Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Appeals Policy/proceedure  
User currently offlineTonyholt777 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2010, 185 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3402 times:

Hi

I want to seek views/clarification on how the appeals function works and how potentially it can be enhanced.

Recently Demand Media stated they wanted to make the site more flexible which was welcomed and discussed at length here.

So, when you appeal a photo at present it is sent into the Head Screeners queue and it is appraised by one or many yes?

The appealed comments are considered and the photo reviewed. Your appeal is either upheld or rejected.

However, as discussed (again previously), people are finding that the photo is actually assessed as a 'new' upload and anything or everything is considered.

This seems at odds with basic justice - You appeal your sentence on specifics and any judgments are based on your appeal submission (common law) _ I feel this is important because you have submitted your appeal in good faith based on the comments you have received.

To make my point I will use one of my own (and mods pls don't remove this because it is part of my debate).

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...714_g-euxh_eddt_sunsetapproach.jpg

It was a difficult shot but I thought told a good story of the night/dusk approach to Berlin (Tegel) putting the viewer into the space/time.

I am then bounced by the first screener. "too dark and not enough a/c in the picture"

Ok I didn't agree and submitted an appeal immediately.

Then on appeal this: "Dark, Motive removed, but it needs some CW rotation."

Ok my arguments accepted but I am now told there's another issue. However, I don't agree.

There appears to be nowhere turn at this point. The mail is actually anonymous, it doesn't tell me who or whom says its unlevel; the basis of the 'level' rejection and hence I cannot argue my point (I was there at the time don't forget)

So how is this working or not for you AND is there time for a policy change/review of the appeals process?

cheers Tony

[Edited 2013-08-05 09:10:04]

33 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10029 posts, RR: 26
Reply 1, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3402 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'm not entirely sure I understand your point. Or perhaps just don't agree.

Sometimes screeners miss things, and sometimes we're too critical - we're human, it happens, and that's what appeals are for. In your case, based on the Head Screeners' judgment, the photo should originally have been rejected for level, but not motive or dark. If it were my photo, I'd take that as a win, as basically they are saying that your photo deserves to be in the DB, but just needs a bit of rotation to bring it in line with standards.

Think about the alternative:

Your shot is appealed, and the motive and dark rejections are determined to be invalid. The Head Screeners feel it needs some rotation, but they can't say that because it wasn't originally rejected for that. So they have to add it, and now we have an unlevel shot in the DB. Then we start getting photographer complaints about screener inconsistency, because their shot was rejected for level and yours wasn't.....

One could say it's a lose-lose for the screeners, but I think the only way to assure consistency is to reject if it's felt that rejection is warranted, even if the first screener didn't pick up on said reason.

Keep in mind also that all screeners see the result of appeals, which is good for calibration of our screening.

With all that said, what would you suggest as an alternative?



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineTonyholt777 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2010, 185 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3316 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 1):

I'm not entirely sure I understand your point. Or perhaps just don't agree.

Seems you don't agree.

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 1):
Sometimes screeners miss things, and sometimes we're too critical - we're human, it happens, and that's what appeals are for. I

Sure, thats my point about a review of the policy.

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 1):
In your case, based on the Head Screeners' judgment, the photo should originally have been rejected for level, but not motive or dark.

Fair enough however, I don't agree with the new category which at best is subjective and in my view wrong so where do I turn now?

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 1):
Then we start getting photographer complaints about screener inconsistency,

Don't you just. Well covered in previous threads because it true.

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 1):
One could say it's a lose-lose for the screeners

Only if they put their heads in the sand . All things considered Vik you at least took the time to respond which is useful however, it doesn't address the point because if Demand Media want more hits on this site they need to be confident in their policy/procedures.

You cannot reject images, uphold the argument(s) on appeal and then not allow a response to any new categories applied _ fairly simple stuff really.

tony


User currently offlinestevemchey From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 369 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3310 times:

I think Vik made a very solid point. Yes, we all hate to get a "new" rejection reason after an appeal (or re-upload) but I would prefer that over inconsistent screening. Sometimes the first screener just focuses on the more glaring problems and the more minute issues come out on second examination.

