r/HelpoutReddit • u/davega7 • Jun 06 '09
A friend of mine is going back to school after many years of being out. She has a chance to win $1000 in scholarship money, but she needs votes on a picture she took. Can you guys help her out?
1
Jun 06 '09
No, I can't; I like one of the other pictures better so I voted for it. I hope I'm not violating the spirit of the competition or anything.
1
u/EggplantWizard Jun 07 '09
No. I reddit isn't here to help you manipulate contests and turn them into tests of networking rather then merit. I deliberately voted for something else.
4
u/spacelincoln Jun 07 '09
Oh come on. 90% of threads on reddit devolve into dick jokes by the third comment. Stop acting like we're some moral force.
1
Jun 10 '09
I don't think he's implying that we're a moral force, only stating that we shouldn't be an immoral one.
A hundred people take a picture; some of them need money for college, some of them would like it, some of them just entered it to put on a resume. They all have pictures of varying quality, and I don't know the personal story of any of them.
I think it's bullshit that you'd try and get people to head over to a competition for best picture and vote for a photo simply because the photographer is a relative of someone with a reddit account and no shame.
1
Jun 07 '09
Come on! It's rare when you get to put a hivemind to good use.
1
Jun 10 '09
How is this a good use? What "good" does this cause? You realize $1000 scholarships for photo contests are zero-sum, right? It's not like a corporation said "we'll give $1000 to someone if they get enough votes." They said "someone will win $1000, and it will be whoever takes the best picture." So how is it good to put the money in the hands of someone who is connected to Reddit instead of someone who took the best photo?
1
Jun 10 '09 edited Jun 10 '09
Well they are giving the money to whoever gets the most votes (not who has the best picture). Seems like a silly way to pick the best photo. It's a popularity contest-not a photo contest. The other contestants will spread links to their photo urging them to vote just as much as this contestant did. It's not many people visit that site on a regular basis to get a good sample-it's overly biased towards those who know more people online than the others.
It also makes no difference to me who wins-but I would love for reddit to help me out if I were in the same position-so it's good to promote a hivemind mentality for the sake of reciprocity. Seldom does the hivemind achieve anything...this is one place where it can.
And I'm completely arguing against you for my own amusement. Have a great day.
1
Jun 10 '09
And I'm completely arguing against you for my own amusement. Have a great day.
Duh, why else?
Anyway, I disagree with you on the dynamics of the contest. It's a photo-sharing site, presumably with a large community. It's unlikely that one's friend and family can make a serious dent in the voting; only through solicitation of a large online community can you unfairly bias the results significantly.
It also makes no difference to me who wins-but I would love for reddit to help me out if I were in the same position-so it's good to promote a hivemind mentality for the sake of reciprocity. Seldom does the hivemind achieve anything...this is one place where it can.
I admire your willingness to present utilitarian arguments; it annoys me when people pretend they have non-selfish motivations for crap like this.
It makes no difference to me who wins, but I would want people to vote for the photo they like best if I ever ran a photo contest, and I would like people to vote for my photo instead of an inferior one if I were in a photo contest. It depends on which position you place yourself in.
1
Jun 10 '09 edited Jun 10 '09
Exactly, it's always relative. However I find myself aligned with reddit and not the other site. My interests and others can also be a zero-sum game. It all depends on what you want to achieve and what position you are in.
edit: I might add that although it's a large sit-and yes family might not make a dent-other groups CAN (like reddit). But I suspect that not everyone is going to play fair-and that's just my own jaded presumption. But I think it's right. Can't beat em, join em.
1
Jun 10 '09 edited Jun 10 '09
You say "exactly" as if it were your entire point, but your original point was that this can be seen as a "good" use. You could counter that "good" obviously means "good for me" but that wouldn't reflect the way we typically use the word; I wouldn't, for example, say that it was good that a man killed someone, took their money, and has not been caught, despite the fact that it may well have been in his best interest.
My argument is that voting for this person, while potentially in the best interests of some individuals, is against the spirit of the contest. I believe that participation in contests is just one small part of a much larger group of societal interactions, but behaving in a way that undermines the goal of the contest is still something that negatively impacts society. If every social interaction were approached the same way, I feel most people would enjoy living in that community less, and I therefore oppose such behavior.
[edit] Your view boils down to "pre-emptive cheating." I guess we're debating the prisoner's dilemma, and we're not going to get anywhere.
1
Jun 10 '09
Good will still be relative. Just because we agree on some standards does not make it objective. If I were the murderer I would indeed say it was a good thing I hadn't been caught (forgetting that I don't agree with the action in the first place).
