| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 3,480 |
| | Posted: | | | | The recent release of Ratatouille demonstrates, in my opinion, that it would be good to shorten the voting time on new releases. I think we've had nearly a dozen contributions in the last 3 days on the DVD version of Ratatouille. Some of them are duplicating others. I have 9 contributions currently pending for this DVD. It's hard to vote when you don't know which combination of profiles and images will be accepted.  Some really good stuff has been contributed that I hope gets thru the mess. I know that new additions to the database are evaluated within 24 hours, but I think it would be a good idea to also speed up the voting process during the first week of a release to 24 hours so that people get their updated scans and we don't have multiple scan contributions. After a release has been out a week, then stretch it back to the normal 48 hours. What do you think? | | | ...James
"People fake a lot of human interactions, but I feel like I fake them all, and I fake them very well. That’s my burden, I guess." ~ Dexter Morgan |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 5,917 |
| | Posted: | | | | Wait a week before buying new releases - the mess is all sorted out by then.  |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | It's called.... IF users would check before they simply leap, they would discover whether or not their Contribution was needed. This will happen no matter what the time frame is. I ALWAYS heck first, and then sometimes I do as Doc suggested.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 17,804 |
| |
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,917 |
| | Posted: | | | | I typically do what Skip said, check first. No need for duplication of effort. My routine is that I add new DVD's, upload them, and then check to see if there's any pending updates for them. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 4,596 |
| | Posted: | | | | I always check prior to contributing. | | | | My WebGenDVD online Collection |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 3,321 |
| | Posted: | | | | I hate to say it, but I agree with Skip.  Users need to take more responsibility and learn to check for prior contributions. | | | Get the CSVExport and Database Query plug-ins here.
Create fake parent profiles to organize your collection. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,480 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Mark Harrison: Quote:
I hate to say it, but I agree with Skip. Users need to take more responsibility and learn to check for prior contributions. I don't disagree with Skip in that regard. I think we all agree that users should take more responsibility. The facts are that we have no power to enforce that (other than our votes of course) so saying what users should be doing doesn't change anything. There have been multiple contributions on new profiles as long as I've been using the program and the voting system hasn't stopped it yet. I thought it would be a good idea to get updated covers to the users more quickly, but it looks like the majority is content with the status quo. | | | ...James
"People fake a lot of human interactions, but I feel like I fake them all, and I fake them very well. That’s my burden, I guess." ~ Dexter Morgan |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,321 |
| | Posted: | | | | Well, I think it would be great if Gerri would give added attention to big releases. It is a pain to have to wade through all the updates. So I do see your point. And you're right that what the users should do and what we can make them do are really two different things.
I support a shorter voting time. Just not too short. Otherwise there won't be enough time to weed out the crap, which will lead to more submissions. Hopefully they can find the right balance. | | | Get the CSVExport and Database Query plug-ins here.
Create fake parent profiles to organize your collection. | | | | Last edited: by Mark Harrison |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,480 |
| | Posted: | | | | Other methods could be to use a bright banner like the one for private messages to advise contributors that there are pending contributions.
Another thing that could be done would be an additional level of submitting where the user is informed of pending contributions. They would have to click through and acknowledge that to continue. (Kind of like the extra confirmations you have to do to delete a profile from your collection or the check box to include a birth year.)
There was a situation last week where a second contributor got upset with me for voting against their cast change. I voted no because there was a valid cast change in a pending contribution that would be overwritten if the 2nd change went through on top of the first.
Luckily a third user stepped in and contributed the combined changes of the 1st and 2nd. This might have been more preventable if there was an extra layer of confirmation inserted into the process somewhere. | | | ...James
"People fake a lot of human interactions, but I feel like I fake them all, and I fake them very well. That’s my burden, I guess." ~ Dexter Morgan |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,321 |
| | Posted: | | | | I really like those ideas James. Much better than trying to shorten the approval process (although I still say it wouldn't hurt Invelos to pay extra attention to the really giant releases). | | | Get the CSVExport and Database Query plug-ins here.
Create fake parent profiles to organize your collection. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 1,380 |
| | Posted: | | | | Just make it so that if users have unvoted pending contributions he cant update said profile, that way everyone would have to see that there already is an existing one. |
|