That all being said, I would be glad if I were you. Since the motive and dark rejections have been dropped, a level rejection is much easier to fix for a re-upload.


User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12566 posts, RR: 46
Reply 4, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3308 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Tonyholt777 (Thread starter):
There appears to be nowhere turn at this point.

Yes there is - fix the problem and resubmit. Easy.

Quoting Tonyholt777 (Reply 2):
You cannot reject images, uphold the argument(s) on appeal and then not allow a response to any new categories applied _ fairly simple stuff really.

The appeal is a one-shot process, it's not iterative. There's no process for appealing a rejected appeal. It makes sense in all honesty, since the appeals are handled by the Head Screeners - if they say something is wrong, it most likely is and appealing their rejection will not change their view.

If your appeal is rejected, you either give up on that shot or re-work it, upload and try again.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10029 posts, RR: 26
Reply 5, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3298 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Tonyholt777 (Reply 2):
Seems you don't agree.

You're right, I don't.  
Quoting Tonyholt777 (Reply 2):
Only if they put their heads in the sand . All things considered Vik you at least took the time to respond which is useful however, it doesn't address the point because if Demand Media want more hits on this site they need to be confident in their policy/procedures.

You cannot reject images, uphold the argument(s) on appeal and then not allow a response to any new categories applied _ fairly simple stuff really.

Well, I'm not a Demand Media spokesman, but I'm pretty confident in the policy/procedure. The Head Screeners are, well, just that - the Head Screeners. If they make a ruling, it stands.

Now, we do discuss both acceptances and rejections within the Quality Team and Head Screeners. This is part of ensuring consistency in both acceptances and rejections. But again, the Head Screeners are the bosses.

Anyway, Steve put it pretty well:

Quoting scbriml (Reply 4):
It makes sense in all honesty, since the appeals are handled by the Head Screeners - if they say something is wrong, it most likely is and appealing their rejection will not change their view.

We could have an appeal of an appeal, and then an appeal of the appeal of the appeal, ad infinitum. Obviously that's not the way to go. I think the current process, including the Quality Team, is quite effective.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineangad84 From India, joined Nov 2012, 859 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3274 times:

I've been burned a couple of times by the appeal process as well. You get a rejection for something like "grainy" and think it's not too bad, put in an appeal and it comes back like one of my multi-variable calculus exams - full of red ink!

On the other hand, once I get over the initial disappointment, it shows me that the head screeners are giving the images in the appeal queue a LOT of attention, which is good for photographers and the quality of the DB. I'm more than happy to live with that.

I think Vik's first response perfectly summed up why it would be difficult, if not impossible, to revamp the appeals system.

Cheers
Angad


User currently offlineTonyholt777 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2010, 185 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 3256 times:

Quoting stevemchey (Reply 3):
I think Vik made a very solid point. Yes, we all hate to get a "new" rejection reason after an appeal (or re-upload) but I would prefer that over inconsistent screening. Sometimes the first screener just focuses on the more glaring problems and the more minute issues come out on second examination.

That makes no sense at all _ What glaring issues are you referring too? Dark/Motive? Well those seems to have been wrong. Unlevel a minor issue (according to head screeners) well its not. Please feel free to point out where the image is unlevel? Actually anyone feel free, because so far no one has.

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 5):
Well, I'm not a Demand Media spokesman, but I'm pretty confident in the policy/procedure

Ok Vik, accept your point however, I don't agree that the policy/procedure is right and that because someone is appointed a judge doesnt make their decision right either. What is important tho is the right to reply and under current policy thats denied.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 4):
Yes there is - fix the problem and resubmit. Easy.

There's no problem to fix - the point above stands (right to reply). No its not about multiple appeals just the right to reply to something.

Tony


User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10029 posts, RR: 26
Reply 8, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3245 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Tonyholt777 (Reply 7):
Ok Vik, accept your point however, I don't agree that the policy/procedure is right and that because someone is appointed a judge doesnt make their decision right either. What is important tho is the right to reply and under current policy thats denied.

Tony, you are free to email the Head Screeners or post in the Feedback Forum should you wish to inquire regarding said rejection. That would be the avenue to pursue if you would like more information.

