Can't take a few seconds to vote?

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Wehrkind**

I usually only vote for things I really like, >6. For lower stuff I feel kind of badly telling someone that, and I kind of suspect that most of the models that I feel there is a lot of feed back I could give might not be intended to get feed back. How often do people really want to hear "thin your paints" ? I don't know, but I don't assume that people post their models on the gallery to get my feed back in particular; I just assume that if the feedback is positive they will appreciate it, unsolicited or not.

**OrlandotheTechnicoloured**

Typically I don't think we actually see much of what I'd put in the 1-4 class in the gallery or anywhere

that's the inch thick layer of paint/nail varnish you find on those random minis you get in bags of bits from ebay

real first attempts or work by the very young

as to judging anything on technical ability, unless you are at least reasonably good you won't actually know the difference between 2 brush blending, feathering, glazing, dry brushing or whatever, all you'll see is a mini you like or you don't (and often that is influenced by what army/company made the mini)

Edit: I only occasionally look at the gallery (where I vote if I really like something I come across) or similar voting sites elsewhere like CMON, If I'm looking for inspiration I'd rather look at the P&M section where you also get an idea of what somebody is looking to achieve, whether it was a labour of love or a speed paint etc

**AllSeeingSkink**

oadie wrote:
For me, a useful voting system means training up the critical eye of the 'average user'. That won't happen, so the system fails.

The alternative is to have a lot of voters in order to balance things out. Rarely does an image get more than a handful of votes, so there's a huge variance. If we got 100 votes on an image, then it'd tend to balance out even to untrained eyes.

But we'll never get so many people voting.

**ScootyPuffJunior**

I enjoy voting on pictures in the Gallery and I often do it to pass time at work.

I don't often see people that have as many Gallery votes as I do, but there are a few that have commented in this thread, which warms my heart!

**Azazelx**

Alex Kolodotschko wrote:
Steelmage99 wrote:
Then again, why are votes important?.

Some people want validating. Sure. It can be a very insular hobby when not at the games club or unable to get to one for whatever reason.
I see votes as being important as a standardisation process.
If a tournament, only wants level 5 or above painting then they could get that. Rather than the dodgy 3 colour minimum.
Commission painters and clients could easily judge and price their standards rather than Gold, Silver, Bronze self appointed levels.
Auction descriptions could make a bit more sense than Pro Painted. We'll save that for 9.5s
With enough votes going into each image people would actually be able to see and improvement in their work and learn to better themselves.

You now that none of that is ever actually going to happen, don't you?

If you really want to encourage people to paint and get better, then I'd suggest that you spend some time in the P&M blog section of the forum, and especially offer encouragement to new and fledgling posters/threads. It's a bit more work than pressing a vote button - true - but the encouragement you can offer with a few words is far stronger than an anonymous vote in the gallery. It's something I consciously do from time to time as well, and offering encouragement and feedback is especially powerful when people have only a few posts in their thread, or their stuff lacks any posts from others at all.

**Pacific**

I quite often vote and comment, but just within a limited scope. Usually anything within the games I'm playing at the time (mostly historicals, Infinity etc.), and quite often because you know of the posters from that section of the forum and so can have some discussion with them.

The 'random picture' idea is great, but in practice about 95% of the stuff you come across is marines or marine-related, which start to tire after you have seen half a million pictures of pretty much the same thing over the past decade!

Also, the quality of some of the shots is pretty horrendous, and I can't understand people taking the time and effort to bother to upload them. This was (and this is honest) the first pic I got when I clicked on a random image just now:

Spoiler:

**BeAfraid**

Steelmage99 wrote:
Alex Kolodotschko wrote:
Steelmage99 wrote:
Then again, why are votes important?.

Some people want validating. Sure. It can be a very insular hobby when not at the games club or unable to get to one for whatever reason.
I see votes as being important as a standardisation process.
If a tournament, only wants level 5 or above painting then they could get that. Rather than the dodgy 3 colour minimum.
Commission painters and clients could easily judge and price their standards rather than Gold, Silver, Bronze self appointed levels.
Auction descriptions could make a bit more sense than Pro Painted. We'll save that for 9.5s
With enough votes going into each image people would actually be able to see and improvement in their work and learn to better themselves.

