Quoting smeehrrr:

Quote:
Also I'm starting to reply to my own posts, which is never a good sign.

I'm glad you mentioned this.  I was beginning to wonder who you were quoting or if you were deleting the wrong part of a message that you'd quoted.  I'll do THAT myself sometimes, then get confused where to put the (blockquote) (/blockquote) commands to format the text properly.  Sometimes I end up editing my post 4 or 5 times.

BTW:  I still disagree with your position on the rules.  And as I said somewhere before, back in the days of guidelines, ping ponging of data was rampant.  So I think that enforcing the rules -- however strongly that's done -- has improved the quality of submissions.  People still do try to contribute garbage, but for the most part if they clearly violate a rule they get stepped on for it.  If it were only guidelines, people would be free to say that a contribution is only a different interpretation not an incorrect submission.  And they might feel free to vote YES on something that were it a rule violation they couldn't honestly (or correctly) do.

Quoting tlevel:

Quote:
Quoting pauls42:

Quote:
Quoting tlevel:

Quote:


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.

1) I have no idea what you are talking about, sorry.

I was replying to this comment of yours. See text marked RED so I can show what I was referring to. Basically you were saying voting solved all problems. I pointed out that if a change never appeared for voting then how could it?

Quoting tlevel:

Quote:

2) You don't have to lock the entire DVD online, just the problem sections where you think people are ping-ponging the data.

My point still stands since I never said anything about locking ALL the dvd. Again how do you know a section will ever be correct?

Quoting tlevel:

Quote:

3) Well, what can I say. That 1% that she doesn't look at must be where all the problems come from.

  When the profiles were being checked with version 2 of dvd profiler then there were more checkers. I think a dozen were mentioned. If she is doing the work of 12 then she must rely even more on the opinion of the voters. And see my 1st point above.

Quoting tlevel:

Quote:

BTW, I wasn't talking about the reputation system voting, I was talking about the contribution system voting.

I apologise. Since you spoken about voting and then seemed to move on to a different topic, I'm sure you would agree  the confusion was understandable.