Quoting Tonyholt777 (Reply 7):
Please feel free to point out where the image is unlevel? Actually anyone feel free, because so far no one has.

Because that didn't seem to be the focus of your post. I thought we were addressing the process, rather than the specific image.

For what it's worth, it does appear to need a bit of CW. It's a great shot, and I hope you see fit to upload it again.

All that said, I asked in my first post what you would suggest as an alternative. That wasn't a rhetorical question - if you have an idea, please feel free to suggest it.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12566 posts, RR: 46
Reply 9, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3225 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Tonyholt777 (Reply 7):
No its not about multiple appeals just the right to reply to something.

Well, there's always email. But what exactly are you going to reply? "My shot was rejected for level. I think it is level." "Sorry, it's not level, it needs CW." Frankly, I'm struggling to see the point. Fix the shot and upload it again. Move on.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineTonyholt777 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2010, 185 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3103 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 8):
All that said, I asked in my first post what you would suggest as an alternative. That wasn't a rhetorical question - if you have an idea, please feel free to suggest it.

Hi Vik I do - please give the photographer the option to appeal direct to the 'reviewer' if they feel any new rejection to be wrong.

regards Tony


User currently offlineairkas1 From Netherlands, joined Dec 2003, 3992 posts, RR: 55
Reply 11, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3078 times:

Quoting Tonyholt777 (Reply 7):
Please feel free to point out where the image is unlevel? Actually anyone feel free, because so far no one has.



Note how the red dots are almost on entirely different lines. Needless to say, I agree with the level and its an easy fix.
TIP: For window shots, I include leveling by horizon (if possible) in my standard workflow. Shouldn't take more than a minute to figure out the right adjustment.





[Edited 2013-08-11 13:23:37]

User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3071 times:

That's an interesting image (if indeed we are referring to the 'out-of-the-window' shot linked in the first post - I've not read all replies); there really is no right or wrong here. At first glance it appears to require slight CW rotation - but if you look at every building in the image they all lean slightly to the right - which would actually suggest CCW rotation.

Screeners are not always right. Neither are photographers. There is no way of proving whether this image is level or not, so ignoring for now any other 'faults' the level issue should be overlooked.

Anyone professing to know 100% whether this image is technically unlevel is either a bit of a know-all or very pretentious indeed. Unfortunately Tony I see a few other issues which I personally find limit the photo's appeal.

Just do what I do these days: upload when you feel like it and not get concerned about rejections. I've begun to enjoy this hobby much more without A.net lately.

Karl


User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10029 posts, RR: 26
Reply 13, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3022 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Tonyholt777 (Reply 10):
Hi Vik I do - please give the photographer the option to appeal direct to the 'reviewer' if they feel any new rejection to be wrong.

Thanks for the input. Unfortunately, as stated, the head screeners have already reviewed your rejection and determined that it needs CW rotation. Appealing to the head screeners again is likely a rather futile idea. And to be perfectly frank, it's a bad idea in terms of time and resources as well. If everyone appealed his/her appeal, suddenly the appeal queue gets twice as long. And then again, what's to stop people appealing the appeal of an appeal?

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 13):
There is no way of proving whether this image is level or not, so ignoring for now any other 'faults' the level issue should be overlooked.

There is "no way of proving" a lot of things about an image - like color, sharpness, contrast, brightness, etc., because opinions will be different. Even dust spots and heat haze can be contentious issues! With that said, we can argue this around in circles forever, but it seems a lot easier to either "fix" the photo and resubmit, or just let this one go and move on.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 13):

Just do what I do these days: upload when you feel like it and not get concerned about rejections. I've begun to enjoy this hobby much more without A.net lately.

I'll say what I always say - upload what you want, be happy about acceptances, don't worry about rejections. It's just a website.

Quoting Tonyholt777 (Reply 11):

Other than that - shut up!

Come on Tony, you asked for opinions.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12566 posts, RR: 46
Reply 14, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 2969 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Tonyholt777 (Reply 11):
Feel free to tell me in your 'experience' where it needs CW?

Tony, it's not me that said your shot needs CW, it was the Head Screeners, so your little snipe is aimed at the wrong person.

Quoting Tonyholt777 (Reply 11):
Other than that - shut up!

