One of the discussion topics that is receiving the most attention regards the merit of the "Aesthetic Value" voting option. Some feel that by including this option, people are being encouraged to treat it as a "beauty pageant" and that is counterproductive to the main goal of the ratings. What is the main goal of the rating system? HMF admins feel (If I may sum up some of their statements) that it ought to act as a tool to emphasize the more useful photos; the photograph as "diagnostic" tool, or one which illustrates the honest-to-goodness behavior of the plant, warts and all. Sometimes the prettiest photos happen to be good "diagnostic" photos as well, but not always. Sometimes a casual snapshot of the whole plant, regardless of what other clutter might be in the photo, or how well lit and composed the image is, is the most meaningful to people who are shopping for a rose with certain features as their priority: bush shape/size, for example. We all want to have an idea of how a certain cultivar is going to look in our garden, and the best way of providing people with that information is to upload your photos of the rose in your garden. So the question is whether the photo ratings on HMF facilitate or hinder the process. If HMF wants to have a way to prioritize the most useful photos, then putting a system in place for participants to vote for image merit is a good approach. Voting for an image based on its "art" merit may or may not serve a purpose in achieving that goal. What is your opinion? How can HMF promote the best photos without turning the process into a beauty contest? This is currently an issue for HMF admin because more than one person has stated that they have either removed a photo because it got a "poor" aesthetic rating, or have refrained from including a snapshot of their plant for fear of receiving a "poor" aesthetic rating. Any and all ideas for avoiding perceived problems in this matter are welcome. Feel free to voice your opinion here and/or at HMF in the following discussion: Here is a link that might be useful: Photo ratings discussion on HMF

See discussion on duplicate post entitled "HMF discussion of photo ratings," or go to the link which has guite a discussion going on.

I got an email back today. "HI there, Photos can be uploaded directly to Houzz, so while you may include links to photo bucket or other photo sites in your posts and comments, the photos can not be embedded directly. Original posts must be edited within an hour. Comments on posts can be edited up to one week later. The reason these limits are in place is to insure consistency in the discussion that follows and to allow for minimal disruption to the other users participating in the conversation. If posts are editable forever, discussions can lose their coherency as people come back and remove their content." I also saw on the Kitchen forum today someone mentioned a post she flagged as spam other people could still see and were commenting on. I'm interested to know how the flagging works too. - Since I flagged two of my own posts. I did want to correct that the photos from Photobucket that weren't coming down...when I went back in last night to try some tests here I realized I didn't delete all of my pics which was why they were still showing the other day. My bad. I apologize for going on about that when it was my fault.

I do a google search using "gardenweb" "myname" and "short phrase" that's the gist of the post. Ex: "gardenweb linelle front door."