 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 ...9  Previous Next
|
|
With All Due Respect to All |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | I have seen a disturbing trend in the past where a Contributor will make change to Profile but does not provide documentation. Some users will vote yes and provide support for the contributor, please stop this. Remember that ANT comments that you might make are lost once the Contribution is approved, they do NOT become part of the permanent documentation record for that title. If the user chooses to come back annd provide supporting documentation for whatever the change is, all well and good, but it is his job as the Contributor not YOUR job as the voter and providing documentation gains NOTHING for future users except asking the question how was this determined. Skip  | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,372 |
| | Posted: | | | | wit all due respect to the original poster... wow.. the protector of the DB strikes again. I believe it is up to Invelos to decide if the documentation is appropriate not you. What Skip is talking about here (at least what appears to be the latest in a "disturbing trend"  ) is the submission of the Blu-ray version of Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World [024543-435501] The submitter changed the release date and simply put this as his notes Quote:
Release date is 5/13/08 ..... NOT 6/2/08 as listed Being the diligent voter I am  I checked his date against Amazon and DVD Empire. They both agreed. I noted that in my yes vote comments for others to see: Quote:
lyonsden5: Amazon and DVD Empire agree The only other current vote comment is this: Quote:
skipnet50 : What is the source for your data change? With all due respect to lyons, itis NOT his job to document the data, his comments are not part of the recor All I can say is.... wow. We're talking about a pre-release title whose date has changed at least three times that I know of. Get a grip. The submission is right. Your no vote is wrong and against the rules (unless you can point our to us where the documentation requirements for release dates are spelled out in the rules cause I can't find them). BTW - I would like to welcome the new person who made the contribution. He just registered 9 days ago and is trying his hand (slowly it looks like) at contributing. Very nice to see and should be encouraged, not discouraged and slapped down. | | | | Last edited: by lyonsden5 |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Yes it has changed Rick. Biut it is NOY your job to provide the documentation, it is the Contributors, any comments you make are NOT part of the public record, which if accepted leaves us with Release date is 5/13/08 ..... NOT 6/2/08 as listed Which a long time from now tells us NOTHING. Have you not taken notice of some of the discussions that have been had relative to release dates from 8 or 9 years ago. You are not helping. You have enough computer experience to know better. I won't say anything else I am thinking because it's not very complimentary. BTW Master and Commander was only the latest, where you have done this. Please Rcik, like I said you are not being helpful, but then.... Skip  | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,394 |
| | Posted: | | | | As I don't own the title, maybe my comment is irrelevant. But though it is good that you were the diligient voter who checked the contributor's data -- but if he had cited a source in his contribution you wouldn't have had to check it. I agree that we should welcome new users, but we should also encourage them to contribute properly -- including documentation. I probably wouldn't have voted against such a change, but if I verified that the data were correct, I would have included a suggestion in my Yes vote about documenting where the information came from. What the submitted said, especially since he shouted it, isn't really proof of anything.
When I see a profile with "funny" data in it -- and go to the contibution notes to see where it came from -- unless there's documentation in the notes, how do I know (1) who did it or (2) if it's correct? In the case you cite, Lyons, you've show to other voters that the new date is right. But what about 6 months from now when the only documentation is what's in the contribution notes? If the submitter said "per Amazon and DVD Empire" we'd know he checked a couple of sources for the dates. As it stands, he could have made them up. | | | Another Ken (not Ken Cole)
Badges? We ain't got no badges. We don't need no badges. I don't have to show you any stinking badges.
DVD Profiler user since June 15, 2001 |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | ,,,or used a dartboard.  Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting lyonsden5: Quote:
wow.. the protector of the DB strikes again. I believe it is up to Invelos to decide if the documentation is appropriate not you.
What Skip is talking about here (at least what appears to be the latest in a "disturbing trend" ) is the submission of the Blu-ray version of Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World [024543-435501]
The submitter changed the release date and simply put this as his notes
Quote:
Release date is 5/13/08 ..... NOT 6/2/08 as listed
Being the diligent voter I am I checked his date against Amazon and DVD Empire. They both agreed. I noted that in my yes vote comments for others to see:
Quote:
lyonsden5: Amazon and DVD Empire agree
The only other current vote comment is this:
Quote:
skipnet50 : What is the source for your data change? With all due respect to lyons, itis NOT his job to document the data, his comments are not part of the recor
All I can say is.... wow. We're talking about a pre-release title whose date has changed at least three times that I know of. Get a grip. The submission is right. Your no vote is wrong and against the rules (unless you can point our to us where the documentation requirements for release dates are spelled out in the rules cause I can't find them).
BTW - I would like to welcome the new person who made the contribution. He just registered 9 days ago and is trying his hand (slowly it looks like) at contributing. Very nice to see and should be encouraged, not discouraged and slapped down. Try voting No as you should and sending a him a PM explaining the details and what he should do as I did. INSTEAD of tecahing him how to do it WRONG. I would like ti thank you for the personal attack BTW, it disappoints me, but it does NOT surprise me, considering the source. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,480 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
I have seen a disturbing trend in the past where a Contributor will make change to Profile but does not provide documentation. Some users will vote yes and provide support for the contributor, please stop this. Remember that ANT comments that you might make are lost once the Contribution is approved, they do NOT become part of the permanent documentation record for that title. If the user chooses to come back annd provide supporting documentation for whatever the change is, all well and good, but it is his job as the Contributor not YOUR job as the voter and providing documentation gains NOTHING for future users except asking the question how was this determined.
