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 2  Previous   Next
Inconsistent screening
Author Message
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorNosferatu
Registered: March 24, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
United Kingdom Posts: 264
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
I contributed very similar changes to a number of titles. Some were approved, some weren't.

This isn't the first time that's happened and it's puzzling because I don't know why those changes are okay with the screeners on one day with one profile and not acceptable the next with another profile.









Has this happened to anyone else?
 Last edited: by Nosferatu
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorninso4
Registered: January 16, 2010
Reputation: Highest Rating
Germany Posts: 1,309
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
What do the No votes say? When there are similar counts for yes and no votes, profiles are often declined.
Think different

Everything will be okay in the end. If it's not okay, it's not the end.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorNosferatu
Registered: March 24, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
United Kingdom Posts: 264
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
I can't remember what the No votes for The Walking Dead contributions said (I think it was one of personal preference, with the Yes votes saying "thank you" and the No votes saying there is no reason to remove that line).

The one for the Black Label contribution said "I can't find the words "Black Label" and "Limited Edition" anywhere on the packaging - what am I missing? You're referring to the website, but we're profiling the actual disc, not the website. I really don't see that as a valid source for an edition."

If that's the case, then they should all be denied. I can't see the logic in approving all except one. At the moment, of all the releases in the 101 Films' Black Label collection, only The Grifters doesn't have the editions.

It's strange and a bit frustrating why there isn't consistency so you can have two identical contributions with identical wording and one will be approved the other will be rejected.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorscotthm
Registered: March 20, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
United States Posts: 2,617
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Nosferatu:
Quote:
It's strange and a bit frustrating why there isn't consistency so you can have two identical contributions with identical wording and one will be approved the other will be rejected.

I would say that the screening process has succumbed to the same apathy as the technical support.  The powers-that-be behind Invelos have lost interest.

It seems likely that the approval process is automatic for contributions with no "no" votes, and a coin toss for the others.

---------------
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorAddicted2DVD
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: Superior Rating
United States Posts: 16,826
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
On the edition.... You say you took from the packaging and website....You said the no vote said no where on the packaging. So I would have to ask ... is the edition on the packaging or not.

Because the rules say it must come from the packaging....

Rules Quote:
Quote:
If you are using a non-standard edition, take it from the DVD box, and ensure it will help distinguish between different releases of the same title.


As for why some goes through and some don't... do the ones going through have no votes? The Screeners only see similar to what  we see when we vote. So (unless they have the same disc theirselves... all they can go by is what the votes say and what the rules say.

As for The Walking Dead. You probably had different screeners... which can read the rules differently just like we do.

On a personal note. I always vote no to removing the word "Episodes" from the list. As Ken said himself they are allowed and there is not standard to how they have to be written. And we are to vote for our preference. And I always perfer it to be there.
Pete
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorNosferatu
Registered: March 24, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
United Kingdom Posts: 264
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting scotthm:
Quote:
Quoting Nosferatu:
Quote:
It's strange and a bit frustrating why there isn't consistency so you can have two identical contributions with identical wording and one will be approved the other will be rejected.

I would say that the screening process has succumbed to the same apathy as the technical support.  The powers-that-be behind Invelos have lost interest.

It seems likely that the approval process is automatic for contributions with no "no" votes, and a coin toss for the others.

---------------

It does feel like that. As you can see from the screenshots, something with a 1-1 'score' was declined when others with the same contribution notes were approved, and the contribution which was 3-5 (in yes-no votes) was approved when one which has more updates and was less contentious (2-3 in the yes-no votes) was declined.

I get the feeling that a contribution with nonsense data and a 3-0 vote would be approved but another with real substance and a single vote against would be declined. My whole point is that it's a bit arbitrary and inconsistent, so the same update could be approved or rejected, with that decision resting on the presence of a single No vote and which screener sees it.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorGSyren
Profiling since 2001
Registered: March 14, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
Sweden Posts: 3,694
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
I have to chime in with Addicted2DVD. You can't expect the screeners to be consistent if the votes are not consistent. They can only go by what's seems incorrect to them or what voters point out as incorrect.

It's not reasoable to expect them to remember that a certain wording had been accepted without No votes, when a similar wording appears in another contribution that has No votes.

Also, different screeners may interpret the rules differently. They are only human, and the rules are far from crystal clear in many cases.

And regarding technical support I would hesitate to call it apathy. It's unfortunate that there is no technical support, but we don't know the reasons for Kens no-show. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt.
My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorNosferatu
Registered: March 24, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
United Kingdom Posts: 264
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Addicted2DVD:
Quote:
On the edition.... You say you took from the packaging and website....You said the no vote said no where on the packaging. So I would have to ask ... is the edition on the packaging or not.

Because the rules say it must come from the packaging....

Rules Quote:
Quote:
If you are using a non-standard edition, take it from the DVD box, and ensure it will help distinguish between different releases of the same title.


As for why some goes through and some don't... do the ones going through have no votes? The Screeners only see similar to what  we see when we vote. So (unless they have the same disc theirselves... all they can go by is what the votes say and what the rules say.

As for The Walking Dead. You probably had different screeners... which can read the rules differently just like we do.

On a personal note. I always vote no to removing the word "Episodes" from the list. As Ken said himself they are allowed and there is not standard to how they have to be written. And we are to vote for our preference. And I always perfer it to be there.

The packaging generally states "limited edition booklet" in the extra features section; the Black Label comes from the website; the spines have a black label on the top with a number at the bottom. It doesn't have the words 'black label' on the packaging, but it does have the black label on the spine, something which is explained on the website. This is why I mentioned both in the contribution notes.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorAddicted2DVD
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: Superior Rating
United States Posts: 16,826
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Per the rules if the words are not on the package you are not to use it. So yes per the rules your contribution would be wrong.

