BHZ.

[Stan Pritchard]

I don't know whether many contributors still pay any attention to the old BHZ system, which was a method by which contributors could get some idea of how their images rated in relation to others in searches.

For a long time now, there seems to have been little or no change in the order of contributors but I happened today to take a look and there seems to have been considerable changes taking place.

In my own case, I've been moved down from position 89 to 91 (out of 3089). In another case, I noticed that a certain contributor has dropped from Page 4 to Page 24.

I wonder whether BHZ still has much significance?

Any comments?

[Ognyan Yosifov]

18 minutes ago, Stan Pritchard said:

I don't know whether many contributors still pay any attention to the old BHZ system, which was a method by which contributors could get some idea of how their images rated in relation to others in searches.

For a long time now, there seems to have been little or no change in the order of contributors but I happened today to take a look and there seems to have been considerable changes taking place.

In my own case, I've been moved down from position 89 to 91 (out of 3089). In another case, I noticed that a certain contributor has dropped from Page 4 to Page 24.

I wonder whether BHZ still has much significance?

Any comments?

As somebody mentioned in another thread on the subject a few days ago, the whole thing would make sense only if everyone marks the BHZ as a supertag. 

If everyone of the participants puts BHZ wherever they want as a tag, super tag or in the caption, it's going to be a mess and not accurate at all for the "ranking" criteria...

Edited May 6 by Ognyan Yosifov

[Reimar]

I don't think moving down two places constitutes a demotion.  Plus, you want to untick RF.  BHZ is for RM images only.  The total is 2795 not 3089.  The image for your pseudo has BHZ only as a supertag, right?  Adding BHZ to the caption as well moved my image from page 6 to page 1 (and back again when I removed it from the caption).   I personally haven't seen much change in BHZ position for my pseudos.

[Stan Pritchard]

19 minutes ago, Reimar said:

I don't think moving down two places constitutes a demotion.  Plus, you want to untick RF.  BHZ is for RM images only.  The total is 2795 not 3089.  The image for your pseudo has BHZ only as a supertag, right?  Adding BHZ to the caption as well moved my image from page 6 to page 1 (and back again when I removed it from the caption).   I personally haven't seen much change in BHZ position for my pseudos.

Thanks for the reply Reimar,  I get your point about unticking RF, having done so, I revert to my position at 89.

I'll try your suggestion of adding BHZ to the caption and see if anything else happens.

I was interested in whether contributors still use BHZ and from the replies so far, it seems they do.

P.S.  I've just checked my BHZ image and I already have BHZ in the caption.

Edited May 6 by Stan Pritchard
Additional information.

[Reimar]

3 hours ago, Stan Pritchard said:

I'll try your suggestion of adding BHZ to the caption and see if anything else happens.

Just to be clear: I do NOT suggest putting BHZ in the caption (other than to convince ourselves that keywords in both the caption and as a supertag is powerful for search placement).

[Robert M Estall]

I don't often refer to BHZ but I have had a look just now and it looks pretty much as it ever did. As long as my image is roughly where it has been, that's OK I don't feel the need to be exact.

 

Edited May 7 by Robert M Estall