Skip If Invelos agrees with you, you have nothing to worry about since they won't accept such contributions. But since they do accept such contributions, this must be a grayer area than you allow. From the rules: Quote:
DVD Release Date
Use the date when the DVD was first released for sale in its specific locality. Do not change the DVD Release Date if a release:
* Goes out of print and then is subsequently re-released using the same UPC.
* Is recalled due to a production error and is subsequently re-released in a corrected version
The DVD Release Date is always the date of Original Release. The contribution meets this standard. Quote:
Contribution Notes
When you contribute a changed profile, you are required to include Contribution Notes. Use the space to enter full explanations for all changes and/or additions that you make. Make special reference to any changes where:
* You have verified there is a discrepancy between the box and the actual content of the DVD - include your verification method.
* You are making a subtle change that may be hard to spot - for example spelling correction to the overview.
* You are removing incorrect information.
Contribution Notes provide an explanation of your changes to other DVD Profiler users and Invelos for voting and deciding whether to accept your contribution, so make your notes useful and descriptive. The contribution meets this standard. The notes are useful and descriptive. "Release date is 5/13/08 ..... NOT 6/2/08 as listed" is a full explanation. Would adding "as verified by Amazon and DVD Empire" make the notes stronger? Absolutely. "Release date is 5/13/08 as verified by Amazon and DVD Empire ..... NOT 6/2/08 as listed" is also a full explanation. But without that, does the contribution violate the rules for contribution notes? No. Quote:
All voting should be based on support of these Rules.
* If a user is following the Contribution Rules and his/her data is accurate, and the contribution replaces data which is inaccurate or violates these Contribution Rules, a "No" vote is considered an abuse of the voting privilege and should be avoided when possible.
The contribution follows the rules. The data is accurate. It replaces inaccurate data. Therefore: a "No" vote is considered an abuse of the voting privilege and should be avoided when possible. Quote:
# Conversely, voting "Yes" to a contribution which violates these Contribution Rules should also be avoided.
# Include a reason for any "No" vote that you cast in order to provide useful feedback to the contributor (and the Invelos Reviewers.) Rick isn't voting yes to a contribution that violates the rules, so there's no voting impropriety there. Adding a comment that 2 e-tailers agree with the change provides "useful feedback to the contributor (and the Invelos Reviewers) just as a 'no' vote comment would. There's no admonishment to avoid providing feedback through vote comments if it would lead to an incomplete record. There's nothing in the rules about retaining a complete record. Such a stance is personal preference, no matter to what degree it might follow "best practices." | | | ...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: 2,394 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting m.cellophane: Quote:
Rick isn't voting yes to a contribution that violates the rules, so there's no voting impropriety there. Adding a comment that 2 e-tailers agree with the change provides "useful feedback to the contributor (and the Invelos Reviewers) just as a 'no' vote comment would. There's no admonishment to avoid providing feedback through vote comments if it would lead to an incomplete record. There's nothing in the rules about retaining a complete record. Such a stance is personal preference, no matter to what degree it might follow "best practices." I agree with everything you say, but I still think it wouldn't hurt to encourage people to document their changes. Merely saying what the contributor said isn't documentation of anything. As I said I would not vote against it, but we are supposed to document our changes in our contribution notes. Clearly someone saying "It isn't A -- It's B" is only a statement, not documentation. | | | Another Ken (not Ken Cole)
Badges? We ain't got no badges. We don't need no badges. I don't have to show you any stinking badges.
DVD Profiler user since June 15, 2001 |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | And yet again, james your comments are not supportive of the Rules but they are supportive of weakening them. BTW I disagree with all you statements.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | An as usual I made a general statement relative to something i have seen for some time. But particular users choose to involve themselves so as to both muddy water and generate a series of personal attacks.
The behavior of certain users has become so very predictable.
"Contribution Notes provide an explanation of your changes to other DVD Profiler users and Invelos for voting and deciding whether to accept your contribution, so make your notes useful and descriptive.
