ok, its been talked about in the past, and its been brought up again..and i think its important enough to make a new thread.
i have, many times, gone 30 by 30 through the top several 100 wallpapers. i have also many times started from the other end and worked my way up. The bottom up to about 65% is crap. There are a few good walls that get mushed down from the mean rating being in the 80's rather then 50% like it should be if the systeem worked perfectly. (but clearly it can't as you have to delet walls and no admin will waste his time giving out 3's anymore). Iff you just cut off the bottom 50% of the walls...what is now a 50 would be a zero, what is a 100 will be a hundred...to me it seems like some one was thinking when they made this system...so that you could indeed purge the site of crap and ruin the rating system. This is also true because of somewhat harder rating now than in the past. I believe the end result of trashing half the site would result in a more elite wallpaper section, where only good artist would want to submit because if the wall sucks..its gonna get a rating that reflects that instead of all this rating inflation. Newbies could learn elsewhere...not everyone has to start here. The possible downside of not starting users here...is that they would never come here...but i think that very few users are loyal to only one site.
yea..what do you think? and to my dear admins, is it possible?
P.S. in the past when this brought up in its own thread people started being idiots as people will do. everyone just fucking pretend to be intelligent in your post...for once.
life is a thrill, when your skill is developed, if ain't got a skill or trade, shut the hell up!
02:47 pm, Tuesday, November 11, 2003 (6 years ago)
I've brought it up before, but DS said that lamplighter has been against it.
I have gone through and deleted about 50 or so of the bottom walls and still plan to delete about 50 more. But thats all I can do right now.
I dont think deleting half of the walls is a good thing though. The bottom 10% is definately crap, but Im not sure if it is wise to get rid of so much...
I just sat in fornt of the computer after a whole day of house cleaning and this is the first thing I see in custo... it was very scary, belive me.
Ok, now to the important.
Who said a newbie woudln't learn here?? Of course they would, they will have a great gallery with the best wallpaper to be inspired, if I where a newbie (and I'm, short of) I would love to hasng out here...
I say it should be done.
"everyone just fucking pretend to be intelligent in your post...for once" you are lovely =).
I think this is a very good idea and that it should be given a lot more thought than it is getting. I think the option of deleting all the crappy walls should be STRONGLY considered before the release of EVO. I think more people would appriciate having a really good resource to find GOOD walls here, then the few (if any) that would miss any wall with a rating lower than 50.
yes, that is a good idea. do some cleaning before EVO. (whats it stand for anyway?) which most likely means every single one of my walls are being flushed as we speak.
Well, I've always been for house cleaning. However, there are flaws in Wonkus' logic, specifically regarding the rating system. Even with only "elite artists," somebody's still got to bring up the rear. Hence, with a relative rating scale like we have now, a fewer number of wallpapers doesn't mean we wouldn't still have "crap" numerically. I don't remember who it was a while ago who came up with a more balanced rating system, but I liked that. Deleting all the crap is a necessity, but it does affect the scores, and you must then consider an alternate rating system.
The most obvious solution is to make the scores non-relative. Something I would much prefer is a numerical rank, where the top wallpaper is rated 1 and then descends from there. This could even be based on the current rating system.
This could be something included with EVO. One thing I think should definitely be done is (aside from cleaning crap out) is the sub-sorting of wallpaper into things like abstract, vector, 2D abstract, photo manipulation, 3D abstract, and so on, with each sub-section being ranked accordingly.
that rank idea would actually work..you could just transfer the percent by multiplying the total number of walls times your percent score in your head....or something.
life is a thrill, when your skill is developed, if ain't got a skill or trade, shut the hell up!
that would be me who had the new math idea. i think like the day after i last talked to DS about it i got chewed out by an admin over something and kind of lost interest.
i could still polish it up if there's any point in it.
I thought it was you. That idea was great. What I liked most about it was its dynamics - things change over time. The things with real staying power (the really rare stuff) would stay near the top.
Why don't we have a hall of fame? That way we could put all the old classics in there, and then don't run the risk of them falling behind simply because they're old.
"One thing I think should definitely be done is (aside from cleaning crap out) is the sub-sorting of wallpaper into things like abstract, vector, 2D abstract, photo manipulation, 3D abstract, and so on, with each sub-section being ranked accordingly."
- Its too difficult to classify some walls to just one category. Grouping all the current walls would also take an incredible amount of work. The idea has been brought up many times before, but I dont see it happening.
FF - I know it would be very difficult. I also agree that many wallpapers fall into more than one category. It's considerably simpler, however, than grouping wallpapers by color. Actually, it wouldn't be too bad to do it once you eliminate a lot of the excess baggage. Sorting through 4000 wallpapers (or 2700, based on Wonkus' 65% crap theory) wouldn't be nearly as bad as almost 8000. While some things are merely pipe dreams, I don't think this one is. It's doable.
bust out he blache and the ammonia, yo! but don't mix them together...hehe...
yeah, once or twice, just out of curiousity, i've looked at the walls in ascending rank, and they are crap...i remember this one wall (if you wanna call i that) of a very badly scanned chicken's head, with HORRIBLE JPEG compression...so yeah...
wallpaper submissions should include subcategories that the user selects when he uploads his work. if the user obviously put it in the wrong section, an admin should have the capability to change which subcatagory its in.
How about a yearly or biyearly system? Where all skins are categorized by there year. There are so many shifts in trends, there isnt that just best wallpaper, its one personnel trend prefrence. So I think with a yearly catergorial system it allows users to navigate the best wallpaper of that particular year. Instead of having kultdesign and 4k at the top.
