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... 3 4 5 6 7 ...13  Previous   Next
Rules Revision Request
Author Message
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile RegistrantAgrare
Registered: May 22, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
United States Posts: 1,033
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
oh, one more thing. I think that contributing data with a middle missing, mainly in reference to someone who would contribute 'every other' cast member or some similar random thing. should be specifically discouraged in the rules.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorWinston Smith
Don't be discommodious
Registered: March 13, 2007
United States Posts: 21,610
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Agrare:
Quote:
some of this has been touched on by others but my thoughts:

Partial contributions, in the sense that the entire section (section being one part that is grouped together by a check box on the contribution screen) is not complete, lend themselves better in some areas than others.

This exremist point of view that the opponents to these type of partial contributions are taken can easily be reversed, and i have done it in the other two discussions that this one stemed from, and will give some more examples here. For instance, any simiple typo, wrong common name, or even different interpretation (the whole are footnotes part of the overview anyone?) would then be seen as an partial/incomplete/wrong contribution. So should be voted no. well if the overview is completely accurate except I typed teh instead of the should that be declined? ok, you'll say I should fix it, and i would, but not eveyone checks their contributions (i do as i like to know the status and make sure its approved). but say i contribute that teh spelling error and then go on vacation and can't check so don't correct it. Is it really more work for someone to simply recontribute it correcting teh to the after it gets accepted? No its not, the only person its more work for is Gerri who has to check every contribution (thats a whole lot more profiles than even the top 10 people with the biggest collections combined) and she seems to be fine with it.

Give Gerri some credit, if someone contributes every other word of an overview, its going to get noticed. And i would think that Gerri would decline it because she seems like a resonable person to me. But based on principle, I would expect one of you vehement no voters, who are so opposed to these wrong contributions, to submit it correctly yourself.

As far as it creating more work, this was also addressed (by me and others) in the two threads that spawned this. To put it simply, it takes a lot less time to verify information than enter it. So any information, as long as its not 100% wrong, is better than no information. Thats also the point of a user created database: "Many hands make little work". By the attitudes of some people here, I am suprised that you would accept any data as 100% correct/complete unless you verified it yourself. So much talk about full audits, you people must spend all your time checking your collections profiles for accuracy rather than enjoying your collection. Why are you doing audits in the first place unless its to verify that the data is correct. If the data is correct, are you checking off the online locks?, if not all your hard work is going to waste. Sure you probably lock your local, but your high and mighty attitude of 'for the greater good' becomes complete horse s**t.

I think everyone is so obssessed with disagreeing with each other that you refuse to work together to come up with answers. And I can come up with a pretty simple answer. why not just a section on partial contributions where it states, (something along the lines of) if you are only contributing partial data make note of that in your contribution notes (so it is available for the next persons reference).

-Agrare

p.s. Sorry about the harsh language towards the end. I fully expect to get my first red arrow(s) for this post. But I firmly believe in what I said and as my parents taught me, you need to stand up for what you believe in (as well as, if you want a job done right you gotta do it yourself).

p.s.s. Gerri, I would just like to say thanks. I appreciate all the hard work you (and Ken) must put into this program/site/databse and you probably don't get the credit your deserve. If I may make a minor request however, it would be that you comment on some of these discussion (as they sometimes tend to go on way longer than necessary) and incorporate the resultes into the rules. Though as a programmer myself (also one man on a full size application) I fully understand that you are not able to devote time to every problem/issue as soon as it comes up.


You echoed my thoughts, especially "I think everyone is so obssessed with disagreeing with each other that you refuse to work together to come up with answers." Well done and well said.

Skip
ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here

Billy Video
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorbob9000
safety word?
Registered: March 13, 2007
Canada Posts: 844
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Unicus69:
Quote:
Under this new policy, I will have to look at the contribution notes for every profile I add to my collection.  If I don't, I will not know whether or not the overview is complete.  I will not know whether or not the cast list is complete.  If I have to verify that each section of a profile is complete, why do I need an online db?  I might as well just enter all the data myself.

You called it.

Further, for me, the main issue remains addressing clearly in the rules how to handle the credits issue raised by Patheon regarding Bewitched.
 Last edited: by bob9000
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile RegistrantStar Contributorm.cellophane
tonight's the night...
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
United States Posts: 3,480
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
Gerri:

My view as a Contributor is as I stated. Anything datafield I Contribute will be as completeand accurate as I can make it at that point in time (obviously pre-releases bring their own interesting issues). I do those out of consideration for every other user in the Community...but that's me. I also recognize that at least in terms of cast and crew, some user might not be interested in Sound AT ALL...so I bite my lip and add it.