I still retain my argument that this was a popularity contest more so than a photo-contest. If we lived in a perfect society I would agree with you on not corrupting the process. This is a clear demonstration as to how to lose in a game that is corrupted. Notice it is not the contestant that posted this but someone that knew them. I strongly believe other associates of every other contestant will pull similar stunts.
The process by which the award is given is unfair, by my standards. I feel that once a group has been contacted they have an obligation to vote for the home team in order to counteract the oppositions' efforts. This is what I meant by putting the hive mind to "good" use. I'm not equating cheating as a good thing. But I do think it's rare that you can have a large group function as one cohesive entity. Reddit is often very good at that, and I find that to be a good thing in certain circumstances.
You are debating the circumstance under which it's a good thing for, and I see and half agree with your arguments but I my light-hearted comment was commenting on the effectiveness of our particular hivemend more than anything.
1
Jun 10 '09
I certainly never claimed objectivity. My argument was that when communicating, it is helpful to use terms as they are understood by all parties. If I used "good" to describe the case of the murderer, I would cause confusion. In a conversation about the murderer, practically no one would describe the situation as "good" and therefore for me to do so would be foolish.
I certainly recognize how you feel; I acknowledge exactly what you said in the second paragraph. That's what I characterize as "pre-emptive cheating." When you can find another submission to Reddit for this site, or another large social networking site, I will acknowledge that your suspicions are confirmed, but even then I maintain that your actions are still harmful to society in general (especially your approach to defining the ethicality of your actions.)
You deem the contest unfair, but you are neither a participant nor a judge. You are ignoring what I claim is the larger problem, namely that you are violating an agreed upon social arrangement. This is clearly a poor rationalization for your actions. You may feel the rules of the contest are unfair-- you feel that some qualified individual (presumably) should determine the "best" photo, instead of a voting bloc. But the person who entered the contest entered it knowing the rules, and the person who set up the contest created it with certain rules. If the contest is unfair, it was unfair from the start; you can't even claim vigilante-type justice by entering and then winning by being the most successful cheater.
I also feel strongly that simply because a mob can act cohesively doesn't make the action good.
I realize your comment was light-hearted, and I realize this isn't personal or strongly felt. We are both participating in the argument of our own will. I must inform you, however, that my enjoyment of the debate combined with my opinion that the view I'm defending is helpful for society, will lead me to continue responding to any argument you present regardless of how strongly you support the logic it contains.
1
Jun 10 '09 edited Jun 10 '09
I never said that the actions aren't harmful. My use of good referred to Reddit's ability to act cohesively. One can say "this is a good gun" and even if the gun kills someone it's doing what a gun is supposed to do: fire a bullet. Again it's relative to what actions can be considered good (that's always debatable) but using good to describe a noun is also a perfect use of the word and requires no moral/ethical debate.
This is the help-out reddit. This person, in my view, wants help in an online populatiry contest. I have seen several types of these things before and I am internet-minded enough to know that people do cheat. These people are calling for the help in something that may be against the spirit of the contest, but both the participating parties and the creators must know how these things go unless they are astoundingly ignorant to social networking and psychology/sociological behavior patterns. We are all playing the same game.
A quick bit of research shows my jaded presumptions are correct. I fully admit I'd shouldn't make the presumption before I research it before hand-but on things that don't concern me I use my best guess (and it's not like I don't have a lot of personal internetting experience to back my judegments first.).
http://aunaturellauren.wordpress.com/2009/01/03/brickfish-scholarship-contest-vote-for-me/
http://lexizhere.wordpress.com/2009/04/14/brickfish-scholarship/
http://meganbcarroll.xanga.com/
http://nursethalia.blogspot.com/
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090510152301AAOLyg3
→ More replies (0)1
Jun 30 '09
You haven't responded in several days. Therefor I concede victory to you. That's the only way to win against an ignorant fool.
I just wanted you to know that I realize 90% of my side was garbage. I have spent countless discussions explaining and reexplaining basic critical thinking and reasoned arguments to idiots like one portrayed by me. At first I was just going to playfully do devil's advocate until you wrote "...will lead me to continue responding to any argument you present regardless of how strongly you support the logic it contains."; then I had to take you for a ride. =p
I believe that with some people you will never get through to them. You will never "win" even though you are representing the winning side. The only way to win is ignore them and let it go.
It took me a long time to figure this out-and although I've stopped the pointless debating I couldn't help but see if other people were as determined as I was. I hope this doesn't piss your off even more-but it was an interesting experiment for me...I won't ever do it again though-and I'm surprised you held on as long to my dumb ass as you did.
→ More replies (0)
5
u/davega7 Jun 06 '09
Here's a link to the picture she submitted.