I'd personally like to see the requirement go away.

I'd say that roughly 7 out of 10 subs get held up in the queue while we wait for stats. It takes about 3 minutes per submission to list a comment saying why it wasn't approved, and then another 2-3 minutes to send a pm requesting the information from the submitter. While this may not seem like a lot of time, consider that most people will submit multiple items at once. It's easy to loose an hour or two a day just listing comments and requesting information, that 9 times out of 10 never comes.

Another issue I have with requiring stats for Gallery subs is it just seems unnecessary. If someone wants to copy something, well, they should have to work for it. I think if we're going to require stats anywhere it should be in weave submissions. There's a bajillion weaves with no listed AR's or ID's; and yet somehow people still figure out how to make the weaves, but I bet a lot of folks would find it more helpful to have the AR's or ID's listed in the weaves to give them somewhere to start.

I'm not suggesting we require stats on weaves, but I would like to test the waters here with other admins and see how they feel about doing away with requiring Gallery stats.

Joined: August 10, 2005
Posts: 7098
Submissions: 337
Location: UK

Reply with quote
Posted on Sat Aug 02, 2008 6:34 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Seems sensible to me!


Maille Code
V2.0 T7.3 R5.4 Ep Feur MAg/Cu Wm$ Cbjpw$ G0.5/3.0 I1.5/12.0 N322.150 Pajs Dacdjsw Xa7g631p4t24w64 S88 Hipsu

Joined: April 15, 2002
Posts: 1823
Submissions: 1
Location: Calgary, AB. Canada.

Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Aug 03, 2008 5:39 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

I'm in a rush here, but, briefly...

http://www.mailleartisans.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=1820 <-- Read that for history.

The threads linked to in that topic, have disappeared from the database somehow. I dug around a bit manually, but didn't have time to be more thorough. I remember those threads.

Anyway, Roxanne basically just decided it was going to be that way. The thread about it went on for quite some pages. Then, the charter was created around the same time, and since it was a bit of a hot topic, an issue poll and membership poll came into play, IIRC. In brief, Roxanne's reasoning:

"In case you don't know, I've made it almost mandatory that each submit has in it's details the metal/s used, wire gauge/measurements, ring ID and weave/s used. So many times i've gone through and seen stuff that just doesn't have it, and I would like to know what they used, so I could perhaps duplicate it. Having the details in the details also saves on space-wasting threads in Gallery asking "What are the stats on this one?"

The requirements I over-zealously implemented seem to be working alright, and the wording of the poll allows for them to be changed, if people so desire."

And, I think Bative said: "I belive we originally placed them, after seeing a larger increase of numbers, and submissions, that as each submission was dealt with, there were becoming more and more of these pictures with a blurry patch of chain, saying ' A Necklace' as a description. In order to properly categorize the new jewelery, and keep things in line without having an overflow of blurry non-sensical pictures, I think we need guidlines, not as 'requirements' (requirements meaning regulations in my eyes..) (because as we saw from David austins baskets, and the other sculptures, we could go on for ages listing sizes, metals, gauges etc) but as guidlines to help get your picture on-line quicker."

My memory's a bit fuzzy around it, maybe Blaise or Kim remember. I wasn't on the BOD back then, though that's when I was most active on the forums.

I do know that there are people who won't post pictures here because of our nazi-ish policies and waa waa, boo hoo. Personally, I didn't want to restrain from slapping any of them in the face anyway, IIRC they've all been rather worthless crybabies with a bone to pick with MAIL in general. Though, a reasonable person might also just not want to post stats.

People have mentioned to me they won't post here because they don't want to give away stats on their projects.

...

No free lunch. Planned upgrades to the site will solve these problems. Eventually.

In the meantime.. I have no problem scrapping them. I never liked them in the first place. I think I led the counter-argument during the debates.

If we do decide to scrap them, it's worthy of announcing. People specifically don't post because of it.

Joined: August 23, 2004
Posts: 1491
Submissions: 0

Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Aug 03, 2008 6:58 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

I went digging around before I posted today too, and found the same things you quoted. I've spoken with Kim about this subject in length over the last 2 years or so, and he was pretty specific that there had been an actual vote, and he was one of the few that voted no. Could be since there's only 6 pages of admin discussion for the last few years that in the last two upgrades and move a lot of threads are floating in the ether, the vote thread included. Could be it was one of those voting in a thread type of deals. *shrug*

Either way, even on the submission screen it says "where possible/applicable, please include the weave, materials,..."etc. So, realistically, it's not an actual policy or requirement, just sort of a general guideline.

Frankly, I don't think we should force anyone to post stats. But, that's the way it's been done for a few years now, and I'm loath to just change it up without getting everyone else's feed back on it.

Ultimately, I'd like to see stats as optional. All the other criteria of course have to be met, a big one to me being image size and clarity.

