Fixed the quotes...

Quoting widescreenforever:

Quote:
Quoting pdf 256:

Quote:
Quoting Alien Redrum:

Quote:
Believe me, I am 100% of the camp that you should only be able to vote on the titles you own, but if someone who doesn't own the title does the work for me, I will verify and vote yes.

In this case we have someone who is making changes based on the cover scans for each profile. All other US profiles list this film as having a 'PG' rating, but this copy (which sure looks like a boot to me) shows 'G', so Terry is changing it to 'G'.

The version that I own lists the run time as 109m, with notes saying that the 'real' run time is 108m59s. But Terry is changing it to 110m and listing the case as his source. I checked my copy, PowerDVD reports 108m59s, I voted NO.
Just after I voted I saw this thread about a different profile of the same film from the same user. I then added all of the R1 profiles to my 'ordered' list. Terry is making changes to five of them. The only one I have voted on is the one that I own a copy of, but based on the accuracy of the changes to that one, if I own any of the others I would check them carefully.
pdf

PDF  I pulled that contribution within minutes of your no vote and for good reason.. The five in the data base had three run times 109 110 and 111 .. I went with the run time on the box.., because I only had the disc in wish list I went with the middle run time you challenged it.. I accepted it and pulled it ..

So which version do you own?
The copy that I own listed a run time of 108m59s in the notes, but you were changing it to the average time listed in five profiles?

Quote:

The G rating only was as accordance to the box , and all others had PG .. I pulled that as well..
Now for the source of this disc it may very well be a Boot as I think it has a multitude of subtitles including Thai .. So along with the bad UPC and a questionable front and rear scan .. I will be submitting this UPC for removal..

Why have 5 titles at once?  Why not?  first of all it is allowed to contribute and vote on even if you don't have the dvd on hand and there is one thing I can't stand and that is to see a multitude of same
titles all with different locations and upc and disc ID's and for all of them to be different.. 

What if they are different? How would you know?

Quote:

If 4 of the titles have the same cast and crew and they have been contributed by our faithful and dutiful members here.., to find one title that has NO contribution history or owners,, and has little to no information you'd think you would at least be happy that someone is looking out for that title..
and Keep in mind IF you Don't Have that Title and corresponding UPC or disc ID in your own data base that title would NEVER come up on your screen ,.. Unless of course you do have it.. and if you do, what are you going to do about the contribution notes..? 

Did you look at the cast you were adding to the profiles that had no cast? Did you check it against the credits of a Bluray or DVD that you own? Hint: it lists an actor atthe end as "Walt's Son #1 (scenes deleted)", we don't do this.

Quote:

Either challenge them or accept them.. and I am not like a lot of others here who get negative votes and just sit on that title for days and days and days until it gets flagged and declined..
I look after that contribution immediatley by correcting or pulling said title .

I am not mad at you Terry, I just want you to make sure that you are not moving bad data from one profile to another.

pdf

Quoting widescreenforever:

Quote:

Better to have something than nothing..

Absolutly untrue statements... It's better to have nothing than a profile filled with error because it was made without the dvd or because it was made before it was released. You have no idea of the number of profile I've to remake from the start because they are full of error (even simple one like the running time or the overview).

Quoting widescreenforever:

Quote:
If the Blu ray has NO cast and crew.. I'll submit the (other same four titles with)  same cast and crew to the Blue Ray.....  IF the Blu ray has  differant cast member under a differant name,, that is UP to the owners of the said Blu ray to get that info in there  , not to let the title sit in the data base for months with nothing in there for cast or crew .. 
Better to have something than nothing..  If owner of said disc finds a discrepnecy  ,. great!  let's hear for the new contribtion notes.., and not be lazy and let the title sit in there bare bones ...

But if you don't own any copy of this film, how do you know if the data you are spreading is good?

If you spread 'bad' data you can push the CLT results toward the wrong answer. 

pdf

Quoting AESP_pres:

Quote:
Quoting widescreenforever:

Quote:

Better to have something than nothing..

Absolutly untrue statements... It's better to have nothing than a profile filled with error because it was made without the dvd or because it was made before it was released. You have no idea of the number of profile I've to remake from the start because they are full of error (even simple one like the running time or the overview).

   

I have a different opinion than most of you. I do not have a problem with someone, who is updating a DVD they own, updating some of the credits for the same film with a different UPC. Of course they must be updating their own DVD correctly by taking the data from the DVD cover, its credits or multiple other resources.

Some of the data could not and should not be entered, the disc id for example.  But, others could be entered and done so with a great deal of accuracy. Why shouldn't someone copy the Overview into a profile that is missing one? The Cast and Crew of a movie does not change from DVD to DVD; this is why invelos allows us to copy data that has already been accepted into the database.

It would be wonderful if the database had complete and accurate data for all of its DVDs but, I'm afraid, that is not the case. Many of them lack even basic data and most of them contains errors in one form or another.

I don't know how or why erroneous data has made its way into the database. Some people have pointed out that errors might occur if one contributes data for a DVD they do not own. I understand that might be the case but errors happen even when one owns the DVD.

As contributors slowly go through their collections, updating and correcting data, eventually the database will weed out any errors that have occurred. If most of the data is correct, it is quite easy and less time consuming to only need to update or change a few things.

Quoting Pro_Trek:

Quote:
i guess we should vote NO on all his contributions from now on just to make sure he doesnt spread bad data

I' m the one finding, fixing,contributing  bad data to good better best .. what are YOU doing to find bad data??

