Sven: Yeah, 6.3/6 photos per photographer in the current queue is within the suggested 10 photo upload limit. However, it's not evenly divided, and with the limit, photographers that have uploaded in excess of 20 photos will be forced to self screen and submit the best of their best.
This may be a little 'ignorant' of me to say, but photographers with more than 50 or 100 photos on this site obviously have more...stamina, if you will...or are able to come to terms with their rejections and will not go to seek revenge on the screeners by means of uploading $hit shots as a 'newbie' might. Then again, some people might be genuinely trying to fix and reupload their photos.
An uploading limit is definately one of the only plausable options, but the benefits of devising a system to 'calculate' each photographer's allowances probably will not make such limits practical. Then again, I don't know what the crew is capable of concocting.
If a set limit, applacable for all photographers (horse-$hit and honored alike), is established--for instance, 10 photos--, it would be unfair and unreasonable to the talented and professional among us. The queue would be shorter, yes, but still. Even then, the queue could still be bombarded with 10 photos from 10 sarcastic uploaders each, adding 100 pieces of crap to the queue, slowing it down. Regardless of the limit. And, as a result, those with photos actually worthy of being looked at in the first place still suffer.
Simple solution, to try first and foremost, is just to reiterate the policy in so many words. Maybe as such:
-First page, with 'uploading rules', statistics, and the final link at the bottom, to upload photos.
-Second page, new page, where in a bold, size 20 font it says something to the effect of, "A PROCESS OF SELF-SCREENING IS HIGHLY RECCOMENDED. UPLOADING TASTELESS PHOTOS, NON REVELANT PHOTOS, OR PHOTOS WHICH ARE CLEARLY IN CONFLICT WITH THE ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA WILL RESULT IN
(insert some witty comment/punishment here)"
...and that's just being nice. Maybe even put one of those check boxes at the bottom, saying that you agree to it.
-Third page, the form to upload a photo.
As far as people just checking the box to proceed and upload without reading the warning, I remember I installed a program where if you did not scroll to the bottom of the agreement thing...actually scroll to the bottom, and you checked the box to continue, you would get a popup saying, "You did not read the agreement. Please go back and make sure you thoroughly understand it, then continue".
Oh, and as far as Johan or the crew being hesitant to an uploading limit. How far off is it, if there's already a two-photo limit to the appeal queue? If anything, Johan's reputation for rejecting appealed shots is well established, and something of that nature is better used for the screeners.
[Edited 2004-04-13 22:12:44]