What else is new?

Quote:
Why do members blatantly ignore the contribution rules?

Well, for one, there doesn't seem to be any penalty. But the main thing is the fact that the DVD Profiler users have turned "interpreting the rules to death" into a true art form, and nothing is ever resolved. As such, it's important to keep in mind that it's become pretty hard to actually identify "blatantly ignoring the contribution rules". People are quick to shout out a phrase like that, but because of those wildly varying rule interpretations, one man's "blatantly ignoring the contribution rules" is often seen as "faithfully following the contribution rules to to letter" by the other party. You may feel someone is breaking the rules, while that person is absolutely convinced that he's actually following the rules - or vice versa. Again, if nothing is ever resolved, if no decision is ever made, then this is the result. There's really no surprise there.

Quote:
if you disagree then petition to change the rules.

If only that actually worked - but it doesn't. The rules haven't even been updated with the necessary stuff to reflect the changes in the last DVD Profiler version, for example (think nested dividers), let alone for anything else. It hasn't happened in years, and there are no signs that this lack of rule updates is about to change anytime soon. Again: nothing is ever resolved. With different parties consistently interpreting the rules in wildly different ways, and nobody around to make a definite decision, this is what we're stuck with.

So if we want the rules to be followed, then the the rules need to be consistently interpreted in exactly the same way by all users, across the various regions and localities. To achieve that, there needs to be an authoritative source making clear decisions whenever these rules are challenged or interpreted in multiple ways, and those decisions should be made swiftly and publicly, by which I mean they should lead to immediate corrections to the contribution rules.

Quoting Lowpro:

Quote:
Consider me part of the problem I guess, because I could care less whether a profile I download abides fully by the contribution rules or not.  I view the ability to download a profile as an initial time saver only.  I've got the physical release right in front of me.  I look over the entire profile I just downloaded regardless checking it for accuracy, updating it from there as I see fit and locking it down.  The end.

The online profile could be removed at that point for all I care.  I don't care what happens to it.  If people want to update a shared online profile for whatever reason, discuss whether a given item abides by the contribution rules or not, discuss how a given contribution rule should be interpreted, changed or enhanced, they can knock themselves out.  I've got better things to spend my energy on.  I'm never going to download the given profile again anyway and don't allow my local profiles to be updated from the shared online database.

I'll point out as well that if a profile hasn't already been contributed I've got no problem at all creating it from scratch.  I do it all the time.  In fact, the shared online database could be taken offline and I would still continue using this program.  It would continue being just as useful to me either way.  Due to how anal many in the community are about what does or doesn't meet the contribution guidelines however, I choose not to make contributions at all.  I'd just assume make the given profile my own locally right out the gate, lock it down and be done with it.  Again, consider me part of the problem I guess.

That is an unfortunate view Lowpro; how did you get to that point?

I'm not sure how many titles you own, but at least for me, the contributions to the online database are helpful as I wouldn't have the time to catalog every single title I own.  And there in lies the challenge.  I see it as a give and take; that is, I contribute some, and I receive contributions from others.

It was refreshing to read that excerpt Kathy. I always found Ken to be a thoughtful, fair and creative leader. I sure hope that guy is OK.

Very simple: the Contribution Rules tell us to take cast and crew information from the film credits. Only role names, if missing in the film credits, can be taken from elsewhere.

Paul - the thing is, you're ignoring the rules.  The cast/crew info can only be taken from the credits of the film (or TV series, etc) itself.  That's it.  You can't just copy it from Wikipedia because it's more convenient than putting a bit of effort in.

I contribute quite a bit.  I have yet to find a single entry on the IMDb which is accurate to the credits I'm looking at.  Wikipedia is even worse.  IMDb's bad, but Wikipedia's a joke.  I'd rather you didn't bother at all than have you contributing inaccurate information.

Others may disagree, of course, and that's their right.  But complaining that that your contributions aren't welcome so you'll stop making them is plain silly.  Your contributions aren't welcome because they're wrong.

And it's alright saying that the cast and crew info may be wrong, but everything else is okay so it should be accepted.  How does anyone know it's right?  You've already admitted that your cast and crew info is sourced elsewhere.  Why should anything else you contribute be any different?

Quoting AlunH:

Quote:
Paul - the thing is, you're ignoring the rules.  The cast/crew info can only be taken from the credits of the film (or TV series, etc) itself.  That's it.  You can't just copy it from Wikipedia because it's more convenient than putting a bit of effort in.

I contribute quite a bit.  I have yet to find a single entry on the IMDb which is accurate to the credits I'm looking at.  Wikipedia is even worse.  IMDb's bad, but Wikipedia's a joke.  I'd rather you didn't bother at all than have you contributing inaccurate information.

Others may disagree, of course, and that's their right.  But complaining that that your contributions aren't welcome so you'll stop making them is plain silly.  Your contributions aren't welcome because they're wrong.

And it's alright saying that the cast and crew info may be wrong, but everything else is okay so it should be accepted.  How does anyone know it's right?  You've already admitted that your cast and crew info is sourced elsewhere.  Why should anything else you contribute be any different?

Hi Alun,

I concede some of your points. However, as you should know if you contribute quite a bit, is that there are 2 fields where you are asked to provide the source of the data, only one of the 2 is for the cast and crew (or at least that is how it comes across to me). My "irregular" contributions clearly stated in the general part that the source of the info is the DVD or Blu-Ray or packaging itself... is that also not good enough?

Anyway, bearing in mind what you and others have said, I have resubmitted my profile for "Die Elenden" (les misérables, 1958) leaving out the cast and crew data (I hope), as I unfortunately don't have the time to get that data from the credits itself. I hope that is acceptable? If yes, I will continue providing such contributions.

Thanks,
Paul.

Sure, as long as it is accurate who should mind you contributing such profiles? Keep 'em coming.