| Author |
Number of new images posted per day |
LYCJ
Joined:
28-07-2010
Messages: 4
 OFF-Line
|  Posted 27-07-2011 at 23:34
Has any consideration ever been given to limiting the number of new images an individual can post per day?
This works quite well on, for example, FLICKR where in some groups there is a limit of four per day.
This means hopefully that each contribution isn't swamped under the weight of others. Would be interested in other people's opinions.
 Profile
 Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7005
from Surrey, UK
 ON-Line
| Posted 28-07-2011 at 01:12
Hello LYCJ and welcome as an active contributor. We have many 'mega' contributors and people do seem to 'dump' things all in one go. I think that's natural when you have a new 'reel' of digital photos to upload from a trip and I wouldn't want to discourage interesting photos of sites from all angles.
Please don't be put off by this. If you are interested in getting your photo seen (perhaps for the photo competition) then you are allowed to vote for it once yourself to get the ball rolling.
People looking for rather more special photos can tick the box to 'just show photos with votes' here which filters out all the 'run of the mill' site documentation photos to just to the selection that people have voted for. More on the competitions here:
http://www.megalithic.co.uk/article.php?sid=2146413898
Competition photos aside, the other way you can get a site that you have photographed noticed is to make it new, unusual or original in some way and we may well put it on the front page. What we'd be looking for is 'new' news about the site, perhaps photos of an open day or dig, or just of a site we didn't previously have a photo of (if it's particularly interesting). Or an original article on a site. Or something interesting from a part of the world that we don't have much coverage of. Or... well we're open to suggestions for sites for the front page if you think we've missed a particularly interesting one.
Cheers
Andy
[ This message was edited by: Andy B on 2011-07-28 01:14 ]
Profile
 Email
Reply
|
sem
Joined:
12-11-2003
Messages: 1710
from Bridgend,S.Wales
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-07-2011 at 01:16
Hi LYCJ
I think this is one for AndyB to answer as he knows how much it costs for "storage" space for the images.
One suggestion I would make is that members are allowed to delete their own pics in order to replace them with better versions. Mind you, this wouldn't go down well with those who post multiple, awful pictures of the same site in what seems to be an attempt to get on the all-time biggest number scoreboard!
Quality or quantity?
Profile
Reply
|
LYCJ
Joined:
28-07-2010
Messages: 4
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-07-2011 at 10:53
Thanks for the reply Andy. My suggestion wasn't made on a competitive basis, having just made my 1st contribution and having seen some of the excellent quality of the other contributors!
I just felt that limiting it to say four per day perhaps would make people a bit more selective of their work. It shouldn't discourage people as they could still post four everyday. The other aspect is that as you say some people do tend to 'dump things all in one go' and I have heard that people try to time their contributions so as not to be swamped by these?
Please accept these suggestions merely as a constructive idea to what is a fantastic site and a mine of useful information.
Profile
Reply
|
TheCaptain
Joined:
30-10-2003
Messages: 1483
from near Bristol
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-07-2011 at 13:00
Despite probably being one of the "guilty" ones, I do agree in principal with this idea. There are times when so many similar pictures of the same site are entered, that many other more interesting things get "lost" by being swamped out. There were times, and I think we maybe should prompt people better, to select their favourite two or three pictures from a site, and send only them in.
However, I also see this from the other side, in that it takes a lot of time to select and send pictures in, and oftern peoples time is limited, so a big batch of pictures is sent all in one go. Without being critical, irundarra falls into this category, and we will, approximately monthly, get sent a mass of pictures of his relatively unknown Pyreneean and Spanish sites. If there was a limit, we would not have anywhere so many sites documented (and so as not to seem critical of irundarra, he does seem to self edit and only send a few pictures of each site).
I also see this from another perspective, as a photo validator and "editor". In the past, sometimes I have acted to select only certain of peoples submissions, and delete other less worthy (in my mind) pictures (perhaps of local car parks or signs or repeat pictures), only to be criticised and get mild abuse... Thankfully not too often. So I also see the side of the validator who just accepts any old tosh for "publication".
I also think that we should perhaps delete older pictures of sites, when better pictures sort of supercede them.
As for my own ongoing submissions (I am still only about 50% of the way through the sites of my French tour in 2005!) I do try and narrow down the pictures to a few of each site, but have to admit to becoming less selective over the past couple of years, and uploading perhaps more than I should. However, time to process them being what it is, it is probalbly not many more than a few on any day.