I do not find the notes to be useful or descriptive. I did not accuse or imply that Rick or you violated the Rules. be careful, boys. I think you are both not being helpful to users of thisi database or to this new Contributor. You assume he will look at his Contribution again...want to bet, I'll take your money, if he does it will likely be because I PM'ed with a more detailed explanation and directions on what he should do. Remember we are talking about a NEW user. i will only say that I find both your votes and your comments there and here to be oh so typical.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 |  Posts: 2,366 |
| | Posted: | | | | I agree we need to properly document our changes, but if I found a contribution to be true I am not trying to teach the contributor as it will only scare him/her away from helping in the future. | | | Martin Zuidervliet
DVD Profiler Nederlands | | | | Last edited: by Daddy DVD |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Martin: You did fine up to the comma. Then you fell apart, so if a new user submits IMDb data we should not try and teach him, we might scare him away....come on, you're kidding me with that argument, right. Data that is not documented is wrong data, and voter documented data is WORTHLESS. Skip  | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 2,366 |
| | Posted: | | | | No, I said the data needs to be true and we all know IMDb can not be trusted. So if the contributor would use that as a source you bet I will teach him/her. | | | Martin Zuidervliet
DVD Profiler Nederlands |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,480 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting kdh1949: Quote:
Quoting m.cellophane:
Quote:
Rick isn't voting yes to a contribution that violates the rules, so there's no voting impropriety there. Adding a comment that 2 e-tailers agree with the change provides "useful feedback to the contributor (and the Invelos Reviewers) just as a 'no' vote comment would. There's no admonishment to avoid providing feedback through vote comments if it would lead to an incomplete record. There's nothing in the rules about retaining a complete record. Such a stance is personal preference, no matter to what degree it might follow "best practices."
I agree with everything you say, but I still think it wouldn't hurt to encourage people to document their changes. Merely saying what the contributor said isn't documentation of anything. As I said I would not vote against it, but we are supposed to document our changes in our contribution notes. Clearly someone saying "It isn't A -- It's B" is only a statement, not documentation. I believe it meets the low end of what's acceptable. I agree that more would be better. But it's not against the rules. Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
And yet again, james your comments are not supportive of the Rules but they are supportive of weakening them. BTW I disagree with all you statements. I'm pointing out what the rules actually say rather than relying on user customs and practices. The word "document" appears in the rules only in reference to the rules themselves as a "document". The rules call for explanations in all cases and verification methods in a few areas (and "Release Date" isn't one of them), but we've had that mega-thread at IVS already.  Forum folks don't see it this way since we live and breathe "documentation" here, but on the flip side, non-forum folks won't see the word "document" as a verb when they read the rules. We need to remember that here from time to time. Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
An as usual I made a general statement relative to something i have seen for some time. But particular users choose to involve themselves so as to both muddy water and generate a series of personal attacks.
The behavior of certain users has become so very predictable.
Skip You are free to make statements of what you've observed and what your preferences are just as I am free to give my opinion on what I believe the rules say in that regard. This is a user forum after all. I have not attacked you in any way. | | | ...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 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | It's no different, Martin. The user need to be taught, I advised him to edit his notes so I can vote yes. If he asks how to edit notes I will teach him that. What I KNOW about a given title is not relevant, I am not the one making the Contribution, as I said undocumented data is WRONG. Voter knowledge is not relevant since it does not become a part of the record for that title. Who knows perehaps 5 years from now the title involved will become the subject of debated over the release date, just like some of the ones we have had recently over early releases to DVD, and what do his notes tell us...NOTHING.<shrugs> So I try to teach him the right way, but at the same time, it is not unusual for new users to respond to a PM a week or two later, by which time any comments have likely been forgotten, but users such as james and Rick have been allowed to damage the database by allowing unsupported data in, thinking they were being helpful by providing documentation. <sigh> It's really too bad that some people just don't understand.  Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting m.cellophane: Quote:
Quoting kdh1949:
Quote:
Quoting m.cellophane:
Quote:
Rick isn't voting yes to a contribution that violates the rules, so there's no voting impropriety there. Adding a comment that 2 e-tailers agree with the change provides "useful feedback to the contributor (and the Invelos Reviewers) just as a 'no' vote comment would. There's no admonishment to avoid providing feedback through vote comments if it would lead to an incomplete record. There's nothing in the rules about retaining a complete record. Such a stance is personal preference, no matter to what degree it might follow "best practices."
I agree with everything you say, but I still think it wouldn't hurt to encourage people to document their changes. Merely saying what the contributor said isn't documentation of anything. As I said I would not vote against it, but we are supposed to document our changes in our contribution notes. Clearly someone saying "It isn't A -- It's B" is only a statement, not documentation.
I believe it meets the low end of what's acceptable. I agree that more would be better. But it's not against the rules.
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
And yet again, james your comments are not supportive of the Rules but they are supportive of weakening them. BTW I disagree with all you statements.
I'm pointing out what the rules actually say rather than relying on user customs and practices.
The word "document" appears in the rules only in reference to the rules themselves as a "document". The rules call for explanations in all cases and verification methods in a few areas (and "Release Date" isn't one of them), but we've had that mega-thread at IVS already. Forum folks don't see it this way since we live and breathe "documentation" here, but on the flip side, non-forum folks won't see the word "document" as a verb when they read the rules. We need to remember that here from time to time.
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
An as usual I made a general statement relative to something i have seen for some time. But particular users choose to involve themselves so as to both muddy water and generate a series of personal attacks.
The behavior of certain users has become so very predictable.
Skip
You are free to make statements of what you've observed and what your preferences are just as I am free to give my opinion on what I believe the rules say in that regard. This is a user forum after all.
I have not attacked you in any way. Your opinion, perhaps you did not intend to. And no I will not help you out and point you at it. As I said your behavior, James is oh so predictable and oh so disappointing. I don't wish to discuss this anymore. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 ...9 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |