Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
From the Box Set Rules:

Quote:
Create individual profiles for each movie in these Box Sets. Use individual UPCs if they are available or use Disc ID (read on a DVD-ROM) if not. Create each of these individual profiles in line with the standard Contribution Rules with one exception - Cover Images. If a film is individually packaged, use the cover images from that packaging.

While I could be wrong, based on that wording, if a film is not individually packaged, you would use the standard rule for cover images...which would lead us to using the scan of the outer case.  Now, I could see an argument being made to use the cover from the book, but not each individual page as those don't, in my opinion, qualify as individually packaged.

To the best of my recollection, you use the child cover art when it comes in it's own packaging with it's own cover art.  Like a box set where each movie comes in it's own keep case.  Something that could be sold individually.

When it's just part of a giant case (such as Aliens Quadrilogy), all profiles get the parent profile cover art.  In this case there actually isn't cover art for the children since they're not packaged separately.

As I recall, the reasoning is that if everyone has the same cover art, there's not a problem.  But when the children don't have cover art, then we would have massive ping-ponging of the profiles as each person would want their own custom image for the profile.

Well, Grendell, it seems to me that there are two schools of thought here:

1. It's Invelos' database and it's best for the database if everyone adheres to the rules. If a rule seems vague to me, I'll confer with the user community to see if there is some kind of consensus as to the interpretation of the rule.
2. If the rule seems unclear to me I'll just decide that what seems best for me is also what is best for the database.

Saying "who cares" and then questioning the intentions and motivations of those who do care says something about which school of thought you belong to.

There will never be a perfect database nor rules that cover every situation.

Invelos has even addressed the "gray area" situations in regards to the contribution process:

Quoting Ken Cole:

Quote:
One-off rulings on individual titles are a waste of time - there is always a new twist available to cast a slightly different shade of gray, and users cannot be expected to scour the forums on a title-by-title basis.  Similarly, refining and complicating the rules to satisfactorily contain each of these new variants is an exercise in futility.

Local databases can support an infinite variety of variants for title and other fields, and the local locks are available to make those changes permanent.  With this in mind, hopefully the supporters on both sides of this and other similar debates can agree that the direction of a decision here is less important that the fact of a decision.  Consistency for submission to the online is possible and what we should shoot for.  Agreement on how it "should be" is neither possible nor (thankfully) necessary.

Quoting AiAustria:

Quote:


As long as reactionary die-hards refuse to accept any change as well as common sense by calling for Invelos - which can be trusted not to react - this grey area handling does nothing but blocking any evolution. And that's why the guys with the best knowledge left the forum and the folks with the best database retire from contributing.

Is this the direction we want to go - or better stumble. Not me.

The so-called "die-hards" only represent a tiny minority of the community. Almost all of the contributions I see being submitted and voted on seldom, if ever, comment on in the forums.

Imho it is the voters and the screeners, not the forum visitors, who end up being the decision makers in regards to the grey areas that pop up.

My approach is to pm the contributor if I do not agree that the submission follows the rules. In most cases this settles the matter one way or the other.

If not, I will post a query in the forums to see what active forum members think. I then vote based on my understanding of the rules and/or Ken's clarification(s).

I then let the voters and screeners decide the outcome and I don't worry about it.

It is my experience that these few issues pale in comparison to the huge number of easy updates. I prefer to spend my time on those tens of thousands of easily fixable items than waste my time on those "grey area" that cause so much contention.

Unfortunately, the database became unusable for some of us long ago.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
From the Box Set Rules:

Quote:
Create individual profiles for each movie in these Box Sets. Use individual UPCs if they are available or use Disc ID (read on a DVD-ROM) if not. Create each of these individual profiles in line with the standard Contribution Rules with one exception - Cover Images. If a film is individually packaged, use the cover images from that packaging.

While I could be wrong, based on that wording, if a film is not individually packaged, you would use the standard rule for cover images...which would lead us to using the scan of the outer case.  Now, I could see an argument being made to use the cover from the book, but not each individual page as those don't, in my opinion, qualify as individually packaged.

This.

What always amazes me is the urge to have one's personal preferences in the central database.

I started profiling my latest purchase not five minutes ago and the very first thing I did was this:





And see all that "The Complete Xth Season" crap in the collection list? That will be gone by the time I'm done with this profile.

See that second to last profile? The one that says "Herzbube mit zwei Damen: Season 1 (Three's Company: Season 1)"? That's actually this US locality profile:



That doesn't mean any of this will make its way into a contribution. No, I will contribute production years and running times and aspect ratios and so forth where my opinion of what a profile should look like and the rules align. And I keep the rest to myself.



I even go so far as to contribute the complete running time of a season in the season profile just to remove it one second later locally because it messes up my measurements (the child profiles have the times already).

Quoting surfeur51:

Quote:
I totally agree with that : The database is most useful if it contains consistent data.

The problem is that rules makes it impossible [...]

Well, I'll agree with you so far as that the name linking system is hopelessly inadequate. But I don't think that it can be fixed by a rule change. It needs a complete overhaul, IMHO.

But that doesn't mean that the rest of the database is useless, if that data is applied consistently.