Shannon H.

Simply put the game is rigged to only ever allow those who spend a bunch of money to get anywhere.

I consider myself a mid-level hobby photographer. I have been doing it a long time but I don't expect to make money at it. That said I have won awards for my photos and honestly some of them are pretty damn good.

I don't mind my photos taking a back seat to better photos, I truly don't. On the Gurushots platform, there are a lot of photos that are better than mine, but there are also a huge number that are worse, including some that should not be shown to anyone (exploitive of children imo) others which are completely prosaic. And some which are frankly horrible (out of focus poorly composed, over-processed, etc.) Losing out to these photos is an insult. Were Gurushots about better photography this would not happen. And no it is not just sour grapes. I see really well-done photos far better than my own suffer the same fate.

On the platform, you enter your photos into challenges. Some challenges have themes such as the color pink or farm animals, others are more general such as a photo of the day (must be one you uploaded recently). Some let you enter one photo others allow four. You enter photos and others vote on them. You increase the exposure of your own photos by voting on those of others. The voting is allegedly blind, meaning you do not see who the photo belongs to. All that is good. But, iffen the game were about better photos, it would stand to reason that the better one would win the challenges. They don't.

The problem is actually in the game's algorithm which seeks to normalize chances to be voted on across all pictures. In other words, suppose you entered a picture 4 days from the end of the contest. And suppose you received 100 views and enough votes that were in the top ten (I have been there). One hour from the end of the contest someone enters a photo. The system will see to it that they get the same 100 views as your photo did. Never mind that you have spent the last several days keeping your exposure level up by occasionally voting, That means nothing to the game.

Of course, just being viewed does not mean that the person will get the votes, The idea being that poor photos will not get the votes, but they do. In the game, a person's exposure level is maintained according to how recently you have voted on other's work. Especially as the game nears the end exposure level drops quickly as this is when much of the voting takes place. So, people are rapid voting. You vote by clicking on a picture or clicking a button yes or no. On the computer or android app you are not required to even see the photos, you can click on a black square where a photo has not been drawn yet. The only way to expect any votes, especially at the end is to keep your exposure level at the highest point.

Also, you can swap photos and this is where the algorithm is abused. Suppose again that you entered a photo and gained 100 views. Early in the game voting is much slower and quality matters but not so much later in the game as people are rapid voting as I explained., So twenty minutes before the end of the contest, you swap out a photo that has a hundred views. The system will make sure that the new photo also gets a hundred views. Since this is the time when people are just voting to increase their own exposure votes are more likely. I have yet to have any swap that did not net more votes. This swapping out of pictures is the ONLY way to have any chance of winning or coming in at a decent place. Why? Because swaps cost money. Up to about a buck a peice (cheaper in bulk of course)

I am to opposed to the game making money, but to rig the voting system in such a way that only those who pay will have a chance is frankly Capitalism at it's worst.

But it gets worse. The game creators say the algorithm works to normalize views, but...

I track things pretty closely. It is possible to see the number of views you have as well as the number of votes. In one contest I had managed to make it to position 100 (not my worst) and sit around that number for much of the challenge. A few hours from the end I did a swap and sure enough, the new picture did better than the old one. I made it to position 55. Then I sat, and I sat, and I sat. I kept my exposure level high through occasional voting but I gained no points on any one of my four pictures for 30 minutes, then 45. I checked the views (Like I said I watch pretty closely) NADA. It was not that my photos did not get the votes they had no chance to as they got no views. I fell in the ranking to number 150 then further. Finally, I started getting views and votes on the last 5 minutes, but even with more votes, I sank further. I ended the contest at 175. This was not the first time this sort of thing happened. Another time I was in position 8 and after the same sort of thing where I just got no views I ended in 25th place.

If I had only swapped and swapped and swapped and swapped, maybe I would have a chance? If only I were willing to put my paycheck into a game. If you are not willing to spend money you will not get to the upper three levels. Because they require winning contests and the only way to win is to game the system. If only it were about better photography I might be willing to pry my wallet open, but it's is not it is about gaming the game. That's a shame too because this has promise otherwise.

Also there should be better social aspects.