Panoramio's Blog

30 Responses to “Correction of misplaced photos with suggestions from other people”  

1. 1 Jay on May 4th, 2007 said:

   Sometimes I get suggestion for misplaced photos, but the suggestion is for the object location. I discard them as I placed the photographer location when taken shoot, not the location of the object.

2. 2 Nicolas Mertens on May 5th, 2007 said:

   Nice work, Señores, but not enough. The problem of anonymity has not been addressed, and it IS a problem. You may have read in the “Support & Suggestions” forum a number of complaints about this, which indicate that anonymity should not be tolerated. In fact, suggestions for relocation should be handled the way “Comments” are, so that the recipients of these suggestions would be allowed to respond. You complain about the problems you have had with the load of suggestions. Please, let me assure you that the load will be considerably reduced when anonymity will not be permitted anymore. Why do you think magazines and newspapers advise their readers NOT to send anonymous letters? People will think twice before making “suggestions” that are either frivolous, malicious, or plain wrong; they will also abstain from “testing” the system, as you put it. What will remain will be truly useful suggestions, expressed in the polite and courteous manner to which most Panoramio users are used to.

   A final comment on your statement, “We also believe that authors should be responsible for the quality of their own contributions, so in case the suggestions are ignored, photos might be removed from the public map.” The first part of that statement is certainly correct: photographers should be responsible for the quality of their contributions. But Panoramio should ALSO be responsible for it. We are talking here about a joint effort between Panoramio and its users. As for the second part of the statement… what is this? No candy for the badly behaved children? Please, Ricardo! Joaquín, please! But that, again, would not occur if anonymity were not permitted. A courteous suggestion by an identified author will not be ignored; it will be responded in kind.

   Sincerely,

   Nicolas Mertens.

3. 3 Eduardo Manchón on May 7th, 2007 said:

   Nicolas,

   I understand your concern and I appreciate it very much. We still didn’t make registration mandatory for suggestions because we wanted to wait to see how the system worked after the first weeks.

   There were many suggestions accumulated before the system was released, that’s why suddenly people got many wrong or repeated ones, but this is over. We also introduced the limitation of only one suggestion per photo ever. Most of reports in the forum are from the first days before this limitation was added. I believe the number of wrong suggestions sent now is much smaller, but if people continue reporting abuses, we will try to reduce it making registration mandatory.

   Anyway I’m afraid the number of correct suggestions will be reduced if we make registration mandatory, many people is not registered, but want to contribute.

   Eduardo

4. 4 Philippe Stoop on May 7th, 2007 said:

   Hi Eduardo
   You’re right, the suggestion system works better now, but there are still a few problems.

   - people who suggest a new location can add a comment now, but the photographer can’t answer !

   - even if you accept or discard a new location very quickly, the popularity index of the photo is changed : if the photo was one of the firsts ones in popular tab, it becomes one of the last if the location has been disputed.
   It’s not very logical, and it really seems that some members use this to manipulate popular tab.Since the pending moves procedure works, about one half of the suggestions I receive is pointless (a few meter move, or totally absurd suggestions). It didn’t happen before. And I am not the only one, see forum

   To avoid any suspicion, I really think that :
   1. Suggestions should not change the photo’s status (I mean its position in popular tab)at once. It should only if the photographer does not answer after at least one week
   2. Suggestions should not be anonymous, and the photographers should be able to answer (not only for dispute : last week, someone helped me to find the right location for several pictures in Djebel Sahro (Morocco), and I could not thank him or her!

   - you are right when you say that photographers are responsible for the accuracy of their location. But, in many
   countries, the map layer does not help much, and the satellite image is not enough to find the right location.

   Anyway, this suggestion procedure is a very good idea, and I am sure it will be perfect soon!

   Philippe

5. 5 Nicolas Mertens on May 7th, 2007 said:

   Ricardo:
   Thanks for your response. You are talking of “mandatory registration,” but you are still trying to avoid it and I don’t understand why. You can see in the forum that most of the complaints boil down to the fact that people who receive the relocation suggestions get angry because they cannot respond to those who make these suggestions. Philippe Stoop’s example is only one among many. (Incidentally, thanks, Philippe, for having the guts to express your views in this blog.)
   You say that, “We still didn’t make registration mandatory for suggestions because we wanted to wait to see how the system worked after the first weeks.” It will not work in a few weeks from now anymore than it works presently, because there will always be people who, under the protection of anonymity, will continue making incorrect, frivolous, or even malicious suggestions.
   You say, “I believe the number of wrong suggestions sent now is much smaller, …” You seem to imply that a small number of wrong suggestions is better than no wrong suggestions at all. (?)
   Finally, you say that, “I’m afraid the number of correct suggestions will be reduced if we make registration mandatory, many people is not registered, but want to contribute.” People who believe they have legitimate suggestions will register, just as they register to make Comments.
   Come on, Ricardo! Anonymity is not only unethical, it is cowardly and the mark of individuals who do not want to take responsibility for the consequences of their actions. You know it, I know it, everyone at Panoramio knows it, and all responsible Panoramio users know it, which, I like to think, is the majority of the Panoramio users. The sad story is that the majority is being harassed by a minority of irresponsible individuals.
   Eventually, as I said above, I don’t understand you reluctance to implement “mandatory registration,” and, to say it frankly, I feel like you are giving us the run-around.
   Sincerely,
   Nicolas.

6. 6 KaBu on May 7th, 2007 said:

   Cheers Nicolas.

   Off Topic:
   Are you that shirty about not existing “Mandatory registration”, that you constantly confuse names?!?
   Usually, your “Ricardo” is called by family, friends and Panoramio users “Eduardo”.

   Back:
   Why we are active Panoramio users? Mainly, because we want to show our (amateur) photos in Google Earth. This calculation works and most traffic to Panoramio website probably comes from GE.
   Since there is no registration for GE, I understand Panoramio’s intention to follow big brother’s habits and create an attractive and open photo community.

   In general, internet users use internet for fun, relaxation and therefore we are lazy (to register). “Mandatory registration” sooner or later leads by definition to a closed community.
   Not yet a good deal for Panoramio, because not all GE users already registered for Panoramio service, Earth is not fully covered by “Blue compasses” etc.

   Please Nicolas, calm down a bit. Small Panoramio team is working full force to deliver good quality and free of charge service. We can do our share (flagging inappropriate content, reporting bugs, suggesting proper places) and wait procedures to improve.

   KaBu

7. 7 Nicolas Mertens on May 7th, 2007 said:

   Thanks KaBu, your input–which came as a cold shower–will certainly calm me down. Eduardo, I sincerely apologize for calling you names! I could try making excuses for myself (passion, emotion, etc.) but I won’t: I’m terribly sorry about this. It was certainly not my intention to offend you in any way.

   Apart from that, I said what I had to say about anonymity. Now, it’s up to the people to decide whether they want transparency or not. At this point, I’ll just keep quiet.

   Nicolas.

8. 8 Marco Langbroek on May 7th, 2007 said:

   I agree with the comments here, there should be:

   a) a way for the photographer to respond in writing why (s)he accepted or rejected a suggestion;
   b) suggestions should not be anonymous.

   The point is that anonymity is begging for abuse. This was pointed out above by various people.

   I had one suggestion for a “wrongly placed” image so far, and it was plainly ridiculous (and therefore I feel, malicious). At that moment I sourly missed the opportunity to rebute the suggestion in words (I solved by posting it as a comment to that image). It was on this image by the way:

   [url=http://www.panoramio.com/photo/659893][img]http://static4.bareka.com/photos/thumbnail/659893.jpg[/img][/url]

9. 9 Daniel Meyer on May 9th, 2007 said:

   On average I’ve received about one suggestion per day over the last few weeks. And I really have to say: certainly less than 10% of them were useful! The reasons for that have already been mentioned, such as misconception of placement (photographer standpoint vs. object targetpoint) or viciously fudging of popularity. For most of my pics I’m really sure about the location and I have the consistent strategy to locate all pics where I was standing when taking them. So, the present system is not helpful.
   In my opinion, the suggestions should strongly be considered as comments on the pics. The implemented commenting works perfectly fine because everyone who wants to leave a comment has to be a registered member and if there are some inappropriate comments the owner of the according pic can remove them.
   I think that suggestions should only be allowed for registered members and with a comment (just to make sure that there was some thinking behind). And suggestions mustn’t have any impact on the popularity of a picture. But unanswered suggestion could remain visible at the pic just like a comment.

10. 10 Jared J. Myers on May 10th, 2007 said:

    Cheers everybody!

    After having shared more or less Nicholas Mertens’ opinion on the relocation suggestions issue, and after having read the above postings, I reconsidered the pro’s and con’s of anonymous suggestions. They may be helpful, in fact; especially if they concern places where few people get and even less people are aware of the geography.

    On the other hand, the number of erroneous or intentionally misleading suggestions was increasing over the last few weeks. If every suggestion, discarded or accepted, leads to a loss of “popularity” and a removal from GE during the next update, this may invite people to misuse this good and helpful instrument.

    Would it be an acceptable compromise to allow every kind of suggestions but to apply “popularity losses” on the photo only in case of suggestions that are made by people who are logged in and have their aliases displayed?

11. 11 Joaquín Cuenca Abela on May 11th, 2007 said:

    Hi,

    the loss of popularity is just a bug, it will be fixed asap. FWIW, it will not impact your ordering in the Google Earth layer, and soon it will have no impact whatsoever.

    Cheers,

12. 12 Philippe Stoop on May 12th, 2007 said:

    Hi Joaquin
    Thanks for your answer. If this bug is corrected, it will solve much of the problem, because there will surely be much less wrong corrections…

    PS : I would not like to seem too insist too much, but my photos
    http://www.panoramio.com/photo/505229 and
    http://www.panoramio.com/photo/462521
    have not been moved back to popular tab, though I have seen that many of other people’s photos affected by the same bug are back…
    Cheers

13. 13 Bart on May 12th, 2007 said:

    Don’t where to post it: your blog’s atom feed does not validate (http://feedvalidator.org/check.cgi?url=http://www.panoramio.com/blog/feed/atom/) . It’s impossible to use it in on-line agregator like Netvibes.

14. 14 Eduardo Manchón on May 15th, 2007 said:

    Philippe, now both your photos are in the popular tab.

    Photos that received suggestions got back the popularity they had, now this bug is fixed.

    Cheers,

15. 15 Philippe Stoop on May 17th, 2007 said:

    Many thanks Eduardo !
    Cheers !

16. 16 ahmetsafak on May 18th, 2007 said:

    Dünyanın, kin ve kan gölüne döndüğü günümüzde, insanların sevgi ve merhamete ne kadar muhtaç olduğu ortadadır. Ben aciz bir kul olarak ancak Rabb’im olan ALLAH’a dua ediyorum.
    “Rabb’im, bizleri birbirimizin hayrına ve iyiliğine vesile kıl, başımıza, inançlı, ihlaslı ve adaletli idareciler ihsan et, bizleri de adaletle hükmedenlerden et”
    Duama katılın ve amin deyin ki, belki söyleyenin olmasa bile amin diyenlerden birinin hürmetine Rabb’im duamızı kabul eder.
    Allah’ın Selam, Rahmet ve Mağfireti, cumle hak eden kullarının uzerine olsun. Rabb’im cümlermizi de ıslah etsin.

17. 17 millotaurus on May 21st, 2007 said:

    Agree with Nicolas, Philippe and Marco - something has to be changed !!!

18. 18 Juan Manuel Rubio on May 22nd, 2007 said:

    Hola. Hace más de un mes que incluí mis fotos en Panoramio. Podéis indicarme cuando serán visibles por cualquier usuario de Google Earth ???.
    Gracias

19. 19 Panamon_Creel on May 25th, 2007 said:

    The loss of “popularity” bug is not resolved yet. Had one suggestion after Eduardo posted it was “fixed” and the picture went to the bottom of the “list”.
    So when is it really going to be fixed?

20. 20 KRattmann on May 30th, 2007 said:

    hello,
    … received a suggestion today - anonymously ( … and let me say it in a gentle way, in my opinion the sugg was bull…, anyway the pic was taken from the “pop tab”.
    My advice now is : those, who makes suggestions (which could be sometimes very useful of course) shall not be able to comment anonymously.
    regards
    and keep the blue up
    K.Rattmann

21. 21 smol on May 31st, 2007 said:

    I can’t map my own photos. The system says “Wait…” and I’m waiting till the end of days (((. What’s the matter? Besides I can’ correct location of already mapped photos. The situation is the same. Is that bug or a feature?

22. 22 DougBuchanan.com on May 31st, 2007 said:

    Example: Since this is the confused location for photo corrections, without an obvious accurate location, in the internet quest of efficient time-use, and in regard to possible intentional misinformation, Steve B’s photo of Sarg Hubbard Park near Washington Park in south central Washington USA, is actually of LL and Laura Buchanan Lake Habitat (BuchananLake.com), despite the amusing attempts of the dishonest quasi-government Sarge Hubbard Park folks to seize control of various of their neighbor’s private land, in part by propagating perceptions of their ownership. Therein, the good idea of your program requires the detailed work to make a READILY APPARENT process to preclude the many subversions of a good idea at play within the diversity of human minds.

    And keep on having fun doing that.

    DougBuchanan.com

23. 23 tim71 on May 31st, 2007 said:

    Will anyone do something about “image xxx.jpg cannot be displayed, because it contains errors”-problem with Firefox. Supposedly Firefox gets this problem with jpeg images coded in CMYK colorspace. At the moment I cannot get any of the Google Earth-linked pctures to open in Firefox (at least any I tried).

24. 24 Jorunna on Jun 5th, 2007 said:

    Thanks for relocating 2 of my photos - badly placed by me! It was really bugging me, but now they’re in the right place - hooray!

25. 25 Pierre-Jean Durieu on Jun 9th, 2007 said:

    What about people who suggest new places in front of their own shop ? (sphinx in Cairo’s centre !)
    That’s a way to make advertising a bit aggressive, don’t you think ?
    BTW, that’s not correct for people who use, and most of all, for people who work hard to make it better each day. Thanks to them.
    You can see my comment on http://www.panoramio.com/photo/2632021.

26. 26 Maurice on Jun 9th, 2007 said:

    Since the resolution of Google Earth has improved in many places some of the suggestions are valid and I accept them.

    Also a lot of suggestions try to move the camera position to the subject position. These I do not agree with.

    I get about an equal amount of location changes both ways.

    Anonymous suggestions I don’t agree with.

    Also when photos are moved they don’t appear in GE right away ???

27. 27 Dennis Hancock on Jun 11th, 2007 said:

    I highly disagree with any personal photos of people being submitted and accepted. Isn’t the intent of photo correlation to an area to highlight the scenery of the spot? I could care less about some photo of “Baxter-May’90
    near Ventura, California (United States)”.
    Please remove the clutter by filtering out these “wasted” uploaded photos somhow.
    It is also quite frustrating to have several very similar photos attached to the same location “from the same person”, duh.

28. 28 Pierre-Jean Durieu on Jun 19th, 2007 said:

    Still two bad suggestions for one best placement suggested !

29. 29 Giles Whittaker on Jun 30th, 2007 said:

    In addition to the location, the date (exact or approximate) that a photo was taken could become highly relevant in future.

    1. May I suggest that the date be given prominence in the displayed and searchable photo data?

    2. As a related topic, a category for old (or historical) photos might be of interest, and could become important, for example illustrating changes to the built environnent or the natural environment over time.

    Some of us must have interesting photographs from family albums going back many dacades. What do you think?

30. 30 Owen Morgan on Jul 12th, 2007 said:

    Hi

    One point which has not been mentioned here is that many of Panoramio’s users travel. That means we may at times be weeks or even months without access to the Internet.

    Meanwhile, our photos receive pointless (a couple of meters), erroneous or plain malicious location suggestions and are removed from the public map and possibly also from GE because the photographer is out making more images from the back of beyond for Panoramio and is not able to respond to the “corrections”.

Leave a Reply