IOTD and Why It Needs Improvement AstroBin Platform open discussions community forum · Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography · ... · 281 · 9028 · 3

Salvatore Iovene:

Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography:

Salvatore Iovene:
This goes to say that whenever you propose a major redesign of the process, and expecting it to work better than something that iterated and improved for a decade, you are massively underestimating what it would take.

Similarly, assuming status quo is the best way to do it, because it's always been done that way is greatly underestimating the value in the feedback provided. The folks providing it may have very strong reasons and significant (multiple decades) experience managing such changes on services greatly larger than Astrobin. ​​​​​

I MASSIVELY rely on community feedback to improve AstroBin and plan my roadmap. As I have said to many people over the years, I only have 2 eyes, and I'm massively grateful to have such a proactive and clever community.

However, this doesn't mean that I should implement every single suggestion I get.

I appreciate your feedback, Bill, but I don't agree that there's a problem specifically with what you're bringing up, and I don't think your proposed solution would work, is all.

Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography:

andrea tasselli:
IOTD is just an Editor's Pick by another name.

That's the crux of the issue. It's equally as unreliable as Editors Pick, which isn't really a contest at all, and IOTD masquerades itself as not being a contest when it is one. Claiming it's not a contest removes elements from the discussion on improving the process that would be in place for any real contest.

So if this is the "Editors Pick" of Astrobin, where's the real contest, setup like a contest, that is supported as a contest? 
​​​

Dan Kearl:
Put up some prize money then... I do not understand the "contest" part of this debate. To my mind a "Contest" has prizes and winners win something.
This is just an Editors pick.

Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography:
The best way then it's to have a deeper discussion about why you don't think it'll work. There's also ways to source multiple streams of ideas to refine the method of improving the process.

​​There's enough agreement that it needs to be improved and that's been shared by more than just me, on this thread. So IMO it would be useful to use this as an opportunity to do so.

Jeffbax Velocicaptor:

Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography:

Jeffbax Velocicaptor:
Dear @Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography , Envy and jealousy are Bad feelings. Please, you are going to harm yourself. This is just a hobby, no injuries.

Just checked you galerie. Some of your images are nice. The last one particularly.

But you should keep the time you are spending on this thread to improove some aspects. We could change the system, you will still need some improvements to reach the top.

I Say again. Take your scope, process, share images and be able to hear that you don't have the truth.

JF

Jeff this is solely about fixing what I and many others (that have shared here on this thread) believe is a process needing improvement. This isn't about me or my images specifically, so there's really no need to go making this personal. I respectfully ask that you stop doing so.

*You started with and extremely agressive title here. Which you have changed After people reaction. You will not fool me. You are jealous and seeking for some ego recognition. 

I leave this smelling thread.

Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography:
The best way then it's to have a deeper discussion about why you don't think it'll work. There's also ways to source multiple streams of ideas to refine the method of improving the process.

​​There's enough agreement that it needs to be improved and that's been shared by more than just me, on this thread. So IMO it would be useful to use this as an opportunity to do so.

I wish it to change along with many unspoken others, but the resistance here is so palpable you can almost taste it. These arguments about how messed up the IOTD process is come along every now and then, and in the end, the chorus that arises from the same parties is "everything's fine, won't change it". When you're the only game in town, you can do whatever you want, I guess.

Arun H:

Dan Kearl:
The Oscars have Million of dollars in sponsorship. This is not exactly apples to apple.

The point is that it is a contest with no prize money. This may be verified through any number of sources. It is also not the only example of a contest. School divisions have contests, as an example, in sports or academics. Almost always, what you get is a trophy of some kind with no monetary value. 

Anyhow... pretty much everyone here, even those who claim that the system is awesome, seem to agree that it is a contest. I won't debate this particular point anymore.

The universe is not always and not everywhere beautiful and colorful, so neither do our photos have to be, otherwise it is vanity and virtual art until someone goes there and sees it with their own eyes, I want a second opinion.
 Otherwise it is just an illusion that time will take care of extinguishing in our minds.

to the memory of my grandfather

If I were the owner of Astrobin, I would remove the IOTD judges, and the all people responsible for choosing IOTD, and I would instead put a "vote for IOTD" or "vote for award" button on the front page, for every image that comes up; that way, the IOTD is neither based on the judges' own opinions nor likes, because both methods are unstable, even if the judges do intense discussions between themselves.

This way, the basis is on the opinion of the viewer, not fans, not judges, just viewers.

And then, maybe every week, or day, certain chosen people (maybe the past judges) can view what image got the most votes, and based on that give awards.

Or something along those lines...

Arun H:

AdrianC.:
Jeez, 300 images submitted per day? 
Then I guess people are more interested in "likes" and IOTD than just simple sharing ...

Of course they are, lol, it is human nature! As I mentioned, even judges who have excellent images  cannot bring themselves not to participate and miss out on the chance to get a badge of some form! Visible recognition of some form by one's peers always is and has been something that is desirable, even if there is no monetary value attached to it. It is the reason why we have so many issues with social media. It is the reason why people who have worked hard or invested time and money to gain this recognition will be incredibly resistant to changing it because they see it as diluting the recognition they have "earned".

May be the one simple thing we can all agree on is that the IOTD is indeed a competition in everything but name. Because the pretense that it isn't is simply not defensible. And change the manifesto to reflect that, and people can then decide what they want to about it being fair or unfair. Heck, even some of the most vocal defenders of the system in this thread (and previous threads) agree it is a competition!  Incidentally, 300 images being submitted per day is hardly evidence that the system is functional. It simply means that people are interested in this or some other type of contest. And it isn't as if there is some other contest or some other platform where they can participate.

AdrianC.:
As a simple example, how can a backyard guy compete with a Chile CDK setup?
How easy is it to image with a PlaneWave ($100K) setup compared with a modest setup that needs constant attention to work? 
If you think about it the quality of the image correlates significantly with the quality of the gear and sky, as it should.

Hence my recommendation to remove the feature all together, but I doubt it would be the case since it can hurt the business, and the designer knows very well why he chose a social media driven system.