 |
|
|
|
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 4 5 6  Previous Next
|
|
Visual Effects <Company Name> |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
  | Corne | | Registered: Nov. 1, 2000 |
| Registered: April 5, 2007 |  Posts: 1,059 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Kathy: Quote:
Although it seems like listening to a broken record, Yves makes a valid point.
Corne has written the word relative to the rules which I believe is the core problem and the cause of so many problems in the rules application - "interpreting".
As long as there are rules or guidelines that need to be interpreted, there are going to be disagreements in the reading or application of those rules or guidelines.
Depending on how one sees these issues, one or both sides of the disagreements may very well be right.
Is there a way to fix the problem? I'm afraid that the answer to that question is "no". There will never be a way to fix it to everyone's satisfaction. Rules or guidelines will always leave areas open to interpretation.
After many years of careful reading of the rules and open listening to the comments on the forums, I have come to the conclusion that there are no clear-cut correct answers to some questions.
I do not have a problem with that. The only problem I have is when we treat the opposing view with a lack of understanding and respect. Well said. I couldn't agree more! | | | | Cor |
| | Registered: May 19, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 6,730 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Kathy: Quote:
Is there a way to fix the problem? I'm afraid that the answer to that question is "no". There will never be a way to fix it to everyone's satisfaction. Rules or guidelines will always leave areas open to interpretation. The problem is not necessarily within the rules. The problem is that we have no jurisdiction, in the sense of a supreme committee that has the power to decide on questions where the rules alone don't help us. As long as we don't have this and leave "decisions" to the users of the forum nothing will ever be solved, because two weeks after this "decision" someone will come up and say that he never agreed but only remained silent against the "more vocal" users. In theory we have this "Supreme Court" it is supposed to be Ken. Alas, he only very scarcely uses this power. That's why we end up with 25 pages of a debate and nothing happened except for some back and forth ... and if we were really lucky this remained in a civil tone. I'd suggest a committee of, let's say 9 members, that have the power to ultimately interpret on questions like these (uneven number because in this case a tie is not possible). This will at least give those of us that come here to find and get answers some security. It will probably not prevent us from endless discussions, because with each and every decision made you will always have some that don't agree with it. | | | It all seems so stupid, it makes me want to give up!
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid?
Registrant since 05/22/2003 | | | | Last edited: by Lewis_Prothero |
| | Registered: March 29, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Kathy: Quote:
Is there a way to fix the problem? I'm afraid that the answer to that question is "no". I think that there is a solution. I spoke of it several times, but it has never been taken in consideration. What I proposed was to change the voting system. Yes would mean "Yes I want to see this in my database", No would mean "No, I do not want to see this in my database". The majority wins. Votes are anonymous to avoid "revenges". When accepted a change gives one point to the contributor, when refused -1 to the contributor. List of best contributors can be seen on the site, and when a contributor has reached -100, he is no more allowed to contribute. With such a system, contributors would have to think "Is what I propose interesting for most of users ?" and after some contributions, they will quicky see what interests people and what does not interest people. With such a system , no more discussions about the conformity to the rules (the term of guidelines would be better). If a data is against the guidelines but yes wins, that means that people are interested. If the data meets the guidelines, but everybody votes no, that means that nobody wants to see that. Pingponging would be avoided by the fact that a change to accepted data would risk a no vote, and a -1 score. | | | | Images from movies | | | | Last edited: by surfeur51 |
| | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting CharlieM: Quote:
We submit to Ken. If only that were true. Instead, we submit to the screeners, and like us, they do not always know how to interpret the rules, and frequently make entirely opposing decisions merely based on "he who shouts the loudest" in either their voting comments or their contribution notes. Quote:
He is the final word in all cases. Again: if only we actually got to hear that "final word" more often. Instead, we go around in circles on the same subjects for week after week, month after month, sometimes even year after year, without getting that "final word"... |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Kathy: Quote:
Although it seems like listening to a broken record, Yves makes a valid point. Indeed he does. Quote:
I do not have a problem with that. The only problem I have is when we treat the opposing view with a lack of understanding and respect.  | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting surfeur51: Quote:
Quoting Kathy:
Quote:
Is there a way to fix the problem? I'm afraid that the answer to that question is "no".
