Quoting pauls42:

Quote:
Quoting tlevel:

Quote:
I also think that they should go back to being guidelines. All the rules that are really needed is something like.

Quote:
Take as much information from the DVD and front and rear covers as possible when contributing. Document any source/reason for any changes for everything else.

How much simplier can it get.

The other things that Ken already has in place will take care of any radical behaviour with the data.

the problem is when you get almost the same information multiple places - and as soon as that happens everybodies opinion would be different and there would be ping ponging of profiles  as person A thought the title should be this and person B took it from an alternative location and changed it.

Ultimate flexibility would lead to ultimate chaos. And to a database which was constantly changing with the value of the data plunging.

So, to you then, voting, locking and Geri wouldn't do anything to stop that and Ken should just take them away? Did you even read my last statement?

No to: Anonymous contribution (why should you hide, trying to slip things in perhaps?)
No to: The majority and screeners decide. (Majority's change freqwently as would your data)
No to: +point system, (You can already reward contribution with the reputation system)



You can already see who's appreciated. (in the forums and by contribution)

Your proposal is flawed. lucky I don't give
today

Quoting Giga Wizard:

Quote:
lucky I don't give

I really don't care. If it can be good for you, do not resist. I got so much that one more or not...

I'm not at all paranoid about those little arrows... 

Quoting Giga Wizard:

Quote:
Your proposal is flawed. lucky I don't give
today

By the way, I think giving negative feedback on a post simply because you don't agree with it violates the spirit of the system.

Quoting Giga Wizard:

Quote:
[b]No to: Anonymous contribution (why should you hide, trying to slip things in perhaps?)
No to: The majority and screeners decide. (Majority's change freqwently as would your data)
No to: +point system, (You can already reward contribution with the reputation system)[/b]


You can already see who's appreciated. (in the forums and by contribution)

Your proposal is flawed. lucky I don't give
today

Absolute agreement.

Skip

Quoting smeehrrr:

Quote:
...  I know when I look at the contributions for voting I tend to go to the unrecognized names first, and give them more scrutiny.

You should use the same scrutiny for any user, mistakes do happen. If you don't agree with contributor, PM him what the problem is, no reply: no vote explaining screener what problem is. Several contributions from same contributor who does not follows the rules: no vote and explaining screener what problem is and aditional a
if received enough it will stop her / him and certainly notify Ken / Gerri that there is a problem with this contributor.

Quoting Giga Wizard:

Quote:
@smeehrrr:
The Reputation system tracks feedback from fellow users on posts you've made, including forum posts and commented contribution votes. Additionally, forum rule violations can affect the reputation score.

Yes, I know what the reputation system is and what it's for.  I don't believe it should be anonymous.

Quoting tlevel:

Quote:
Quoting pauls42:

Quote:
Quoting tlevel:

Quote:
I also think that they should go back to being guidelines. All the rules that are really needed is something like.

Quote:
Take as much information from the DVD and front and rear covers as possible when contributing. Document any source/reason for any changes for everything else.

How much simplier can it get.

The other things that Ken already has in place will take care of any radical behaviour with the data.

the problem is when you get almost the same information multiple places - and as soon as that happens everybodies opinion would be different and there would be ping ponging of profiles  as person A thought the title should be this and person B took it from an alternative location and changed it.

Ultimate flexibility would lead to ultimate chaos. And to a database which was constantly changing with the value of the data plunging.

So, to you then, voting, locking and Geri wouldn't do anything to stop that and Ken should just take them away? Did you even read my last statement?

I read everything you said. But I rejected it.

1) There are still entries which arrive which I have never seen to vote on. And I look every day.
2) Locking - there are problems with this - how can you ever be sure that the dvd profile is complete and can be locked?
3) Geri doesn't check every profile submission herself. But I'm sure she is pleased to be thought of as being super human and able to do this. (The reality is that there is a team of screener s).

And your last sentence implied that you believe that rating a submission with a up or down arrow was a valid way of voting on a submission. It isn't. I suggest you re-read the guidelines that Ken gave about the valid use of these arrows.