That is of course only relevant if there is a standard (that everybody uses) by which we vote, and a guide on how to judge those standards.
Assuming that people would then actually use such a standard and follow the guidelines, then you might have a point......but no such standard exists, so.....

This is why you want a lot of people voting.

Standards, otherwise known as "norms," exist because a population establishes them through a concensus.

The population does not need to be 100% educated about a specific topic, especially in cases where there is an amount of actual subjectivity.

But if you have a population that is a typical example of a general population (a set percententthat is educated, a set percent that is knowledgable but without education, a majority that is basically sensible but otherwise not greatly knowledgeable, and a small fraction of more fractious and divisive people - they just come with any population) then you will beta toe that "normalizes" (turns out to be the "norm") that population's "standards."

In other words... If enough people voted, then we WOULD get a reasonable set of standards that would be a very close approximation to an objective standard.

MB

Automatically Appended Next Post:

oadie wrote:
Pete Melvin wrote:
I vote regularly, but I dont use the coolness category.
Judging painting is subjective, painting "coolness" even more so.
I don't really agree with this (rather common) view, which is a large part of the reason why I stopped voting (which I used to make a point of doing). Coolness is entirely subjective, yes, but there are a number of consistent, quantifiable metrics voters can use for rating paintjobs. Individual scales would vary, somewhat, but that's what averages are for. The fact that there are TWO categories for voting should be telling, but the scores I see seem to point to an inability of voters to separate generalized likeability and technical skill.

Ever see a really creative and characterful conversion that looked like it was 'painted' by an epileptic ape using melted crayons? Somehow, the painting and coolness ratings always seem to balance out. What about a 'yet another boring tac marine' image? All other things being equal (image quality, sculpt, etc.), the coolness rating generally follows the painting score quite closely. There seems to be little point to the two categories if people don't treat them as two categories.

There are also the (related, I'd argue) issues of benchmarks and coddling. Past suggestions of any sort of instruction/standardization of scoring were shouted down rather violently. Nearly everyone wanted to have their own scale (e.g. 5 isn't the universal average - 5 is what I can do (I have no arms or brushes btw lol) and everything better sits between 8 and 9, since you can only get a 10 if a Golden Daemon trophy is also in the frame) and some simply thought less than positive feedback was mean. I've had two images receive wildly different scores... which were two shots of the same model from slightly different angles. Same camera, same lighting, same distance - just rotated the mini, a bit. What the hell is that supposed to tell me? Everyone needn't have a universal, completely rigid scale - we'd only need one vote per image, then. It'd help, though, if we were all on the same page. Same book, even.

A score is informative if the range is relatively small (barring the odd outlier, if we can assume sufficient votes) and the median and mode line up with the mean. A score is not informative if it's the average of one half honest ('harsh' to the feel-gooders) feedback and one half back-patting with a gold star sticker, for good measure. For scores to have meaning, 5 should be average work, not the average of 0s and 10s.

For me, a useful voting system means training up the critical eye of the 'average user'. That won't happen, so the system fails. Why pour time and effort into a failed system? Words carry context and nuance that numbers lack, so I see threads as a more useful avenue for feedback. If all the uploader wants is validation of his effort, making a thread will get him more and better.

TLDR: YOU consider voting important. You're wrong.

I was completely with you until that last paragraph.

As I explained above... If enough people vote, then the "weird" votes will balance out against the greater number of people who can see "Oh! This is the exact same mini, just rotated."

And those votes will balance out the extremes, and mediocrity as well (mediocrity can be an extreme in a community or population that rejects either expertise or failure).

MB

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Pacific wrote:
I quite often vote and comment, but just within a limited scope. Usually anything within the games I'm playing at the time (mostly historicals, Infinity etc.), and quite often because you know of the posters from that section of the forum and so can have some discussion with them.

The 'random picture' idea is great, but in practice about 95% of the stuff you come across is marines or marine-related, which start to tire after you have seen half a million pictures of pretty much the same thing over the past decade!

Also, the quality of some of the shots is pretty horrendous, and I can't understand people taking the time and effort to bother to upload them. This was (and this is honest) the first pic I got when I clicked on a random image just now:

Spoiler:

That is the saddest picture I have seen in a while (as in: it made me sad to see it).