I think that there is a solution. I spoke of it several times, but it has never been taken in consideration. What I proposed was to change the voting system. Yes would mean "Yes I want to see this in my database", No would mean "No, I do not want to see this in my database". The majority wins. Votes are anonymous to avoid "revenges". When accepted a change gives one point to the contributor, when refused -1 to the contributor. List of best contributors can be seen on the site, and when a contributor has reached -100, he is no more allowed to contribute.
With such a system, contributors would have to think "Is what I propose interesting for most of users ?" and after some contributions, they will quicky see what interests people and what does not interest people.
With such a system , no more discussions about the conformity to the rules (the term of guidelines would be better). If a data is against the guidelines but yes wins, that means that people are interested. If the data meets the guidelines, but everybody votes no, that means that nobody wants to see that. Pingponging would be avoided by the fact that a change to accepted data would risk a no vote, and a -1 score. This sounds good, in theory, but as long as we have 'rubber stamp' voters, such a system can never work. I have seen people make changes to a profile, that are absolutely wrong for that profile, and get 100% yes votes because people just don't pay attention. I am sorry, but I don't want that kind of database. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
| | Corne | | Registered: Nov. 1, 2000 |
| Registered: April 5, 2007 | | Posts: 1,059 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Quoting CharlieM:
Quote:
We submit to Ken.
If only that were true. Instead, we submit to the screeners, and like us, they do not always know how to interpret the rules, and frequently make entirely opposing decisions merely based on "he who shouts the loudest" in either their voting comments or their contribution notes.
Quote:
He is the final word in all cases.
Again: if only we actually got to hear that "final word" more often. Instead, we go around in circles on the same subjects for week after week, month after month, sometimes even year after year, without getting that "final word"... I've seen screeners decisions going both ways, sometimes in favour of the 'loudest', sometimes not. It depends on more factors. I like the solution proposed by Silence_of_Lambs. Just let a committee rule at the end of a discussion (or at least at a point that the discussion falls into reruns of arguments). Those rulings should be listed somewhere so that the rulings don't get to page 100x. | | | | Cor |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TheMadMartian: Quote:
Quoting surfeur51:
Quote:
Quoting Kathy:
Quote:
Is there a way to fix the problem? I'm afraid that the answer to that question is "no".
I think that there is a solution. I spoke of it several times, but it has never been taken in consideration. What I proposed was to change the voting system. Yes would mean "Yes I want to see this in my database", No would mean "No, I do not want to see this in my database". The majority wins. Votes are anonymous to avoid "revenges". When accepted a change gives one point to the contributor, when refused -1 to the contributor. List of best contributors can be seen on the site, and when a contributor has reached -100, he is no more allowed to contribute.
With such a system, contributors would have to think "Is what I propose interesting for most of users ?" and after some contributions, they will quicky see what interests people and what does not interest people.
With such a system , no more discussions about the conformity to the rules (the term of guidelines would be better). If a data is against the guidelines but yes wins, that means that people are interested. If the data meets the guidelines, but everybody votes no, that means that nobody wants to see that. Pingponging would be avoided by the fact that a change to accepted data would risk a no vote, and a -1 score.
This sounds good, in theory, but as long as we have 'rubber stamp' voters, such a system can never work. I have seen people make changes to a profile, that are absolutely wrong for that profile, and get 100% yes votes because people just don't pay attention. I am sorry, but I don't want that kind of database. Not only that Martian... but it also wouldn't work for the same thing Tim said earlier about people's opinions on things changing and such. We would go a while doing something one way... then the wind blows another way and we have to do it another way. Then it also depends on the profiles you have... some profiles will show info one way because of who has the releases... yet other profiles for the same title could have it another way because different people has the profiles. It don't even remotely sound good to me. | | | | Pete |
| | Registered: May 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,475 |
| | Posted: | | | | Although I see some merit in your proposal Yves, I don't think the current system is in need of that much overhaul for the reasons Martian and Pete have outlined.
