admin wrote:
The idea behind the system is so you can browse the photos that you want to.
The 1-10 scale isn't a rating, it's the quality of the image not the content. The data will be used to display the clearer better quality of images first, with the blurry ones at the back of the search query after we get the new search implemented.
Swinging Heaven is looking for ways to make all areas of the site more relevant and usable for the members. Our goal is continual improvement and listening to our member feedback. In the recent site surveys, a relevant image search was one of the top three points that our member base was asking for.
I've snipped a fair bit for space - not to skew the argument.
I'm sorry, but does ANYONE actually believe this - - - "The 1-10 scale isn't a rating, it's the quality of the image not the content." is what will happen? I certainly don't.
I agree a relevant search that includes or is based on what images are available is needed - but a subjective judgment on quality (be it subject or image quality) is wholly inappropriate. The people making these value judgments are not monitored, guided or even asked to justify their judgments and - as far as I have understood - their input is entirely anonymous. Validation is bad enough - anonymous validation (by any other name) is unacceptable.
If admin want to have everyone put their images in private galleries so no-one gets to see them without an invite, they have done exactly the right thing.
I have never cared who looked at my pictures - I have none in private galleries, but I will be spending the night working out how to put them in a private gallery. I also wish to be informed how to remove the tags that are already on them. Or is being the public subject of other people's anonymous judgments mandatory now?
Frankly the more I think about this, the angrier I get.