Interesting to hear others opinions.
Profile
Reply
|
Martin_L
Joined:
04-10-2007
Messages: 786
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-07-2011 at 14:06
A limit of photos posted per day is problematic as several people seem to visit only very few sites while others regularly visit many sites. And the obvious workflow of some main contributors was already mentioned.
Apart from this the Megalithic Portal obviously is not a Flickr stream! It is a database! So i cannot see were photos "get swamped". This can only refer to the "new photos", but I think the usual way to use the MP is to search for a site and have a look at the information and photos.
Of course there unfortunately are people being not very selective, but most of these send site pages and photos from areas where there are no other contributors. Personally I prefer (a theoretical) someone who sends new sites and info along with photos (even if "too many" or of poor quality) of new sites over (a theoretical) someone who submits a limited amount of boring standard-angle photos of a site where there already are several similar ones. If there are capacity problems one day photos with less quality and/or information content may be removed from the database.
[ This message was edited by: Martin_L on 2011-07-28 14:33 ]
Profile
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7005
from Surrey, UK
ON-Line
| Posted 28-07-2011 at 15:00
> I also think that we should perhaps delete older pictures of sites, when better pictures sort of supercede them.
We could do this but it is an awful lot of effort for no benefit and we have a lot of admin jobs to do as it is. We are not going to be short of disk space, collecting photos is one of the most important things we do. I am sure we are going to be around a lot longer than the vagueries of whatever the latest social networking fad is. eg there is no guarantee you will be able to access Facebook or Flickr images in say 40 years but I am certain we will still be around in whatever form, plus we are being archived by the British Library.
Older photos serve as a documentary record of the site from times gone by. With hindsight, it would have been very useful to have had 'anoroak level' photos of every bank and ditch at Priddy circles, or indeed every stone at Hunbed D45. No doubt if someone had done this we would have had complaints at the time!
I'm not inviting photos of every stone at D45 - most people do self edit well and people who really go mad sending too many all the same usually get a polite word from one of the admins. As Martin said, easier to delete duplicates than imagine ones that someone wasn't sure about sending in.
If need be one day we could 'archive' really old photos off the main pages, or just show the best ones unless you asked to all see of them. Another reason why it's good to vote for your favourite photos as it helps to 'tag' the best ones for future reference.
So I don't propose any quantity limits. If you want your photos to be seen, get posting some more and make them visually good (and yours was) or historically interesting 
[ This message was edited by: Andy B on 2011-07-28 15:37 ]
Profile
Email
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7005
from Surrey, UK
ON-Line
| Posted 28-07-2011 at 15:38
> Please accept these suggestions merely as a constructive idea to what is a fantastic site and a mine of useful information.
That's fine, suggestions and ideas always welcome, thanks very much
Profile
Email
Reply
|
TheCaptain
Joined:
30-10-2003
Messages: 1483
from near Bristol
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-07-2011 at 17:17
I also think that we should perhaps delete older pictures of sites, when better pictures sort of supercede them.
We could do this but it is an awful lot of effort for no benefit and we have a lot of admin jobs to do as it is.
Yes, I didn't finish my sentence to say "given infinite time for very limited benefit". and should have typed could....
With hindsight, it would have been very useful to have had 'anoroak level' photos of every bank and ditch at Priddy circles
Yes indeed. I did have a look through my old paper prints, hoping to find an image of the priddy circle where the bulldozing happened, and did indeed find a photo of the Ashen Hill Barrows taken the evening I remember visiting. But no photo of the Priddy circle ditch and bank I thought I had taken. Obviously, in those days of 36 pictures on a film, and about £15 to buy film and print it, even I thought not to bother!!! So the image of that part of the bulldozed circle is just printed in my memory, and I dont know yet of the technology to transfer it here!
But that does remind me, like so many other places, I now have many pictures taken of the various Priddy circles I took the other week - just waiting for me to try and edit down from say 80 pictures to 4 or 5 of slightly differing shades of green in the fields! Maybe I must make time to swamp the portal with these pictures!
And to think, only last Autumn, I discussed the Priddy Circles with Drew, and suggested he went elsewhere as there wasn't much to see on the ground!!!! He might have taken the vital pictures!