This specific topic always puzzles me. I’ve said this before, but wanted to get all my thoughts out and then hopefully be done with it… the following post is EXTREMELY long  , for anyone who makes it through the whole thing, I totally applaud you! 

It seems there's a mentality around here to treat these... how did Martian put it "our update your local profile, contribute to all regions people" as some sort of pariahs. That they're on a mission to spread bad data and infect the entire database, sitting there, with an evil smirk on their faces as they're doing this. When in fact it appears to me, that it’s the exact opposite. Every single contribution that's come through my local from a submittor that doesn't own the profile, has specifically and explicitly stated that they don't own the profile they're contributing to. Which in turn lets me automatically know that I should double check the info (which I do about 85% of the time anyway, with the exception of what I’m sure we all have, those trusted contributors whose work seems to always be flawless) for accuracy and if it's wrong, vote accordingly. I don't automatically view these people (which I myself have been during a few points around here) as some malicious people that are out to harm our precious data, in fact, I view them the opposite. They're people that are actually taking it upon themselves to try and help others, and the system out, by correcting blatant errors and introducing good data.

Since this topic has become a hot button issue in the forums, we’ve discovered, what? Two? Three? Five? Titles that actually have data that varies across regions? (Keep in mind this post refers to things that spread across all regions, such as cast and crew data, or info that can be verified from the scans, such as overview… info that can be incorrect from the scan to the actual disc, such as runtime, audio, video etc. are not what I’m talking about here). I’m sorry, but to me, that is an eighth of a drop in the ocean. And if one more is discovered, again, vote accordingly on it. Not one of the people that contributes across varying regions is trying to force their way on you. They’re trying to help.

When I first joined here, and entered all my dvd’s, I found that I had two different names in my local. One for Brandy and one for Brandy Norwood. The same person. The singer/actor that was huge in the mid-90’s to early 2000’s. Not so popular now though… I love Brandy. I’ve followed her career since the beginning. And it was weird to me to see that Brandy Norwood was the common name in the CLT results, when I know for a fact that with a few exceptions, she’s been using just Brandy since about 1994. I looked at the titles, and that data was completely skewed from one profile being copied to another to another to another etc. I sent out a few pm’s, and next thing you know, everyone’s responding saying “she’s just credited as Brandy”. Damn rights I made the corrections. The common name now stands as Brandy over Brandy Norwood, with the credited as being applied as necessary. It didn’t help matters that in some lesser populated localities, there was no original title being used, skewing the title count in the CLT results even further. I make no apologies for contributing to those profiles I don’t own, I helped the system, I introduced good data, at least one name has been corrected. The chances now that Brandy Norwood will be downloaded into a local profile and spread are much slimmer (there are a few titles I didn’t get a response on, so I left them alone). And I’d say a good 85% of the corrections I made, didn’t get a vote, even from the people that pm’d me back with an answer. So instead of having someone try to do a good thing and help the system, you’d prefer for those profiles that are never going to get updated, to sit there with completely incorrect data, forever skewing results from the CLT? That makes no sense to me.

And I don’t mean this to be offensive, but to everyone saying “you’re possibly (key word) spreading bad data” who doesn’t double check 100% of the submissions that come through their locals for accuracy, you’re coming off as something of a hypocrite. You are also possibly spreading bad data for the simple fact that you’re not checking the accuracy of the submission being made. Member making a contribution to a profile they don’t own = possible spread of bad data (although the facts we’ve discovered generally tend to move away from this theory and more towards the fact that they’re spreading good data). Member not checking every single contribution that comes through their locals for accuracy = possible spread of bad data. You’re pointing a finger, and calling out people for doing the same thing you’re doing… possibly spreading bad data. It’s the exact same thing, carried out two different ways. For every person who’s voted on a contribution for a title they don’t own (such as a wishlist or ordered title)… possible spread of bad data.

Everyone is so worried about this seemingly bad data being spread, but very few are actually willing to take it upon themselves to correct it. A few are, I applaud them, I also vote NO to them if the data does end up being incorrect (and then hell, possibly even make the corrections myself). Really, if you are so worried about this bad data, go through your locals and update them. Check the actual submission for accuracy against the dvd/bluray. Do the work, stop “calling out” the people who are only trying to help. Saying people aren’t doing the work is false. They are doing they work, they’re actually doing more work, all in an effort to HELP, not harm. And in the end, it really doesn’t matter. Ken (in one of the few answers he’s seen fit to give in the past year), has said this is okay. Whether it’s liked or not doesn’t matter anymore, by all means and measures, for this program, from the one guy who can say yes or no, it’s been deemed okay. If the need arises for it again, yeah, I’ll take the crap and submit to a few profiles to correct errors that need correcting to help the system.

Quoting Kathy:

Quote:
Some of the data could not and should not be entered, the disc id for example.  But, others could be entered and done so with a great deal of accuracy. Why shouldn't someone copy the Overview into a profile that is missing one? The Cast and Crew of a movie does not change from DVD to DVD; this is why invelos allows us to copy data that has already been accepted into the database.

But there, I am afraid, is the rub.  It is not being done with a great deal of accurace.  It would be one thing if he was actually auditing the title, like T!M does, but he isn't.  He is copying data from one profile, errors and all, and contributing it 5 or 6 times over.  He is copying data from his case, without checking the previous contribution notes or the other cases, and contributing incorrect data.

Ken has said that it is o.k. to contribute to profiles you don't own.  Fine, I accept that.  But if you are going to do it, and inflate your contribution numbers, at least do the work required to ensure you are contributing accurate data.