this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2024
10 points (100.0% liked)

Not The Onion

12311 readers
1614 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Silverseren@fedia.io 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Disqualification seems appropriate. If it is against the rules to use AI photos in a normal photo category and the winner gets disqualified for that, which has happened, and it is against the rules to use a non-AI photo in this category, then the person should similarly be disqualified.

Not sure if the person behind this actually made the point they thought they were? Because it just shows that being consistent in rules and disqualification is good and the contest was consistent.

[–] corus_kt@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The stated point listed in the article was to prove that manual photography has merit and that 'nothing is more fascinating than Mother Nature herself', which he proved by winning the people's choice award. He didn't say the disqualification was inappropriate nor did he criticize the contest for inconsistent rules? It seems quite clear that he expected to be removed from the contest after making his statement, actually.

Personally I hope this doesn't become a trend of machine generation and manually shot/created work spoiling each other's contests.