Quoting surfeur51:

Quote:
And the system has failed when we got some unsearchable T4xi

What's the Original Title of T4xi?

Quoting mediadogg:

Quote:

"In all cases, the result of applying rules should be a database that is correct and consistent in the eyes of the larger community of Invelos customers, even if it means ignoring or bending a specific rule in a specific case."

As I wrote on previous page, I already proposed something similar 3 years ago. But 80% of users here disagreed with this proposal, so Ken did nothing.

Quoting mediadogg:

Quote:
Quoting Kulju:

Quote:
Quoting surfeur51:

Quote:
And the system has failed when we got some unsearchable T4xi

What's the Original Title of T4xi?

The system didn't fail. The people using the system failed, if they allowed a rule to override common sense and the best interests of customers and the corporation. "T4xi" as the Title was wrong. Fix it and move on.

Also, somebody should draft an "Overriding Principle" rule and submit that to the Rules Committee.

Example:
"In all cases, the result of applying rules should be a database that is correct and consistent in the eyes of the larger community of Invelos customers, even if it means ignoring or bending a specific rule in a specific case."

On our specific note on "T4xi" I whole heartedly disagree. This is DVD Profiler, bit Movie Profiler the title should be the title of the DVD. 

When this was last discussed what was determined was that rather than bastardize the data integrity of en existing data element what we need is additional title fields that the search engine can search

http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=568589

Now I don't know if anyone actually submitted the request, but that is what came out of that thread.

But this thread is not about "T4xi" and if there is further concern about it a different thread should be opened.

"Overriding principals" are fine, but when they are used to override a definition of a data element then the integrity of the data element is put in question and it's contents become a matter of opinion rather than fact. 

Some people may think naming this "Taxi 4" is common sense, but some do not.  By making that statement the field is populated based on opinion and not facts.

We should have an additional title field for the credit block and an additional title field as well as the original title and title should be left as it is being the title on the screen credits and the search engine should search all.

All of that is outlined in that thread.

Quoting mediadogg:

Quote:
And when customers can't find a title that in fact actually exists in the database, Invelos competitors will laugh all the way to the bank.

I agree that there were alternate solutions, such as changing the search engine. But we don't have it yet. Simple as that.

All I know is that when I went to add DVD by title and typed in Taxi 4, I got nothing. That is wrong, and bad for business.

And BTW, I know what this thread is about. Taxi 4 (T4xi) was presented as a valid example of what can happen when one blindly applies rules outside of the context of the ultimate objective. And I agree that it is a good example.

Then I would suggest you form and document the business case and it's impacts and present it to Ken/Invelos and maybe that would either cause a ruling to be made or a higher prioritization of the fixes involved in the issue.  He owns the business end of it and the database.

And "T4xi" is only a good example if you believe like the OP states that the current condition of "Nude Nuns with Big Guns" being contributed incorrectly is what the rules state.  Many have pointed out that it is not the case.  "T4xi" is a different situation.

Quoting TheDarkKnight:

Quote:
Quoting surfeur51:

Quote:
Quoting mediadogg:

Quote:

"In all cases, the result of applying rules should be a database that is correct and consistent in the eyes of the larger community of Invelos customers, even if it means ignoring or bending a specific rule in a specific case."

As I wrote on previous page, I already proposed something similar 3 years ago. But 80% of users here disagreed with this proposal, so Ken did nothing.

Maybe that's telling you something right there. If 80% are in favor of how it's handled right now why change it?

Well it may be that the additional title searchable fields were not part of that proposal.  Ken and others may go for that as opposed to changing the meaning of the data element to something where it could be more opinion.

But yourr point is well taken when looking at the datat definitions as they are today.

Ok, I'm going back to plugins. I can't follow all the quotes and re-quotes and long posts, but it seems that I might have missed the OP's original point. If that is the case, I apologize. But for the record:

My opinion is that "Nude Nuns with Big Guns" is the correct title.
My opinion is that "Taxi 4" is the correct title, and that the previous "T4xi" decision was wrong.

I also agree that this is not an issue that should divert Ken's attention away from higher priority tasks. I am fully on board with that!

With that, I shall move on ...

Quoting mediadogg:

Quote:
Ok, I'm going back to plugins. I can't follow all the quotes and re-quotes and long posts, but it seems that I might have missed the OP's original point. If that is the case, I apologize. But for the record:

My opinion is that "Nude Nuns with Big Guns" is the correct title.
My opinion is that "Taxi 4" is the correct title, and that the previous "T4xi" decision was wrong.

I also agree that this is not an issue that should divert Ken's attention away from higher priority tasks. I am fully on board with that!

With that, I shall move on ...

Taxi 4 is the movie title and T4xi is the title of the DVD. That was the choice the studio/manufacturer made, nothing more, nothing less. That's one reason why we have an original title field.

Quoting Alien Redrum:

Quote:
lol at 8 pages of this s.h.i.t.

What did you expect?