Profile
Reply
|
Sunny100
Joined:
20-03-2010
Messages: 216
from Near Nelson, Lancashire
OFF-Line
|  Posted 28-07-2011 at 18:18
I think that is the problem really, folk trying to be at the top of the pictures leaderboard, and trying to stay there. Should that idea be scrapped. I think it should as it does cause problems. Myself, I can only send a copuple of photos in now - so I don't ever expect to be at the top.
Profile
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7005
from Surrey, UK
ON-Line
| Posted 28-07-2011 at 18:29
Sunny, we agreed with this suggestion and a few months ago we moved the Top Contributors leaderboard from 'top billing' in the left hand menu to be in an obscure menu (under About Us). It does also refresh every month so new people have an equal chance.
I'm not deleting it as it gives useful stats for people who know about it but it's not 'your name in lights' like it used to be.
Profile
Email
Reply
|
Sunny100
Joined:
20-03-2010
Messages: 216
from Near Nelson, Lancashire
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-07-2011 at 19:30
It is better than it used to be.
Profile
Reply
|
Martin_L
Joined:
04-10-2007
Messages: 786
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-07-2011 at 19:31
Quote from Sunny "I think that is the problem really, folk trying to be at the top of the pictures leaderboard, and trying to stay there. "
Sunny which "folk" do you refer to? Your statement is largely incorrect. It is just annoying how you offend the main contributors like TheCaptain, Motist, AlexHunger, AngieLake, cosmic, HolgerRix and others. Most of these so called folk have posted photos of several hundred or even thousands of sites for several years. So no wonder they have sent many photos.
And tell me one place in the world where one could show-off with: "oh I am on top of the megalithic portal ...-list?" Who would be interested in this?! Ok, there theoretically might be some weirdo, but to make a general statement like you did is not acceptable.
[ This message was edited by: Martin_L on 2011-07-28 19:32 ]
Profile
Reply
|
Sunny100
Joined:
20-03-2010
Messages: 216
from Near Nelson, Lancashire
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-07-2011 at 20:22
Er hang on a mo Martin, I didn't mention any names, but YOU did. Perhaps I was being a bit general in what I said, I did not intend that.
I don't recall every upsetting any of those people you mention, of well me and The Captain have had our moments, but thats by the by. Please get your facts right in the future. Thank you.
[ This message was edited by: Sunny100 on 2011-07-28 20:36 ]
[ This message was edited by: Sunny100 on 2011-07-28 21:04 ]
Profile
Reply
|
Sunny100
Joined:
20-03-2010
Messages: 216
from Near Nelson, Lancashire
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-07-2011 at 21:07
Martin, there are enough wars in the world at the moment, please don't lets have another. Ray.
Profile
Reply
|
Martin_L
Joined:
04-10-2007
Messages: 786
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-07-2011 at 21:44
Very clever.... of course you did not mentioned names, but you clearly referred to the top contributors and I just named some of them.
Your statement and the replies are just disgusting. Threatening others with "war" when getting critized for your statements is an interesting reaction.
Profile
Reply
|
Sunny100
Joined:
20-03-2010
Messages: 216
from Near Nelson, Lancashire
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-07-2011 at 22:42
I do think Martin you are not being a particularly nice person - you are persisting with this - whatever I say you just seem to add to and try to make a molehill into a mountain as it were. Please just leave it there. We don't want this sort of thing on the site. You are lowering the site.
[ This message was edited by: Sunny100 on 2011-07-28 23:41 ]
Profile
Reply
|
Sunny100
Joined:
20-03-2010
Messages: 216
from Near Nelson, Lancashire
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-07-2011 at 22:47
Martin I am not threating ANYONE with war, do not be so sily. Please can we call a halt to this now.
Profile
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7005
from Surrey, UK
ON-Line
| Posted 28-07-2011 at 23:48
Seconded. It was just a general comment originally and not aimed at anyone in particular. And no one was threatening war, it was just unfortunate wording for Sunny to use.
[ This message was edited by: Andy B on 2011-07-28 23:52 ]
Profile
Email
Reply
|
Sunny100
Joined:
20-03-2010
Messages: 216
from Near Nelson, Lancashire
OFF-Line
| Posted 29-07-2011 at 18:26
It was an unfortunate word to use, perhaps taken in the wrong context. To get back to the original issue of this topic/forum I had not looked at the Contributors pics list for some time and didn't realise that it had been altered. I should have looked before posting the comment, but I did not. Sorry about that. 
Profile
Reply
|
Main News