![](/images/MasterShadowLeftTop.gif) |
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1... 3 4 5 6 7 ...11 Previous Next
|
Isn't contribution system going in a wrong way? (Locked) |
|
|
|
Author |
Message |
![DVD Profiler Unlimited Registrant DVD Profiler Unlimited Registrant](/images/PUD.PNG) ![Star Contributor Star Contributor](/images/PSC.PNG) | Kevin | Registered March 22, 2001 |
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 609 |
| Posted: | | | | <yawn> As usual, this is getting old. |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 951 |
| Posted: | | | | I think some members forget like we have the ability to contribute or not. The screeners have the ability to accept a contribution or not. Especially when a contributor doesn't agree with the current rules and chooses to contribute based on their own personal preference. Quoting richardw: Quote: Very interesting! I recently submitted contributions updating the profiles for three Region 3 DVD releases of Shaw Brothers movies.
I note today that they have been declined on the basis that I did not provide the source of the information I inserted, which seems to relate to cast and crew.
IN fact, my Contribution Notes for all three noted the source, CINEMASIE.
I can accept that a panel member might not recognise the name. But, it seems to me, an email to check the reference would have more easily resolved the matter than outright rejection.
Not that it worries me.
I am happy to contribute from time-to-time as the quid pro quo for the Profiles I download. I do my best to follow the rules and, if my contributions do not conform for some reason, then I expect rejection.
If they are not wanted so be it! But on one uninformed vote? Naming sources isn't a guarantee that your contribution will be accepted. See Ken's response bellow. Quoting Ken Cole: Quote: This is not a wink wink, nudge nudge "rule". We do not want IMDB data, or data from any third party database, entered into DVD Profiler. The reason for this is that they have invested much time and money (as we have) into generating and maintaining their database. Copying their database is theft. If that weren't enough reason, third party databases routinely spike their data with "poison" data - false data designed to identify and prove cases of theft.
The requirement for naming the source is not designed to allow Invelos plausible deniability. If the submitted data came from the IMDB or another source, we need to know that so we may properly decline the submission. Falsely stating the source of data in an attempt to bypass this will result in an immediate and permanent ban from contributing. | | | Are you local? This is a local shop the strangers you would bring would not understand us, our customs, our local ways. |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 2,694 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting surfeur51: Quote: Quoting Rifter:
Quote: I don't have one bit of sympathy for you.
Poor guy...
Unable to read Unable to think Unable to consider anything except his own certainties...
I think it's no more necessary to discuss with blind minded people ![](/images/emoticons/grin.gif) ROFLMAO! Yet you're the one who seems to have the problem! | | | John
"Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice!" Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964 Make America Great Again! |
| Registered: April 10, 2007 | Posts: 10 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting richierich: Quote: The only frustration I have, is when an image contribution is declined, despite there being up to a 20-1 yes vote. As it is basically a subjective element of a profile, surely such a great majority should dictate that it is a preferable image? But it appears the screener/autobot follows the 1 no vote.
Frustrated ![](/images/emoticons/grin.gif) I recently submitted higher quality coverscans for The 6th Day (5035822099036.4) which received 11 positive and 0 negative votes. Still the submission was declined for some reason. Really frustrated ![](/images/emoticons/grin.gif) |
| Registered: March 23, 2007 | Posts: 317 |
| Posted: | | | | I think that this is being blown out of proportion. This thread is not about following the rules or not following the rules, it's about proportionate response. If you have a profile that is 'owned' by 1000 people, you might expect more updates and challenges to get the information right and the application of very strict rules becomes important. If, however, you have a profile that is 'owned' by only 10 people and possibly only two people who will ever contribute to it, then you need to be more realistic about the quality of information you're likely to get and the level of scrutiny you can apply. As has been said more than once, some information is better than none!