Because those Marines look like they are painted quite well, but unless you knew what to look for, you might ever be able to tell from the images/photos here.

MB

**Azazelx**

Pacific wrote:
I quite often vote and comment, but just within a limited scope. Usually anything within the games I'm playing at the time (mostly historicals, Infinity etc.), and quite often because you know of the posters from that section of the forum and so can have some discussion with them.

The 'random picture' idea is great, but in practice about 95% of the stuff you come across is marines or marine-related, which start to tire after you have seen half a million pictures of pretty much the same thing over the past decade!

Also, the quality of some of the shots is pretty horrendous, and I can't understand people taking the time and effort to bother to upload them. This was (and this is honest) the first pic I got when I clicked on a random image just now:

Spoiler:

Well, that's obviously someone'e battle report photo, and so the context of it being hosted in the Dakka gallery could (and probably is) completely different to "look at my cool models". You do bring up a good point about Marines, though - how "cool" is a stock space marine? Some might say 0, because it's so very played. Others might still think that the design and execution of a plastic Space Marine is still pretty cool to them.

BeAfraid wrote:

Standards, otherwise known as "norms," exist because a population establishes them through a concensus.

Funny to see you talking about norms, after so heavily violated them in the Harad thread. Well, those were social norms. (protip: give criticism, even constructive criticism when it's asked for. Otherwise, follow Wehrkind's lead.) There are other, more subtle ways to suggest, but they might be more of a challenge.

In other words... If enough people voted, then we WOULD get a reasonable set of standards that would be a very close approximation to an objective standard.

As amusing as this thread is in terms of a way to spend a few minutes for entertainment purposes, asking/expecting or even hoping for the proportion of voting users to have any kind of significant increase is simply tilting at windmills, and you're better off going off to vote in the gallery or post in people's P&M threads.

That is the saddest picture I have seen in a while (as in: it made me sad to see it).
Because those Marines look like they are painted quite well, but unless you knew what to look for, you might ever be able to tell from the images/photos here.

As I said above - it's all about context.

**BeAfraid**

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight!

MB

**Vermis**

Azazelx wrote:

Well, that's obviously someone'e battle report photo, and so the context of it being hosted in the Dakka gallery could (and probably is) completely different to "look at my cool models".

It's still a gakky photo though, with all that in mind. Even as part of a sequence and with a full description below it, it'd be useless in context because all you can see is one blurry marine to the left and a couple of blurry gamers to the right. It conveys almost nothing about the state of play, no information other than one of the players is using yellow marines. You can't even appreciate how well that yellow is slapped on.

You do bring up a good point about Marines, though - how "cool" is a stock space marine? Some might say 0, because it's so very played. Others might still think that the design and execution of a plastic Space Marine is still pretty cool to them.

They would have to be pretty new to the game, I think. And if they were trawling the gallery in order to roll their eyes back in space marine ecstasy, there are a heck of a lot of other and kewler marine pics to squee over like they were cheeseburger cats. As Pacific said so very well, marines are everywhere. Everyone and their granny has marines somewhere, sometime. And once everyone's kewler, no-one will be.

Funny to see you talking about norms, after so heavily violated them in the Harad thread. Well, those were social norms. (protip: give criticism, even constructive criticism when it's asked for. Otherwise, follow Wehrkind's lead.) There are other, more subtle ways to suggest, but they might be more of a challenge.

Was that really necessary or relevant?

As amusing as this thread is

You don't sound very amused.

As I said above - it's all about context.

As I said above - it's still rubbish in context.

**Ignatius-Grulgor**

Voting may well be subjective but volume certainly helps to counteract that, more people voting builds a community consensus so even if people who call themselves professionals are on the whole granting a low score, the vast volume of us who are just hobbyists (and far out number any professionals) should bring it back up again. I must admit early on I was a little upset with some of the scores on my first pieces, but looking back I can see why, it's not as helpful as someone commenting in your showcase thread or P&M blog but it does have at least some purpose. I do think a guideline would help, regardless of if people like it or not, you know something like 10 - Crystal Brush / Golden Daemon finalist 5 - Tabletop standard 0 - Is there a miniature under that can of house paint?

