In It to Win It?

Before I get into this, for the benefit of those new to BP blogging and rewards, with apologies to all the regular supporters of mine and other people's blogs . . . About Clapping: Rewards for blog posters and viewers are based on clapping. For the viewer you receive a daily reward for 'clapping 10 blogs' for the poster it is based on 'claps received'. Viewers, you can clap a single blog to receive your reward, simply do so slow and steady: clap & clap & clap ... 10x. Posters require first 100 and then 500 claps. A viewer can clap up a blog to 20x. So if and when you clap this blog, please clap 20x, not once or twice, as claps may have been intended to serve as a measure of blog quality, value, enjoyment but in reality are simply a means to a reward. Among many of those with whom I am most closely connected, the Daily Challenge continues to elicit observations about submissions, occasional frustration at results, and discussion of the voting system. But despite the ups and downs, like many others, I continue to enter, vote and (when so lucky) celebrate a top 10, even a top 3, or now the newly recognised top 20 finish. It has been 6 months since I posted my blog reflecting on the newly introduced Daily Challenge, which makes a follow-up appropriaate BudgetPixel To Play Or Not To Play? To Play Or Not To Play? | DavidP | dailychallenge budgetpixel.com If you read that you'll recall I chose to opt out. I didn't want to have to manage my own mindset and emotion to deal with the vagaries of the voting system and the results. I stayed away for quite some until a friend suggested I should just enter, forget about the result, and earn the credits. Credits were precious at that time, so I jumped back in and happily farmed the daily challenge for credits. Other than for a couple of challenges which I missed when distracted by other things, I have been a constant participant and voter ever since. But my gripes remain. I did some research on the ELO rating algorithm. Based on that, I entered into discussion on the BP DC Server which, if I recall correctly, did contribute to some fine tuning of the two key constants in the algorithm. The system serves well as a means to rank chess players and organise over-the-board Swiss-style tournaments or make pairings on sites like chess.com to provide opponents of similar strength. I still argue that this is due to the objectivity of chess in which the opponents actually play a game with set rules. The same system applied to the judging of the daily challenge in which independent people make a choice between two images based on no criteria, really just their own taste and preference, is unlikely to deliver an objective result. To be fair, there is probably no system that can do that since we are in the realm of creative visual art, not a contest with rules. Adding to this is the matter of luck. Your result is subject to the set of people who see it in match-ups and when they see it. The rating of an image may fluctuate and the points gained or lost will be influenced by the ELOs of the images at that point (I assume). There is also the possibility of 'tactical picking' viz. somebody may consider which of the two images may be a likely contender and pick the other in the hope of improving their own chances. I know there's zero integrity in that, and there's relatively little at stake, but people are people. People are people, and based on that, people are well aware of how glamour appeals. The number of top 10 images in which the main subject is a well-endowed woman displaying her charms suggests the practice is effective at improving your odds. I appreciate such images as much as the majority, but when done as a ploy to improve chances of being picked, it just seems a little facile. On that note, after some discussion the organisers have been persuaded to remove the sample image that was included with the challenge topic. Frequently the top 10 featured many images that were essentially versions of that sample image. In similar vein, a couple of us have advocated for theme descriptions that do not provide explicit descriptions of the theme which are effectively descriptions of an image to be submitted. I far prefer simpler descriptions that serve only to ensure people understand the theme. I appreciate this is a fine line, and for people who are not native English speakers, an accurate understanding of the theme can sometimes be tricky. But I suspect that some people may simply copy the description directly as their prompt, which defeats the purpose in my opinion. For example, the following is the current open challenge topic: Chariot Race: Create your most exciting scene of a high-speed ancient chariot race with powerful horses, flying dust, rival racers, and a roaring arena I created this image using that as the prompt Time will tell how many images I see when voting that are similar. Of course the archetypal Roman chariot race in the Colosseum perfectly fits the theme. Who knows, maybe if I had entered this image perhaps it would have ended up with a winrate good enough for Top 10 - I'll never know - but it just seems to easy to take that route. For me the challenge remains to come up with an image that is on theme, good quality and a little creative. I have pursued that approach without caring about the limited success in results. I keep repeating that to the point that people may say the participant 'doth protest too much' but I've felt that my overall results reflect a middle of the pack finish as par for the course, with the distribution weight towards the low end rather than the high end, not an entirely balanced normal distribution. I'm a bit of a geek, so took some time to record all my results. Turns out that I have participated in 92 challenges, my average place being 35 and the average number of participants being 61. Normalise that to 100 and I finsish 57/100. The data confirms my sense. I do know that averages can be misleading, so I decided a couple of graphs would be useful - as I said a geek. I'm yet to win a challenge but have claimed last place twice. If I further simplify to just three buckets then my distribution is 34 - 33 - 25. For whatever reason, the data supports my hypothesis that, for the majority, my images are not especially appealing, very much middle-of-the-road. Of course I am totally subjective in my own opinion and often wonder how I ended up not achieving a higher winrate. Sometimes friends comments point out issues, other times I just accept that it is the nature of the beast. Note on this graph that there is a large gap on the left hand side when I had opted out. It does show that participation grew and may just have tapered off a little recently. So I am under no illusions, delussions even, while I always enter with a flicker of hope, the head tells me that mostly I will finish somewhere around the midpoint, leaning to below it. Of course, law of averages is at play, so the stars will align and I may finish in the top 20 or 10, and not impossible that I may yet win a challenge. But I am mostly not "In it to win it!" I don't need the credits. I have built up a sufficient balance and tend to spend far more time trying to view, comment and reply to the people I am close to here than generating images. So not in it to farm credits. There are better ways to do that (that's another story). I generally don't invest a lot of time in creating my entry. "Ah" I hear you say, if you did maybe you'd do better. I doubt it as I see many others who generate many versions, explore different ideas, and also don't feature in the top 10 regularly (at least to my recollection. There are only a few people who seem to be have the knack to be able to come up with an idea, create an appealing image, and finish (somewhat) frequently in the top 10, and have been top 3 what I'd consider to be many times. So why? Maybe it is back to the topic I discussed in my first blog shared here . . . BudgetPixel The Dopamine Dilemma: When Likes Become an Addiction The Dopamine Dilemma: When Likes Become an Addiction | DavidP budgetpixel.com There is something addictive, even in just that flicker of hope, the comments and commiserations at a decent image that some say they liked, picked, and thought deserved a higher place. I know it is like playing slot machines, and thankfully I am not addicted to that. But I do like a challenge, and the simple process of coming up with an idea, the anticipation to see what the prompt will produce, and the personal sense of satisfaction in an image I like is enough to now keep me in it . . . at least for now. About Clapping: Rewards for blog posters and viewers are based on clapping. For the viewer you receive a daily reward for 'clapping 10 blogs' for the poster it is based on 'claps received'. Viewers, you can clap a single blog to receive your reward, simply do so slow and steady: clap & clap & clap ... 10x. Posters require first 100 and then 500 claps. A viewer can clap up a blog to 20x. So if and when you clap this blog, please clap 20x, not once or twice, as claps may have been intended to serve as a measure of blog quality, value, enjoyment but in reality are simply a means to a reward. I mentioned better ways to farm credits - I know, I confess - in addition to sharing my thoughts in my blogs, the credit rewards are appreciated.