With pleasure.   



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineAlexC From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2007, 60 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 2942 times:

I really can't see the problem. The image does need a slight degree of levelling. If you want it on on the D/B why not just carry out the adjustment and re-submit? And please don't tell me to shut up as well, it's not very polite!

User currently offlinestealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5696 posts, RR: 44
Reply 16, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 2941 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Tonyholt777 (Reply 11):
Feel free to tell me in your 'experience' where it needs CW?

Pretty easy to see the image was unlevel.. looked that way to me on first viewing
AirKas1 just managed to quantify it

Quoting Tonyholt777 (Reply 11):
Other than that - shut up!

Unpleasantly harsh response to folk that are trying to discuss what is a fairly flimsy premise, one that seems based on hurt pride.



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 17, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 2908 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 14):
heat haze can be contentious issues

Not really. It's either there or it's not. In my opinion there are way too many heat-hazed shots here. But that's just my opinion, of course.

Quoting stealthz (Reply 17):
Pretty easy to see the image was unlevel.. looked that way to me on first viewing

At first glance it LOOKS unlevel - but that doesn't mean it IS unlevel. Like I say, just look at the buildings. Unless the Germans build all their tall structures with a slight lean to the right, I'd say it theoretically requires CCW. Sometimes there is no way around physics. Horizons - unless they are water - are not always reliable.

That said, it doesn't 'feel' level - and since much of the emphasis here is on the 'feel' of an image it's perhaps best just to re-level and re-submit.

In this instance I don't think the heads are actually saying it's technically unlevel (I hope not because that would be like them saying they know God exists!); they appear to be saying that it just isn't levelled according to the site's preferences.

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 14):
be happy about acceptances

I suppose. But you should be happier you got the shot in the first place. That's the bit that matters to me.

Karl


User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10029 posts, RR: 26
Reply 18, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 2888 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 18):

Not really. It's either there or it's not. In my opinion there are way too many heat-hazed shots here. But that's just my opinion, of course.

Thanks for supporting my point Karl.   Opinions vary - therefore it can be contentious.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 18):
they appear to be saying that it just isn't levelled according to the site's preferences.

That is all we are ever saying.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 18):
I suppose. But you should be happier you got the shot in the first place. That's the bit that matters to me.

Of course. You don't have to be happy about acceptances. Just a suggestion.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 18):
Like I say, just look at the buildings. Unless the Germans build all their tall structures with a slight lean to the right, I'd say it theoretically requires CCW. Sometimes there is no way around physics. Horizons - unless they are water - are not always reliable.

I zoomed way in on it last night, and I didn't see that many buildings that were leaning to the right. Nevertheless, in shots such as that, we typically use the horizon for judging level.

Anyway, I think we've just about exhausted a discussion on this image/point.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinelen90 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 580 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week ago) and read 2811 times:

Hey Vik,

Don't want to beat a dead horse, but wasn't there something where once a picture is appealed that is it, like the picture is no longer listed in your rejected photos or selectable for appeal. If not, then I think that might be a good idea to implement.

As to the OP, I personally would just adjust the level using the advice given. Probably only comes out to 0.25-0.5 degrees clockwise.



Len90
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10029 posts, RR: 26
Reply 20, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week ago) and read 2808 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting len90 (Reply 19):
Don't want to beat a dead horse, but wasn't there something where once a picture is appealed that is it, like the picture is no longer listed in your rejected photos or selectable for appeal. If not, then I think that might be a good idea to implement.

If I'm understanding you correctly, then I suggest you read over the thread. I've already stated why there's no option to appeal an appeal - that's exactly what we've been discussing.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinelen90 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 580 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2803 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 20):

Yes read over the thread and agree. Had I rechecked my rejected pictures I would have answered my own question. Appealed pictures are removed from the rejected list to prevent appealing an appeal. Sorry to bother...



Len90
User currently offlinehenkita217 From Australia, joined Apr 2007, 390 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2663 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi All,

Funnily enough, I have just had a similar experience/feeling..