At the end of the day if the majority is agreeable to doing away with stat requirements, perhaps we could simply change the wording on the submission screen from "where possible/applicable" to "If you're so inclined" or some such.

Joined: April 15, 2002
Posts: 1823
Submissions: 1
Location: Calgary, AB. Canada.

Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Aug 03, 2008 8:01 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

I actually don't like a lot of what people write in the gallery blurbs. What I actually care the least about are the things they used.

But, the gallery submits are too tiny to be of much use anyway.

I don't see a problem with someone starting a thread to ask questions about an item all the time. Go nuts. TRL has that as the only way, and it works just fine for them, if not better than our way.

The plan is to move to a TRL-style project-thread for every gallery item, but to keep the gallery display itself. Like, a thumbnail to the thread about the item.

One of the dumbest things we have right now, is if you want to show 2 angles, you have to make 2 submissions. It should really be one link per project, with more details on the project.

The current system cannot handle what it needs to anyway, so, I don't see a point in forcing people to fill in info as if that gets us anywhere.

Y'know, I'd leave it up as a requirement, and only just loosely enforce it. If people read they have to add it, they do so. If they want to skip it, they do so. No point in having admins spend time on it and muck up the queue.

I'd rather have a text description of what the item is and such than a stats breakdown anyway.

Joined: April 29, 2002
Posts: 3213
Submissions: 93
Location: Albany, New York

Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Aug 03, 2008 2:03 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

I agree with Cynake. I say leave it there as leverage for when you get the "A picture of a thing" descriptions, but enforce it with greater flexibility in the future...


"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one."

— George Bernard Shaw
___________________________________

Maille Code V1.0 T5.7 R5.1 Fhd MCu Wc Cd G2.03/.56 I9.75/3.25 Pn Dacdjs S97 CCi

Joined: August 23, 2004
Posts: 1491
Submissions: 0

Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Aug 03, 2008 3:05 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Yeah, that sounds pretty reasonable.

Joined: June 21, 2002
Posts: 1682
Submissions: 72
Location: Idaho

Reply with quote
Posted on Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:48 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

I agree as well.

I like Kim's point on this subject. IIRC, he said basically that more detailed descriptions make for less skilled maillers. I like the thought that if you really want to copy a piece from the gallery, you ought to work for it and figure it out on your own.

Thank you, Jen, for bringing this up. This is a topic we've held off on for quite some time, and I'm glad it's finally being discussed.

~Mical~ Coif Smiley

Joined: August 10, 2005
Posts: 7098
Submissions: 337
Location: UK

Reply with quote
Posted on Wed Aug 06, 2008 12:58 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Agreed.
Kim said to me that for weave submissions they should have stats (or at least ARs) and a good description on how it's constructed. This was so that it could be reasonably reproduced to prove that it really was a new weave. However Gallery submissions don't really need that.


Maille Code
V2.0 T7.3 R5.4 Ep Feur MAg/Cu Wm$ Cbjpw$ G0.5/3.0 I1.5/12.0 N322.150 Pajs Dacdjsw Xa7g631p4t24w64 S88 Hipsu

Joined: February 15, 2002
Posts: 881
Submissions: 45
Location: Virginia Beach, VA

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Aug 07, 2008 1:19 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

No problems here... as long as the pictures are clear Very Happy


The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.--Bertrand Russell

Maille Code V2.0 T6.4 R5.4 E=o.o Fj6.2 MAl.a W$m C$b G0.5-2.6 I1.6-9.5 N20.26 Pn Dacjs Xa25g13w5 S00 CCu

Joined: August 02, 2005
Posts: 1894
Submissions: 14
Location: Arnett, Oklahoma

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Aug 07, 2008 11:50 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

I just woke up, so sorry if this has been pre clerafied...

If it's got the weave, possibly ring types and possibly gauge and id, we approve it? Pretty much as long as it has more than just "Dragon Scale Shirt" as the description?


I'll rise, but I won't shine.

Joined: August 23, 2004
Posts: 1491
Submissions: 0

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Aug 07, 2008 3:19 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

That's what I'm thinking. I really personally don't care if it has any of that information, as long as the picture is clear, large enough to see, and there is some kind of description beefier than "a necklace" or some such. Really I think that as long as the description has at least one actual stat listed it should be golden. Weave or weaves seem to me to be the most important, after that metal type and then AR or ring ID.

Truthfully, I really don't care about the description at all, but people seem to want a decent one with each submission and I'm happy to go with the flow there.

Joined: August 02, 2005
Posts: 1894
Submissions: 14
Location: Arnett, Oklahoma

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:01 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Gotcha!


I'll rise, but I won't shine.

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT. The time now is Fri Dec 06, 2019 4:34 pm
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Admin Discussion
Display posts from previous: