Should people take part, knowing they won't fulfill?

[tSkye]

This is just a query of one's views, that there be no right or wrong answers.

There are some competitions that when one is selected, he is supposed to travel aboard to photograph and do volunteer work. Others include turning up at several locations, giving speeches or even lessons.

The question is, "Why do people take part in such competitions, knowing they would not want to fulfill these obligations?"

 

[attap seed]

my question is,

"those who take part w no intention to fulfill those obligations, what are their chances of winning?"

 

[night86mare]

attap seed -

my question would then be,

"how can you tell that they have no intention to fulfill those obligations when judging who will win?" :bsmilie:

tSkye - try luck lor.. tbh, it happens a lot these days, not just with photographic competitions. :dunno:

 

[attap seed]

paiseh, a little lost.

my point is, if the winner is expected to fulfill shooting and speech obligations, then the standard of the competition must be very high.

and to win will be a great honor.

and those who win should, generally, ve put in lots of effort and will cherish such rare opportunities.

...no doubt, can try luck. but if the term "try luck" is used, then the probability of winning will naturally be slim, cus, after all, its "play play" only.

but then, many competitions, nowadays, choose very controversial entries as winners. then, perhaps, trying too hard can be counter-productive.

 

[night86mare]

? why do you think that just having shooting and speech obligations means standard of competition must be high? i'm not sure if you guys are referring to specific stuff here, if this is the case and it is too sensitive, please pm me.

well, a lot of people step into decisions where the moral ground is hardly ever considered, only self-interest

and that makes all the difference. one would say that the system should be able to judge the right people from the wrong, but that's not easy either, and surely, not fail-safe.

 

[attap seed]

paiseh, i am not referring to any specific case.

perhaps, i shouldnt even post any reply, considering that i dunno wat exactly is going on.

over and out.

 

[Long Thai Bean]

Maybe the TS should post a more specific scenario ....
Is there a photo competition that requires the winner to do that ....
If so ... is that part of the prize or another obligation to fulfill before you get the prize?

Frankly for myself ... I have taken part in online competetion that I am slightly "over the age limit" ... I stress SLIGHTLY ... and I do mean it.
This is an international online competition .... My intension was not to win ... but to see how I fare against photographers worldwide ... It may not be a fair comparison but still a sort of self guage ....

My point .... sometimes its not winning and getting the prize .... Its knowing that you can win and knowing that you are good at what you do.

 

[ortega]

thread moved

 

[sircheezeball]

Sometimes, there could be a clash of schedule. If one gets to know of the dates of some other more important events only after taking part, it's not up to them to decide.

Furthermore, sometimes the specific details of the event are not clearly stated on the homepage or other relevant pages. Unless he or she flips through every single page of the website or brochure etc, it's almost impossible to find such details. I mean if an organizer puts the date of the talk/trip/workshop one has to attend in an irrelevant section (such as putting in under subheadings like objectives, organizers etc), do they actually expect people to read them? Imagine this: If you are someone taking part in e.g. clubsnap photo contest and you don't know the date which you have to attend their meet up session because you cant find it, will you not join the contest? Furthermore, won't you presume that the date for the meet up session might simply be undecided yet, since you can't find it?

In conclusion, although participants may cause quite a lot of inconvenience to organizers, but the organizers should also consider the problem from a participant's perspective. As I have mentioned in the example above, ensuring that the participants can find the information of the event with relative ease is absolutely essential to the proper organization of any event.

Hopefully, with this advice, further organizers can put themselves in the shoes of the participants and take note of such important yet minute details.

All best to future photographic events!

 

[tSkye]

Ah yes, but the main intention of this query is not to persecute those who genuinely have been held up at home but rather, to those who have no intention in the first place to fulfill some conditions set out. I refer to this topic due to a recent event that triggered this question.

I think even if we want to pit ourselves against the best and see our standard of level, and try our luck at winning it, would it be reasonable for one to scour through the website for information on any competition? Like see what are the terms and conditions, whether post processing can be used, what camera can be used, when is the deadline, what kind of file format to submit, whether we have to pay to submit etc etc?

As for the exact date and time, we can't just blame the organisers for placing it in a lesser accessed section, can we? Or like contracts signed, we neglect to read the fine print and expect to be totally expunged from duty? Should we play our part, and e-mail queries to the organiser to clarify our doubts?

 

[vince123123]

So what's the main beef here? Someone who won and couldn't do the things he's supposed to? Then just retract his award and give it to the next person? I'm wondering what's the problem here.

 

[night86mare]

So what's the main beef here? Someone who won and couldn't do the things he's supposed to? Then just retract his award and give it to the next person? I'm wondering what's the problem here.

ethics? morality?

among many other things. i think it is alright if the conditions to be fulfilled have a clash of interests - like a while back if i'm not wrong one of the conditions to redeem prize from a race was that the winner had to be sponsored by company a.. but since winner was already sponsored by company b (direct competitor) before hand she declined. otherwise, it is worthy of comparison to other relevant and parallel examples like scholarship bond breaking, to name one that i can think of.