My objective in a perfect world and i am not perfect, is to set it up once and not have to touch  again until ken makes the next set of program mods which might call for some new things. Unfortunately i am not a good typist, so there are occassional typos in what i do, but not as often as forum writing.

Like I said that's just me and the philosophy my father taught me. Do it right or don't do it at all...don't leave it for someone else to clean up. This is also why I correct errors even if there is ONLY one No, if some one catches a mistake why should I ignore and leave it for them to correct just because everyone else missed it.

Skip

You submit overviews without all of the required tick marks; therefore, none of your submitted overviews may be viewed as "complete" and thus have to be cleaned up by those who do that work. Just a reality check. 

With that said, I've always viewed the rules as requiring accurate and complete data. The only exception would be pre-releases. And that's not due to an allowance by the rules but rather just the fact that one doesn't yet have the disc in hand. There's sort of a wink and a nod that one is doing the best they can until release day.

But the quotes in overviews battle really punctured that, and so here we are. Yes, I believe a rule clarification is necessary. I would prefer it to shore this up so that all data is submitted complete for each box checked.
...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
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile RegistrantStar ContributorPantheon
Registered: March 14, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
United Kingdom Posts: 1,819
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Gerri....

Bewitched was a special case I think.

I took the cast from the end credits of each episode - and under my interpretation of the standard and non-stardard credits rule I was 100% correct in doing so.

So, in this case we went from 3 cast entries in the child profiles to the FULL cast entries of 60+ names. Which is what I submitted.

However, 3 people voted NO to this contribution stating that it was incomplete....and the war raged on.
Unfortunately, despite adding valued information to the profiles the screeners initially declined the submission - and without a discussion/consensus I didn't feel confident that the screeners would change their mind. Sorry.

What I couldn't understand was that I was improving the profiles vastly; but they still voted NO.

I resubmitted under the claim that it could be classed as a 'partial contribution' of the cast - thereby allowing the voters to vote YES - but that didn't happen either as they had a different view on what a partial contribution was.


As far as I am concerned anything that adds missing data to a profile is a good thing. I always do a complete check on every DVD I own anyway regardless of how much or how little information is currently holding.
Others have mentioned that partial cast/crew would create more work - this I don't understand. If there is already a correct entry in cast/crew then it takes a fraction of a second to check that in the onscreen credits...whereas ADDING that entry takes multiple seconds because you have to type in the name/role and selection job etc.
Therefore, anything that reduces the time spent typing/clicking buttons is a good thing as far as I am concerned.

I also don't feel this will result in a degradation of the online database - because eventually someone will do a full audit on a title and then it can be locked down.

Partial contributions are ESSENTIAL so that those users who don't have the time can still contribute.

P.S. I am going to start a different thread regarding Bewitched to keep the two issues separate.
 Last edited: by Pantheon
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorWinston Smith
Don't be discommodious
Registered: March 13, 2007
United States Posts: 21,610
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Neil:

Don't assume that Bewitched was sepcial, it wasn't though i can't name anything off the top of my head, I have no doubt they are out there. It was only special in that it was first found.

Skip
ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here

Billy Video
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile RegistrantStar ContributorPantheon
Registered: March 14, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
United Kingdom Posts: 1,819
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
Neil:

Don't assume that Bewitched was sepcial, it wasn't though i can't name anything off the top of my head, I have no doubt they are out there. It was only special in that it was first found.

Skip


As I said, I felt someone else would know otherwise....try to rack your brains and come up with an example Skip as that would be very helpful in the Bewitched discussion.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorWinston Smith
Don't be discommodious
Registered: March 13, 2007
United States Posts: 21,610
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
LOL, I'll try. I am putting my brains on the rack, right now, and threatening to tighten the chains unless they talk.

Skip
ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here

Billy Video
Invelos Software, Inc. RepresentativeGerri Cole
Invelos Software
Registered: March 10, 2007
United States Posts: 524
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Agrare:
Quote:
oh, one more thing. I think that contributing data with a middle missing, mainly in reference to someone who would contribute 'every other' cast member or some similar random thing. should be specifically discouraged in the rules.