Had this photo rejected for heat haze affecting the aircraft.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/APPEAL_20130813_a1375341351.8366dq-fju_03-1280_fijiairways_a332.jpg

I appealed, because I disagree and felt it was unfair to blame the photo on heat haze, when it could've been jet wash from the engines as there are more areas that are sharp, than not. Anyway, this is not the main point of the story.

The appeal was rejected, and a reason was added to rejection list which puzzled me, motive, not the nicest angles/crops.

Had this been my first upload of such angle/crop, I would've accepted the advise and moved on..
However, I have similar photos in the database already, with similar crops/angles.. so this is where we need to seek clarification from the Heads about his actions.

Other photos:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Hendra Barnes


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Hendra Barnes



Because of the two accepted photos, it is difficult for me to accept such critique and move on.. I think I have the rights to, no?

Cheers,
Hendra


User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 23, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2587 times:

Hendra,

Must admit, I'm not keen on the light in your latest image, and the crops are a little better left-hand-side in your two accepted images.

As for heat-haze, it's almost laughable the amount of truly hazed images sneaking in lately. Yeah, there's a touch of engine exhaust here but it's perfectly natural and doesn't in my opinion affect a disturbing portion of the image.

Unfortunately for me the light kills it; add the more awkward crop too and I doubt you've got much of a case.

Cheers,

Karl


User currently onlineaussie18 From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 1747 posts, RR: 9
Reply 24, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 2585 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 23):
As for heat-haze, it's almost laughable the amount of truly hazed images sneaking in lately. Yeah, there's a touch of engine exhaust here but it's perfectly natural and doesn't in my opinion affect a disturbing portion of the image.

Karl, If it is so laughable than how about sending the quality team a email and maybe we can get something done about these heat haze affected images.

The email is - quality@airliners.net

Part of what the quality team is doing is checking accepted/rejected images and trying to make improvements and making things more consistent across the board for all so we do appreciate if members from the photographer community who find images that may have quality issues to please send the link to the quality team and we can check them out.


Cheers Mark


User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 25, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 2588 times:

Quoting aussie18 (Reply 24):
Karl, If it is so laughable than how about sending the quality team a email and maybe we can get something done about these heat haze affected images.

Because it's not something I'm overly concerned about these days. It's up to the site if it wants to accept such images; it's nothing whatsoever to do with me. I was an advocate of change, and I got it. Whether things have genuinely improved for the better I really don't know yet - it's too early to tell but, apart from a few rogue images still getting in, so far so good.

As I've said previously, I hope the revisions don't mean that poorer images are making it in. When the changes first came about there was some rubbish (sorry, I can describe it no other way) being given the green light but I'll be honest and say that some level of consistency appears to have been found again.

Karl


User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10029 posts, RR: 26
Reply 26, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2561 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 25):
Because it's not something I'm overly concerned about these days.

Then why consistently bring it up, honestly? As Mark said, if people see images they think shouldn't be in the DB, we'd appreciate emails about it so we can look into them. That's a large part of what the Quality Team is there for.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineflyer408 From Germany, joined Jun 2010, 19 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2568 times:

Is it the Quality Team's main work to check all pics ever uploaded to the DB if their acceptance was justified? Or are the doors now open for denunciation? Just curious...

User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 28, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2565 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 26):
Then why consistently bring it up, honestly?

If you're trying to psycho-analyse me it's not proving accurate. If you have a theory that I secretly find A.net to be the most important thing about my hobby, that's fine. I can assure you that I really aren't bothered what goes on here as I have more pressing priorities.

I would have thought my recent silence and lack of uploads would have been indicative of my stance. The site accepts what it wants; what it thinks will muster views. It's got nothing to do with me. Besides, I'm sure the team is capable of rooting out below-par images without my help, should it be so inclined.

Karl


User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10029 posts, RR: 26
Reply 29, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2548 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 28):
If you're trying to psycho-analyse me it's not proving accurate.

No Karl, not at all trying to psycho-analyze, and I don't have any theories about you or your hobby. Just have seen the same comment about heat haze over and over, and like I said, why not email us with some of the allegedly offending images so we can take a look? It would be helpful to us, and the worst thing that could happen is we simply disagree.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 28):
I would have thought my recent silence and lack of uploads would have been indicative of my stance

I honestly don't keep track of who's posting or uploading, and I wouldn't pretend to know the reasons for it anyway.