The only gripe I have is the problem of 'big model disparity', I've never seen a titan get what I would consider a poor score regardless of how well it has been painted. Big or impressive models seem to get a good +2-3 points on the painting column regardless of how well they've been done, makes the little highly subjective coolness column next door to it seem rather pointless sometimes.

**Wirecat**

Personally I always vote subjectively, since no objective criteria are provided, and each image is displayed alone, so there isn't even "this or that" choice involved. Similarly, I don't provide low votes, since they are best provided with comments - why and what exactly is "bad". Amount of photos that just ask for an N/A on both "cool" and "paint" ratings is discouraging.

I try to place at least a few votes each time I visit Dakka, but quite a lot of random images get skipped, because I am not interested in subject or cannot judge due to photo quality.

**ScootyPuffJunior**

I vote like this:

Paintjob rating is how well the miniature is painted on a technical level. I ask myself the following questions: is the paint work clean? Did they use "advanced" skills? Are there brush strokes on the model? Is the model based?

Coolness rating is an objective rating on how well the entire model "works." My personal tastes don't come in to play with this rating. For instance, I don't like Eldar models, but a well posed and well painted Eldar model with an interesting color scheme will still score a high "coolness" rating even though I'm not a fan of those models.

**VorpalBunny74**

I go on voting sprees, but then get stumped by an image of an unpainted, partly assembled mini.

I just feel odd putting N/a for both categories, for some reason.

**BrookM**

I turbo-vote from time to time and usually stick to the bottom most option, it's certainly the most mind-numbing, but those pictures also deserve attention.

**gunslingerpro**

I don't really know why everyone needs background information when it comes to voting.

Why does it matter if the person is a pro or an amateur? If they were put into the same competition, would it change how you grade their painting? I think people are scared they are going to hurt feelings, but really any feedback is better than none at all. If you're really that curious, vote and then comment with tips/advice/questions.

I have a 10 in my mind (free hand, NMM, OSL) and a 1 (dipped in nail polish, rolled in dog hair). The scale doesn't change on experience. But that is what 'Coolness' is there for. Sure, those sternguard may be a 8 painted, but they are pretty static and straight out of the box, so they get a 5 coolness. These tabletop standard Veterans may only get a 6 painting, but they have been posed fantastic and I love the non-traditional color scheme, so they get an 8 cool.

Of course it's subjective, it's a scaled voting system. Even a binary 'is this painted well/is this cool' would be subjective.

**Reality-Torrent**

Look at my vote count

**Nevelon**

I spent a little more time in the galley after seeing this thread. It’s nice to go poking around there from time to time. Lots of cool images.

I generally rate a basic tabletop job at a 5. And I’m very stingy with the 10s, but am more then willing to give out 7-8s for good work.

Coolness is of course very subjective. I try to keep the spirit of the model in mind, but there is a lot of bias. Things like orcs and super heavies tend to get an extra point, but it’s wide open.

**Eilif**

Januine wrote:
what seems like, the gross majority not be bothered to give a simpe vote on what they think of what someone has spent time, usually quite a few hours on, and then posted up for others to look at??? I came across a couple that stick in mind - really really well painted figs - and according to the page had hundreds of views but not a single vote>>??? come one folks - cant we give a little feedback to the budding artists are ar trying their best at what is a damnedtricky artform anf then posting their work on a very large and public forum?

Meh, I've got alot of forums to keep track of. I comment on threads that interest me and I'm not sure I want to add another task to my web surfing. Also, it's well known that lots of folks post their stuff and don't even get much/any feedback on the posts they make, much less any gallery feedback. Happens to me too sometime, but I don't let it bother me.

On the other hand, if a picture is interesting enough to me that I want to click on it to see it larger or see what else might be in the gallery (rarely happens, but still), maybe I will try and remember to give a gallery vote and perhaps evenk a comment.

**Smacks**

**jah-joshua**

gunslingerpro wrote:
I don't really know why everyone needs background information when it comes to voting.

Why does it matter if the person is a pro or an amateur? If they were put into the same competition, would it change how you grade their painting? I think people are scared they are going to hurt feelings, but really any feedback is better than none at all. If you're really that curious, vote and then comment with tips/advice/questions.

I have a 10 in my mind (free hand, NMM, OSL) and a 1 (dipped in nail polish, rolled in dog hair). The scale doesn't change on experience. But that is what 'Coolness' is there for. Sure, those sternguard may be a 8 painted, but they are pretty static and straight out of the box, so they get a 5 coolness. These tabletop standard Veterans may only get a 6 painting, but they have been posed fantastic and I love the non-traditional color scheme, so they get an 8 cool.

Of course it's subjective, it's a scaled voting system. Even a binary 'is this painted well/is this cool' would be subjective.

personally, i am not scared of hurting feelings, as much as knowing that it happens quite easily...
over the last decade, i have read so many posts on forums by people who are hurt by votes of 5's on their models...
while a 5 would be middle-of-the-road work, most of the reactions i have seen are as if the vote cast was a 2...
it is even evident in this thread, where i talked about voting 5's on an average paintjob, and a few posts later AllSeeingSkink is using me as an example of someone who would vote a 2 simply for less-than-perfect blends...
that is quite an over-reaction, but it definitely goes to show how people feel...

it doesn't really matter if someone is an amateur, or a pro...
there are people out there who paint a hell of a lot better than me, and wouldn't dream of trying to paint for a living...
in competition, it doesn't make any difference, as far as i can tell...
where the difference lies, is that i think hobbyists should be encouraged, while a pro should be ready for a much harsher critique of their work, as they are taking someone's money for their paintjob...
a pro is expected to have a thicker skin than a hobbyist, and is held to higher standards...
though, even then, there is a huge difference between an army painting pro, and a display painting pro, and a bit of perspective on what the intention of the job is can be helpful in judging someone's work...
i would expect people to put a much harsher light on the majority of my work, because my intention is to be one of the pro's hired for top-shelf paintjobs, with prices to match...

of course, in the end, it is all still subjective, as can be seen by Azazelx and Pacific saying that some people may think Space Marines are played-out, while others may still really like them...
this was immediately confirmed by Vermis having a go at people who like Space Marines, saying they must be new to 40k if they like Marines...
this goes to show how individual personal opinions really are, since i have been a fan of Space Marines for nearly 30 years, and most of my money is earned from painting Space Marines for clients all around the world...
for me, personally, there is nothing else in the entire realm of miniatures that i enjoy painting as much as a Space Marine...

cheers
jah

**BeAfraid**

Ignatius-Grulgor wrote:
Voting may well be subjective but volume certainly helps to counteract that, more people voting builds a community consensus so even if people who call themselves professionals are on the whole granting a low score, the vast volume of us who are just hobbyists (and far out number any professionals) should bring it back up again. I must admit early on I was a little upset with some of the scores on my first pieces, but looking back I can see why, it's not as helpful as someone commenting in your showcase thread or P&M blog but it does have at least some purpose. I do think a guideline would help, regardless of if people like it or not, you know something like 10 - Crystal Brush / Golden Daemon finalist 5 - Tabletop standard 0 - Is there a miniature under that can of house paint?

The only gripe I have is the problem of 'big model disparity', I've never seen a titan get what I would consider a poor score regardless of how well it has been painted. Big or impressive models seem to get a good +2-3 points on the painting column regardless of how well they've been done, makes the little highly subjective coolness column next door to it seem rather pointless sometimes.

l

To get even more specific:

An objective standard is often a statistical mass of subjective views.

When a population votes, it establishes the outcome of that vote as an objective preference (see "norm" above).

Although there are many cases where a norm is at odds with other facts, it does not make that outcome any less an objective fact itself. It is just a fact that is at odds with reality (like the fact that the Heritage Foundation opposes the science behind Global Warming, or that Paul Rueben's Pee Wee's Playhouse had a genie - Jambe - with no hands - although this latter is rather obscure and mysterious unless you saw the right episode of the show).

Although having a norm at variance with other facts is less likely if one has a high number of experts in the population establishing that norm.

MB

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Smacks wrote:

MB

**MadSoul**

Never realised that was there, thanks for bringing it to my attention!