In my opinion, every other cast member would go against the rules as it is not in the order that the credits appear. And is an excessive violation of that. So if that was pointed out in the votes by someone or if I knew it, I wouldn't approve it.

-Gerri
Invelos Software, Inc. Representative
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributor?
?
Registered: March 14, 2007
Posts: 3,830
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageDirect link to this postReply with quote
Sources for one or more of the changes and/or additions were not submitted. Please include the sources for your changes in the contribution notes, especially for cast and crew additions.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantMsPaula
Ms Paula
Registered: March 14, 2007
United States Posts: 168
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Yikes!

My apologies for even mentioning the possibility of contributing a partially completed field (as opposed to an entire section)

I too had no idea that such a submission could be acceptable as being an improvement.  My post was more of a tongue-in-cheek comment. I didn't mean to open up a whole can of worms or to temporarily lead this thread off in a different direction. 

I personally would not contribute any section that I hadn't completed entirely to the best of my ability - if I don't intend to completly do a particular section, I don't do it at all.
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile RegistrantStar ContributorAiAustria
Profiling since 2004
Registered: May 19, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
Austria Posts: 5,715
Posted:
PM this userDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Pantheon:
Quote:
- documentation of left content: If the contributor knows that (s)he contributes an incomplete profile, (s)he should prepare a list of open working areas (for others as well as for himself)..


While I feel this is a good idea I would say that may users would view this as a waste of time; better spent completing more of the profile.
Only if we document it, we can get a little bit more flexible. The problem starts with the pre-released profiles, which cannot contain valid (as forced by the rules) data, but nobody can identify it.

Using weaker sources as the back cover cannot be allowed without documentation...

But I agree, that weaker sources like the opening titles or the cover are very dangerous - where should the thin line be drawn between weak source and an illegal one... ?

Regards, AA
Complete list of Common Names  •  A good point for starting with Headshots (and v11.1)
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorBodi
Registered: March 15, 2007
Posts: 445
Posted:
PM this userDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Gerri Cole:
Quote:
Quoting Darxon:
Quote:
I'd bet that the vast majority of contributors didn't even think about submitting incomplete fields.



As the person who sees 99% of the contributions around here, I can say for a fact that the majority of contributors realize and do submit partial contributions.

-Gerri


Absolutely...I do it all the time...I only have interest in the Director and principal actors and that is all I submit for cast and crew.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantAstrakan
Registered: Feb 12, 2000
Registered: March 28, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
Canada Posts: 1,299
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
I guess I'm in the minority when I think it's fine to accept partial contributions.

If there's a profile with 5 cast members (out of a total 30 on the DVD) and someone submits an update with an additional 5 cast members, that's still an improvement and should be accepted. Sure, we only have 10 of the 30, but that's still better than 5 of 30.

The same thought process can be applied to any field.

KM
Tags, tags, bo bags, banana fana fo fags, mi my mo mags, TAGS!
Dolly's not alone. You can also clone profiles.
You've got questions? You've got answers? Take the DVD Profiler Wiki for a spin.
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile RegistrantStar Contributorhal9g
Who is John Galt?
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
United States Posts: 6,635
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Unicus69:
Quote:

I think we are opening a huge can of worms here but, if this is what the majority wants, so be it. 

Edit:  I see Mike is on the same page I am.


I agree.

If you don't want to take the time to enter the field completely and accurately, leave it for someone who will!

I think allowing partial contributions of fields is a BAD idea.  Someone is going to have to come in behind that person's contribution and fix it anyway and it will take them just as long in many cases to verify the "partial" data as it will to enter it from scratch.
Hal
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile RegistrantStar Contributorhal9g
Who is John Galt?
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
United States Posts: 6,635
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting reybr:
Quote:
Quoting Gerri Cole:
Quote:

So is there anything wrong with only contributing part of the overview - if there isn't one there to begin with?


I don't think it is. As long as it improves the current profile I don't see anything wrong with adding a partial overview. (or partially correcting an overview as long as it doesn't introduce new errors).

Regarding Unicus69 point that it creates more work for everybody else, I don't think that is true. If a person only wants a partial overview in his collection, he isn't going to add it all, contribute and remove it locally. He is going to change it locally to his liking without contributing at all, leaving an empty overview. No more work for anybody.


If a person is not going to follow the Rules in their local database, they should not be contributing to the on-line!
Hal
    Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion Page: 1... 3 4 5 6 7 ...13  Previous   Next