Quoting flyer408 (Reply 27):
Is it the Quality Team's main work to check all pics ever uploaded to the DB if their acceptance was justified?

No. The ultimate goal is to ensure consistency and establish/modify acceptance standards as needed. Part of that is monitoring accepted and rejected photos, and discussing them if there are relevant issues. We're not going to be going through 2,000,000+ photos to see if they all should have been accepted.  
Quoting flyer408 (Reply 27):
Or are the doors now open for denunciation?

Can you clarify what you mean?



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 30, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2543 times:

Vik,

I'm assuming the quality team does have genuine concerns about the quality of accepted images? If this is the case then I don't mind linking any images I feel are not up-to-scratch - but on an 'as I go' basis as it's quite a big task sifting through the database to relocate those I've found already. I don't go looking for offending images - they kind of find me by simply catching my attention. Should any cross my path in the future I'll try to raise the issues.

Karl


User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10029 posts, RR: 26
Reply 31, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2515 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 30):
I'm assuming the quality team does have genuine concerns about the quality of accepted images?

As was stated in the announcement of the formation of the team, part of its responsibility is ensuring acceptances and rejections are warranted and consistent.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 30):
If this is the case then I don't mind linking any images I feel are not up-to-scratch - but on an 'as I go' basis as it's quite a big task sifting through the database to relocate those I've found already. I don't go looking for offending images - they kind of find me by simply catching my attention. Should any cross my path in the future I'll try to raise the issues.

Much appreciated. We're not asking anyone to go looking through the DB for questionable images - that's not really the goal. But if you happen to run across any, feel free to bring them to the team's attention.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinederekf From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 912 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (1 year 1 month 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 2488 times:

I have to say that I feel slightly uncomfortable with the thought of non-screeners trawling through the datbase flagging up images that they perceive as being unaaceptable.
If this quality team find rejected images that should have been accepted, will they then be uploaded or will the uploader be informed? And are we seriously saying that they will delete previously accepted images? An e-mail to the photographer to re-upload an improved image would be much better.

( I would have added this to the other screening criteria thread but this useless forum has locked it after 28 days(???)



Whatever.......
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10029 posts, RR: 26
Reply 33, posted (1 year 1 month 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2483 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting derekf (Reply 32):
I have to say that I feel slightly uncomfortable with the thought of non-screeners trawling through the datbase flagging up images that they perceive as being unaaceptable.

Again, not the point. IF folks happen to see images they have questions/concerns about, they are welcome to email the Quality Team about them. That's it. Besides which, just because someone contacts us about an image doesn't mean it will automatically be removed.

Quoting derekf (Reply 32):
If this quality team find rejected images that should have been accepted, will they then be uploaded or will the uploader be informed? And are we seriously saying that they will delete previously accepted images? An e-mail to the photographer to re-upload an improved image would be much better.

If it's something correctable like dust spots or level, we do typically ask the photographer for a reupload rather than just delete the image.

For images that were rejected but should have been added, I think sometimes we'll ask the photographer to appeal it. If it's beyond the appeal window, we can always ask them to upload it again.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Annoyed About Photo Caption Policy. Explanation? posted Sat Dec 13 2008 08:12:54 by JakTrax
New Terms Of Use And Privacy Policy posted Wed Mar 5 2008 15:42:05 by Flyheligirl
Review Only - New Privacy Policy posted Thu Feb 21 2008 15:03:56 by Flyheligirl
Upload Guidelines, Appeals, And Fairness posted Mon May 21 2007 21:02:44 by Viv
Percentage/rejection And Appeals. posted Sat Aug 26 2006 23:03:02 by LHRSIMON
Appeals - Ever Successful? posted Tue Aug 8 2006 05:14:52 by D L X
A Plea For An Improved Appeals Process posted Sat May 20 2006 11:20:09 by Edoca
Head Screeners Now Handling The Appeals posted Fri Mar 11 2005 23:52:18 by Administrator
Appeals To Johan posted Thu Sep 30 2004 16:41:56 by Nbseer
AA's New Photography Policy? (flights From Hell) posted Sat Aug 7 2004 05:02:42 by United4everDEN