As for alternatives, I think the argument is that the 'new', hard-line is a change, and the alternative is simply to go back to what it was before. And what was before? The voting systems! If you have a well maintained profile that may expect 100 votes on a change, chances are that profile is going to adhere well to the rules because of the amount of scrutiny it is put under. If you have a less owned profile which may attract only three or four votes and only two or three changes in its lifetime (e.g. vast swathes of minority interest and non-R1 profiles), you tend to be less discerning.
My concern (and it would seem, many others) is that the submissions I make (which rarely contain more than a few words of contributions notes) will receive single-figure yes votes and no no votes, but will now be rejected where it wasn't in the past. I.e. that balance of credibility has moved further away from the voting systems and towards the nameless, faceless bots.
I think the argument is not to do with the detail or the strictness of the rules, but that their implementation in a given circumtance is best suited to a jury of the submision's peers. | | | This is a sig... ... ... yay...
Don't understand? Maybe DVDProfilerWiki.org does! |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 21,610 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting surfeur51: Quote: Quoting kahless:
Quote:
You remember my 1st answer to you at the beginning of this thread? Take it easy! ![](/images/emoticons/wink.gif)
Well, in fact I knew that from the beginning, since I've read many topics in these forums. I just regret that it seems impossible to have a quiet discussion where everybody tries to understand the arguments of the other party.
I have personnally no problem, I'm very happy with dvdprofiler. But I think the system is going wrong and I tried without any success to alert about it.
Thank you for your support ![](/images/emoticons/beam.gif) In your opinion and you want your area to be exempt from the Rules which were written for everyone, Surfeur. I fully understand that you want to be treated differently, but it not the way it is adn not the way it was designed. As I said I want you to Contribute, as long as you follow the same Rules as everyone else, just because you are french or Italian or whatever is not an exemption. Thsi also applies to voting, the FIRST thing has nothing to do with a jury of your peers, the questions is are you or are you NOT following the Rules, if you are not then all votes should be No. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!! CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it. Outta here
Billy Video |
| ![DVD Profiler Unlimited Registrant DVD Profiler Unlimited Registrant](/images/PUD.PNG) | Dan W | Registered: May 9, 2002 |
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 980 |
| Posted: | | | | I'll put it another way.
We tried it without rules and the DB was a complete mess regardless of the number of arguments in the forums. We have just as many arguments now but the DB is much better. | | | Dan |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 810 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting DariusKyrak: Quote: I think that this is being blown out of proportion. This thread is not about following the rules or not following the rules, it's about proportionate response. If you have a profile that is 'owned' by 1000 people, you might expect more updates and challenges to get the information right and the application of very strict rules becomes important. If, however, you have a profile that is 'owned' by only 10 people and possibly only two people who will ever contribute to it, then you need to be more realistic about the quality of information you're likely to get and the level of scrutiny you can apply. As has been said more than once, some information is better than none!
As for alternatives, I think the argument is that the 'new', hard-line is a change, and the alternative is simply to go back to what it was before. And what was before? The voting systems! If you have a well maintained profile that may expect 100 votes on a change, chances are that profile is going to adhere well to the rules because of the amount of scrutiny it is put under. If you have a less owned profile which may attract only three or four votes and only two or three changes in its lifetime (e.g. vast swathes of minority interest and non-R1 profiles), you tend to be less discerning.
Why? Why should the number of other people that own the DVD lower the bar on data quality? A full third of my collection are films that are not in English, should I let crap into the database for these titles just because most other R1 users will not own a copy? I try hard to submit new profiles that have all of the data and will never need a change (every once in a while I submit one that meets this goal ![](/images/emoticons/laugh.gif) ). Quote: My concern (and it would seem, many others) is that the submissions I make (which rarely contain more than a few words of contributions notes) will receive single-figure yes votes and no no votes, but will now be rejected where it wasn't in the past. I.e. that balance of credibility has moved further away from the voting systems and towards the nameless, faceless bots.
