| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 1,272 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting surfeur51: Quote:
Quoting Addicted2DVD:
Quote:
The idea of having the fields empty and EVERYONE having to fill in this information makes no sense what so ever to me.
The idea of having the fields wrong and EVERYONE having to correct this information makes no sense what so ever to me. "EVERYONE"? You mean everyone that doesn't have the right information? | | | HDTV: 52" Toshiba Regza 52XV545U AVR: Onkyo TR-707
Speakers: Paradigm Monitor 7 v6, CC-190 & Atom Monitors Subwoofer: Definitive Technology ProSub 800
BD/DVD: Oppo BDP-93 (Region Free) HD PVR: Motorola DXC3400 500GB w/ 1TB Expander
BD/DVD/Game: 250GB PS3 Slim DVD/Game: 250GB XBox 360 Elite Special Edition (Black) Game: Wii
Remote: Logitech Harmony One w/ PS3 Adapter WHS: Acer H341 Windows Home Server | | | | Last edited: by DoubleDownAgain |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,272 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting superted: Quote:
I would rather have blank information, than wrong information. Besides the information is already in the mother profile. To put the data in both mother and child profiles would be redundancy, which should be avoided in the database. So you would rather have to copy and past ALL the data from EVERY Parent to Child rather than those that are wrong? Does not compute | | | HDTV: 52" Toshiba Regza 52XV545U AVR: Onkyo TR-707
Speakers: Paradigm Monitor 7 v6, CC-190 & Atom Monitors Subwoofer: Definitive Technology ProSub 800
BD/DVD: Oppo BDP-93 (Region Free) HD PVR: Motorola DXC3400 500GB w/ 1TB Expander
BD/DVD/Game: 250GB PS3 Slim DVD/Game: 250GB XBox 360 Elite Special Edition (Black) Game: Wii
Remote: Logitech Harmony One w/ PS3 Adapter WHS: Acer H341 Windows Home Server |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting DoubleDownAgain: Quote:
You mean everyone that doesn't have the right information? When we recopy errors and contribute them, yes. Generally speaking, with the rules we have, the only correct profiles are blank ones  | | | | Images from movies | | | | Last edited: by surfeur51 |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Once again that is your opinion on the subject...there is those of us that feel if the info matches the release... then that info is correct for that release. Whether there are typos and such or not. So your use of EVERYONE is wrong. My saying EVERYONE would have to fill in the info if it is blank in the main database is true. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: October 30, 2011 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,870 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting surfeur51: Quote:
Quoting Addicted2DVD:
Quote:
The idea of having the fields empty and EVERYONE having to fill in this information makes no sense what so ever to me.
The idea of having the fields wrong and EVERYONE having to correct this information makes no sense what so ever to me. But the data is not 100% wrong. It is only a few fields when in the context of a disc ID being used across multiple box sets. So the data is 100% correct for the first box set and not the second. If that even happens. But blanking the fields so that in the future IF the disc ID is ever used in another box set and having everyone manually put in that data in the initial box set is nuts. The re-use of a disc ID based profile within a locality across multiple box sets is an exception that is being dealt with. | | | | Last edited: by Scooter1836 |
|
| Registered: October 30, 2011 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,870 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting surfeur51: Quote:
Quoting Addicted2DVD:
Quote:
The idea of having the fields empty and EVERYONE having to fill in this information makes no sense what so ever to me.
The idea of having the fields wrong and EVERYONE having to correct this information makes no sense what so ever to me. First of all it is not EVERYONE If we put in all those fields blank EVERYONE that owns the initial box set will have to fill in those fields locally. If and only if that disc ID based profile is re-used in a different box set at a future date, those that purchase the second box set would have to update fields. And some or all of those fields may still be correct (images most likely different). Making them blank forces ALL that own either box set to fill in those fields. But the whole problem with the "blank data" premise is that the second box set that re-uses the same disc ID/locality will probably never happen. So you are blanking out good data and making people not be able to share that data for some future concern that the profile will be re-used. That makes absolutely no sense to me. It is better just to deal with the exception if and when it occurs. If you look at the 80/20 rule. You do not create a solution to handle what falls in the 20% that will hinder the 80%. | | | | Last edited: by Scooter1836 |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Scooter1836: Quote:
But the data is not 100% wrong. Of course, but it can be wrong, so you have to verify everything, which takes more time than filling directly with good data. And this is the problem with all fields, even those not concerned by this thread. As long as you cannot trust what is in the profile, you have to redo everything from scratch. | | | | Images from movies | | | | Last edited: by surfeur51 |
|
| Registered: October 30, 2011 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,870 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting surfeur51: Quote:
Quoting Scooter1836:
Quote:
But the data is not 100% wrong.
Of course, but it can be wrong, so you have to verify everything, which takes more time than filling directly with good data. And this is the problem with all fields, even those not concerned by this thread. As long as you cannot trust what is in the profile, you have to redo everything from scratch. That is another topic. I really do not see how that justifies leaving the data blank in the online database. Yes, when people download a profile they should validate the data within the profile. But that really has nothing to do with the topic and the proposal to leave certain fields blank in disc ID based profiles. | | | | Last edited: by Scooter1836 |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | I personally have always found it easier to correct data then to start from scratch. So that too is a matter of opinion. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting surfeur51: Quote:
Quoting Scooter1836:
Quote:
But the data is not 100% wrong.
Of course, but it can be wrong, so you have to verify everything, which takes more time than filling directly with good data. For you maybe, but not for me. In both cases, all the data has to be verified...all of it. In one case, some of that data will be correct and some will be incorrect, so you have to change what is incorrect. In the other case, all the data is missing so all the data will have to be entered. I'm sorry, but correcting some of the data, at least for me, is far quicker than having to enter all the data. | | | 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 | | | | Last edited: by TheMadMartian |
|
| Registered: December 27, 2009 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,131 |
| | Posted: | | | | The problem with the argument of having to fix a profile with existing incorrect data in that profile is that after it is fixed most people do not contribute the corrections into the database. So the next person that downloads that profile still has to fix them, and maybe they will contribute the corrections (odds are they won't). |
|
| Registered: October 30, 2011 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,870 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting ateo357: Quote:
The problem with the argument of having to fix a profile with existing incorrect data in that profile is that after it is fixed most people do not contribute the corrections into the database. So the next person that downloads that profile still has to fix them, and maybe they will contribute the corrections (odds are they won't). Yeah, but we are speaking of when a disc ID based profile gets re-used at a later date. So those corrections cannot be contributed anyway (the first always stays). That won't get fixed until we are able add release specific information to the same UPC/Disc ID. Basically the MC, Release date, images, case type, SRP, etc. |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 1,777 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting ateo357: Quote:
The problem with the argument of having to fix a profile with existing incorrect data in that profile is that after it is fixed most people do not contribute the corrections into the database. So the next person that downloads that profile still has to fix them, and maybe they will contribute the corrections (odds are they won't). Ah, and this is me. I do contribute about 10% of my corrections, but the common name nonsense is so hopelessly broken that I rarely even bother contributing all my cast and crew. But to get back on topic, the original proposal is a non-starter for me. There's a reason folks have the power to edit their local database. The online is meant to be a starting point, nothing else. Those who insist on making it the perfect resource in their image are doomed to be frustrated. |
|
| Registered: June 1, 2013 |  Posts: 217 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting mdnitoil: Quote:
There's a reason folks have the power to edit their local database. The online is meant to be a starting point, nothing else. Those who insist on making it the perfect resource in their image are doomed to be frustrated. bullseye |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,321 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting superted: Quote:
As specified in the first post, my suggestions only apply to child profiles registered with Disc ID. Child profiles registered with UPC# should be treated as usual. There's your first problem. The people on this forum would handle those instructions ok. People outside the forum would most likely end up confused. Any time a rule splits like this (do A in this case and B in that case, etc) it becomes incrementally harder for the non-power users to keep up. That means fewer contributions, more mistakes, more frustration. I can't speak for Ken, but in my experience, he caters to the lowest-common denominator rather than the power-users, so I'd be a little surprised if he agreed with this rule. Second, the entire parent / child process needs revisited. The fact that we still can't properly profile something with 2 or more movies on single side of a disc is evidence of that. This seems like a lot of band-aids when what we really need is the wound fixed. Finally, I disagree with some of your choices of where you're leaving data out. Right off the top of my head, I fail to see why we wouldn't include the case type for a child. I agree that that data serves very little purpose. But if we're going to collect it, I'd like to see it for everything, not just certain types of profiles. Just one example. Or overviews. I'm sure if I looked long and hard enough, I could fairly easily find an example where the overview on the box is crap or non-existant and the real meat is on the individual cases that are part of the set. To say that child profiles shouldn't have overviews is absurd in my opinion. On the plus side, it's nice to see someone thinking of ways to make things better even if I don't care for this particular idea.  | | | Get the CSVExport and Database Query plug-ins here.
Create fake parent profiles to organize your collection. | | | | Last edited: by Mark Harrison |
|
| Registered: October 30, 2011 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,870 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Mark Harrison: Quote:
On the plus side, it's nice to see someone thinking of ways to make things better even if I don't care for this particular idea. This is something I think we all many times fail to recognize. It is good that people are thinking of ways to things better, even if the idea is not what many would like. |
|