It is not like the screener has the disc in front of them to check... they rely on the votes.

Plus Ken stated they will accept some wrong info if the majority is right. That the wrong info can be fixed in another contribution. I personally don't agree with it. But that is how he wanted it.
Pete
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorscotthm
Registered: March 20, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
United States Posts: 2,617
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Addicted2DVD:
Quote:
It is not like the screener has the disc in front of them to check... they rely on the votes.

When cover images are online the screeners do not need to rely on the voters.  They can look.

Quote:
Plus Ken stated they will accept some wrong info if the majority is right.

This appears to be random.  Sometimes this happens and sometimes it does not.  As I've said, it almost seems as if it's a coin toss when "no" votes are received.

---------------
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorAddicted2DVD
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: Superior Rating
United States Posts: 16,826
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Can they just look at the cover image? Or is it just like our voting view... we only see what is being changed. I would imagine  it is the same as we see when voting. Plus not everything can be seen clearly on the cover... if the info is even on the cover in the first place. Remember Invelos does have some rather low quality images to look at.
Pete
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile RegistrantStar ContributorTheMadMartian
Alien with an attitude
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
United States Posts: 13,183
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Whether or not they can look at the cover is immaterial in this case as the words "Black Label" and "Limited Edition" are not on the cover and "limited edition booklet", listed as an extra feature, does not make it an edition.

As Pete points out, the single 'no' vote, and subsequent decline, were correct per the rules.  As for why the rest were accepted, well, without any 'no' votes, there is no reason for the screeners to doubt the contribution and no reason to check a cover scan.  Assuming they have that ability, in whatever screen they are using, it would not have helped here as the black logo is on the spine and we don't scan the spine.
No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorAddicted2DVD
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: Superior Rating
United States Posts: 16,826
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Long time no see Martian! Hope all is good over your way!
Pete
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorT!M
User since 6 Dec. 2000
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
Netherlands Posts: 7,755
Posted:
PM this userDirect link to this postReply with quote
Indeed, none of those "Black Label: Limited Edition" contributions, words that do not appear on the cover of these releases, should have been approved, not for any of those titles. It's nice that the distributor's website labels these releases as such, but their website is not enough to qualify for entry as an "Edition" into DVD Profiler. But when there aren't any no-votes, the screeners have no reason to doubt what you're saying. As long as nobody votes "no", pretty much anything can and will get through - but that doesn't make those contributions correct.

While I agree that these editions should all have been declined, otherwise, I do agree that it can be extremely annoying when the screeners' decisions are so inconsistent. It's baffling when you contribute the exact same change to twenty of your profiles, with the exact same contribution notes, and then having it approved in eighteen of them and declined in the other two. If an actual person was behind this, you would hope that they'd go back and either decline them all or approve them all - you'd hope they'd simply pick a stance and apply it consistently. But automatically approving the ones without no-votes and automatically declining the ones with no-votes is just lazy. It looks like the (first-level) screening process is purely an automated process these days, just an algorithm. Given the lack of any other input from Invelos that wouldn't be very surprising, but it isn't exactly a token of appreciation towards the contributors either...
 Last edited: by T!M
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorNosferatu
Registered: March 24, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
United Kingdom Posts: 264
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting T!M:
Quote:
Indeed, none of those "Black Label: Limited Edition" contributions, words that do not appear on the cover of these releases, should have been approved, not for any of those titles. It's nice that the distributor's website labels these releases as such, but their website is not enough to qualify for entry as an "Edition" into DVD Profiler. But when there aren't any no-votes, the screeners have no reason to doubt what you're saying. As long as nobody votes "no", pretty much anything can and will get through - but that doesn't make those contributions correct.

While I agree that these editions should all have been declined, otherwise, I do agree that it can be extremely annoying when the screeners' decisions are so inconsistent. It's baffling when you contribute the exact same change to twenty of your profiles, with the exact same contribution notes, and then having it approved in eighteen of them and declined in the other two. If an actual person was behind this, you would hope that they'd go back and either decline them all or approve them all - you'd hope they'd simply pick a stance and apply it consistently. But automatically approving the ones without no-votes and automatically declining the ones with no-votes is just lazy. It looks like the (first-level) screening process is purely an automated process these days, just an algorithm. Given the lack of any other input from Invelos that wouldn't be very surprising, but it isn't exactly a token of appreciation towards the contributors either...

This is exactly my point. To contribute 10 identical profile changes with the same contribution notes and to find a couple of them have been declined because there is a solitary No vote means the rules are being applied in an arbitrary, slapdash manner.

I now realise the Black Label titles shouldn't have that wording in the edition field. At the moment, of all of the titles released by 101 Films as part of that label, only one doesn't have the wording – the one where you accurately applied the rules and voted against the profile change.

It seems eccentric because there is no consistency and the point of this thread was to see if it was only happening to me or whether others had done something similar, contributing a number of identical changes with identical contribution notes to find that one has been declined when the others have been accepted and released.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorT!M
User since 6 Dec. 2000
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
Netherlands Posts: 7,755
Posted:
PM this userDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Nosferatu:
Quote:
the point of this thread was to see if it was only happening to me or whether others had done something similar, contributing a number of identical changes with identical contribution notes to find that one has been declined when the others have been accepted and released.

No, it's not just you, I share that experience. Again, it seems like at least the first-level screening process is purely an automated process these days, just an algorithm.
    Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion Page: 1 2  Previous   Next