**Howard A Treesong**

I think people should turn off voting on images they don't want voted. There are a lot of pictures of stuff half made it in packaging in the galleries. It's ok to host pictures to support a battle report of blog, but if it's marked for voting and is only in undercoat, what can it realistically get for a painting/coolness score?

**AllSeeingSkink**

Howard A Treesong wrote:
I think people should turn off voting on images they don't want voted. There are a lot of pictures of stuff half made it in packaging in the galleries. It's ok to host pictures to support a battle report of blog, but if it's marked for voting and is only in undercoat, what can it realistically get for a painting/coolness score?

It doesn't really matter since very few photos actually gather the required 5 votes to get a score and even if they do I doubt the uploader cares.

**ORicK**

A Gallery... actually never visitid it... i will look into it! :-)

But i also agree that voting is subjective.
I paint since 1990 and paint above average, but not among the best (because i paint more armies then individual models).

I usually only vote if i am impressed by a paint- or convert-job.
This is a hobby so it is supposed to be fun so i stay positive.
Nobody likes it if work is criticised, especially if they are proud of it...

**Azazelx**

Vermis wrote:
Azazelx wrote:

Well, that's obviously someone'e battle report photo, and so the context of it being hosted in the Dakka gallery could (and probably is) completely different to "look at my cool models".

It's still a gakky photo though, with all that in mind. Even as part of a sequence and with a full description below it, it'd be useless in context because all you can see is one blurry marine to the left and a couple of blurry gamers to the right. It conveys almost nothing about the state of play, no information other than one of the players is using yellow marines. You can't even appreciate how well that yellow is slapped on.

You might find it hard to infer context, but it's not there for you. Presuming that the uploader gives (or would give) two hoots about what you think is presumptuous. It's clearly not there to be voted on. It's there to illustrate something.

You do bring up a good point about Marines, though - how "cool" is a stock space marine? Some might say 0, because it's so very played. Others might still think that the design and execution of a plastic Space Marine is still pretty cool to them.

They would have to be pretty new to the game, I think. And if they were trawling the gallery in order to roll their eyes back in space marine ecstasy, there are a heck of a lot of other and kewler marine pics to squee over like they were cheeseburger cats. As Pacific said so very well, marines are everywhere. Everyone and their granny has marines somewhere, sometime. And once everyone's kewler, no-one will be.

Except of course that Marines are the single most popular thing of all of the things. So I guess that makes them plenty cool. Or in the context of this discussion, 10/10.

Funny to see you talking about norms, after so heavily violated them in the Harad thread. Well, those were social norms. (protip: give criticism, even constructive criticism when it's asked for. Otherwise, follow Wehrkind's lead.) There are other, more subtle ways to suggest, but they might be more of a challenge.

Was that really necessary or relevant?

**Skinnereal**

With more votes than posts, popping into gallery snaps from the main page gets a few votes every time I come here.

I have more than 1 photo of some of my models, taken at similar stages of being built.
One photo got rated 4.7 with 8 votes, and a photo from a slightly different angle got 7.25 with 6 votes. Since the average swings so widely, I'm not too fussed about the lower score.

I'll mark a photo based on 7 as the 'table-ready' standard. Anything around there on my photos is good enough for me, based on the amount of effort I put in.

**Elemental**

Pacific wrote:
I quite often vote and comment, but just within a limited scope. Usually anything within the games I'm playing at the time (mostly historicals, Infinity etc.), and quite often because you know of the posters from that section of the forum and so can have some discussion with them.

The 'random picture' idea is great, but in practice about 95% of the stuff you come across is marines or marine-related, which start to tire after you have seen half a million pictures of pretty much the same thing over the past decade!

Also, the quality of some of the shots is pretty horrendous, and I can't understand people taking the time and effort to bother to upload them. This was (and this is honest) the first pic I got when I clicked on a random image just now:

Spoiler:

Maybe he was looking for feedback on the t-shirt?

**Pacific**

Even that is obscured though!

The only reason I can think of posting something like that is if you wanted to provide an example of a gakky photograph, in which case it gets a 10

I'm surprised actually that we are this far into the thread an no-one has posted the upside-down warbikes.. does the photo still exist on Dakka?