So add real notes, list your sources. If you had just spent 30 minutes entering the full cast from the film/DVD credits, the extra time to type "entered full cast from the film credits" is not much! Quote: I think the argument is not to do with the detail or the strictness of the rules, but that their implementation in a given circumtance is best suited to a jury of the submision's peers. As you said up above, on some submissions there will be very few (or zero) votes, Invelos needs a quick way to sort out good data from the bad. The current system works. Yes there are times that a bad one get approved, so we resubmit the good data and move on. There are times that good data gets rejected, one again we resubmit with clear notes and them move on. pdf | | | Paul Francis San Juan Capistrano, CA, USA |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 810 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting surfeur51: Quote: Quoting kahless:
Quote:
You remember my 1st answer to you at the beginning of this thread? Take it easy! ![](/images/emoticons/wink.gif)
Well, in fact I knew that from the beginning, since I've read many topics in these forums. I just regret that it seems impossible to have a quiet discussion where everybody tries to understand the arguments of the other party.
I have personnally no problem, I'm very happy with dvdprofiler. But I think the system is going wrong and I tried without any success to alert about it.
Thank you for your support ![](/images/emoticons/beam.gif) I don't get it. What part of the rules is giving you a hard time? The basics of the rules are: Use the data on the DVD as the main source for all the data that you can. Enter the cast and crew data from the film credits. Enter the overview from the case back. The basics of submission are: Enter notes that list your sources for data. Enter notes that explain why your data is not the same as what is shown on the case. What part of this is hard? I have submitted more then 180 new profiles in the last two and a half years, plus I don't know how many updates to other people profiles with almost all of them approved. If I can do it, so can you. pdf | | | Paul Francis San Juan Capistrano, CA, USA |
| Registered: May 14, 2007 | Posts: 455 |
| Posted: | | | | In the far corner weighing in at ......
Enough already Rules are rules. | | | Last edited: by leo1963 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 21,610 |
| Posted: | | | | Succinct and to the point, leo. Skip ![](/images/emoticons/grin.gif) | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!! CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it. Outta here
Billy Video |
| Registered: May 9, 2007 | Posts: 137 |
| Posted: | | | | Do these threads ever reach a conclusion?
If you feel the rules are evil, then don't contribute. If you like to contribute, do so. Happily. If you think a certain rule needs some revision, pull up a thread, state your concern and try to contribute a solution.
Open up the dialog. What's the problem? Complaining doesn't take us too far.
It's a hobby, not a torture.
I think I'm starting to feel like Dan W's avatar... | | | Funny, these cookies don't taste anything like Girl Scouts.
DVD Collection |
| ![DVD Profiler Unlimited Registrant DVD Profiler Unlimited Registrant](/images/PUD.PNG) | Dan W | Registered: May 9, 2002 |
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 980 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting SailorRipley: Quote:
I think I'm starting to feel like Dan W's avatar... Geez!!! ![](http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b142/roadkill141/Geez.jpg) | | | Dan |
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | Posts: 278 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Dan W: Quote: I'll put it another way.
We tried it without rules and the DB was a complete mess regardless of the number of arguments in the forums. We have just as many arguments now but the DB is much better. Much, MUCH better. The absolute garbage that used to get approved before was unbelievable. | | | Guns don't kill people. Hammers do. |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: ![High Rating](/images/Ratings/Small/1.png) | Posts: 2,372 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Kevin Coed: Quote: Quoting Dan W:
Quote: I'll put it another way.
We tried it without rules and the DB was a complete mess regardless of the number of arguments in the forums. We have just as many arguments now but the DB is much better.
Much, MUCH better. The absolute garbage that used to get approved before was unbelievable. Agree. A lot of that can be attributed to both the rules AND the Voting process. People still submit garbage (and always will no matter what the rules say), but most of the time it is voted down. |
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | Posts: 278 |
| Posted: | | | | I noticed a discernible difference when the voting system came in mainly. | | | Guns don't kill people. Hammers do. |
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1... 3 4 5 6 7 ...11 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
![](/images/MasterShadowRightTop.gif) |