Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Queue slots

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Queue slots

    Hello! I wanted to post a reply on this topic: https://forums.jetphotos.com/forum/a...-starter-queue

    But there is an error occurring when I try to reply some topics (Invalid node id specified)

    Originally posted by justtosim View Post
    Dear contributors,

    As of today, a photographer starts with 5 queue slots.
    As soon as a number of 10 photos in database has been reached, the queue limit will be increased to the usual 20.

    We have taken this measure as we see more and more photographers starting with a full queue of photos with the same flaws.
    This is often resulting in rejection of all queued photos, which is as disappointing for photographers as it is for us, screeners.

    In addition, we believe that this measure will take some pressure off the queue, which is in the end, good for everybody.

    As always, we can recommend photographers to take the time to fully read our upload guidelines and most of all, to use our forum where we'll be glad to help you.

    Thank you for your understanding,

    Your JetPhotos screening team

    Why don't assign the number of slots based on a recent acceptance ratio? It would estimulate the photographers to upload only their best. If they do so, more slots. If they don't, they loose slots.

    For example: today I have almost 1500 accepted photos with 75.63% of acceptance ratio, but if i look the last 70 days of the queue, the number goes to 91.72%.

    All of us know that there is a lot of begginers (as I myself was, nothing against them) who upload many photos below de standards, and they have the same 20 slots than photographers with 80, 90% of acceptance. Easy to see in the queue status that in the same period that I had 90% of acceptance ratio, the total queue sometimes has only 40%. So, why don't give more slots for those with high acceptance AND/OR reduce the slots of those who sent the 60% of rejected photos?

    I think it's fair to have a little more slots as we upload good photos and loose those extra slots if we start messing up. This could help to lower the queue size as people can reconsider uploading bad/non acceptable photos as an effort to reach more slots. Today we loose slots for 14 days for each rejection, but loosing slots for 14 days + achieving new slots for "good performance", which can be lost with low acceptance ratio can estimulate more.

    I'm an ex-JPElite member, I miss it hahahaha.

    Well, just an idea to improve the site and reduce the queue!

  • #2
    Thank you for the suggestions, which are course always welcome.

    In fact such a suggestion has already been made, and a system devised by the crew. Now we just wait on implementation by FR24

    Comment


    • #3
      Nice!

      Waiting for it anxiously!

      JPElite nevermore?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by llpilch View Post
        Nice!

        Waiting for it anxiously!

        JPElite nevermore?
        That's what we've been trying to push.

        Comment


        • #5
          Fifteen days for the photo to be evaluated (on average), fourteen days for releasing rejected photo slots, sometimes almost a month for the photographer to send a new photo.

          I understand that the level of screening is increasing the photo standard, looking for a level of photos always high, but the level of rejects will increase as well.

          I believe that encourage the photographers to uploading your photos on jetphotos can reduce by the queue limitations, they will send their photos to other competing platforms.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

            That's what we've been trying to push.
            Waiting for it even more anxiously!!!


            There is something else that i'm thinking in these days when the queue reached 15000+ photos: how many banned users who still trying to upload pictures exists? Last week I saw in the forum an user complaining about a rejection and a crew member said something like "when will you understand that you are banned?" So, seems like he is been trying to upload photos a lot of times, even being banned. I was banned for a long time, before talking to the site admin and try to revert my ban, I tried to upload photos something like 3 times, and it was possible, but they was rejected.

            If a user is banned, why can he still upload images to the queue? Why don't just simply disable the function to upload as it happens when reach the slots limit? Less photos on queue, less unecessary work for the screeners, more fast the queue goes.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by llpilch View Post
              There is something else that i'm thinking in these days when the queue reached 15000+ photos: how many banned users who still trying to upload pictures exists? Last week I saw in the forum an user complaining about a rejection and a crew member said something like "when will you understand that you are banned?" So, seems like he is been trying to upload photos a lot of times, even being banned. I was banned for a long time, before talking to the site admin and try to revert my ban, I tried to upload photos something like 3 times, and it was possible, but they was rejected.

              If a user is banned, why can he still upload images to the queue? Why don't just simply disable the function to upload as it happens when reach the slots limit? Less photos on queue, less unecessary work for the screeners, more fast the queue goes.
              You may have misunderstood the exchange, since banned uploaders cannot submit images to the queue. That being said, the number of banned users is relatively small, and thus has a nearly inconsequential effect on the queue.

              I've been a strong proponent of acceptance ratio-based slot availability for more than a year and a half, but unfortunately it is not something that FR24 has yet been able to implement.

              Comment

              Working...
              X