The suggestion of Silence_of_Lambs is one that I think might better suit the database with less disruption of the contribution process. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | I can't even say I agree with what Silence_of_Lambs said. I mean MAYBE if this "committee" was Invelos employees and actually has Ken's ear... but definitely not a group of forum members or anything like that. | | | | Pete |
| | Registered: March 15, 2007 |  Posts: 1,982 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
So by all means, go ahead and hurl some more lies and abuse around - maybe it'll finally get you banned for good. You have no idea how much I hate people like you who think they are better than anyone else... I have spent and continue to spend hours and hours correcting all my profiles in the last weeks because of errors entered by you and others in the database because they contribute changes in the film credit without owning the dvd in the first place. For the banning don't be sad but it won't happen... Ken don't ban any paying user, I never got a single day suspension, I only got a couple of warning from the moderator when you have whine to him and nobody except you had a problem with me (wich is mutual). Continue to have fun entering wrong data on what you don't own and I will continue to vote no on your useless ego boosting contributions. |
| | Registered: January 1, 2009 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,087 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting ninehours: Quote:
I remember seeing a thread about this before but can't find it
Do these people get a Visual Effects credit or because the visual effect credit applies to the company name (you don't know what the people credited under it actually did) they should not be credited
... According the rules I'd say they're allowed. As "negative" example I remember the Percy Jackson Move where there was real big bunch of those in the end credits. (Which I didn't include in my contribution, but made a hint in the contribution notes for other users) My personnel opinion: I'm absolute in favor for your suggested "catagorised crew credits". (with imho a needed change of the linking system) There will be always discussions, should someone be included or not. With this there wouldn't be an argue, because we could include everything we like. If someone doesn't want to have a part of the crew: delete it local. And I don't think there will be full credits of many movies, because the users will just include those things they're interested in. | | | | Last edited: by VirusPil |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Agree! | | | | Pete |
| | Registered: May 20, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,934 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Quoting CharlieM:
Quote:
We submit to Ken.
If only that were true. Instead, we submit to the screeners, and like us, they do not always know how to interpret the rules, and frequently make entirely opposing decisions merely based on "he who shouts the loudest" in either their voting comments or their contribution notes.
Quote:
He is the final word in all cases.
Again: if only we actually got to hear that "final word" more often. Instead, we go around in circles on the same subjects for week after week, month after month, sometimes even year after year, without getting that "final word"... I wasn't referring to contributions. We debate rules and propose rule changes. Ken is the ultimate. Screeners approving or disapproving is tacit approval or disapproval at best. I have had contributions go both ways for the same concern. Until Ken makes final judgment, nothing is set. This is what I was referring to. Charlie |
| | Registered: May 20, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,934 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting surfeur51: Quote:
Quoting Kathy:
Quote:
Is there a way to fix the problem? I'm afraid that the answer to that question is "no".
I think that there is a solution. I spoke of it several times, but it has never been taken in consideration. What I proposed was to change the voting system. Yes would mean "Yes I want to see this in my database", No would mean "No, I do not want to see this in my database". The majority wins. Votes are anonymous to avoid "revenges". When accepted a change gives one point to the contributor, when refused -1 to the contributor. List of best contributors can be seen on the site, and when a contributor has reached -100, he is no more allowed to contribute.
With such a system, contributors would have to think "Is what I propose interesting for most of users ?" and after some contributions, they will quicky see what interests people and what does not interest people.
With such a system , no more discussions about the conformity to the rules (the term of guidelines would be better). If a data is against the guidelines but yes wins, that means that people are interested. If the data meets the guidelines, but everybody votes no, that means that nobody wants to see that. Pingponging would be avoided by the fact that a change to accepted data would risk a no vote, and a -1 score. The only really big issue with this, is where is the standards. This would not solve your biggest complaint either. Case and point I own a BD and DVD of a particular movie. I went through and updated the cast and crew. I submitted both for consideration. 1 is running 8 to 3 against, the other is running 6 to 0 for. With your proposal, both would be accepted, and thus have 2 different crew lists for the same movie. To amplify this, I contributed another profile, and 5 people that voted no on the first one voted no, and with the same type of change voted yes on the second one. With your proposal, a contributor would never know what to contribute. Charlie |
| | Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting CharlieM: Quote:
With your proposal, a contributor would never know what to contribute.
In fact, I do not care about the feeling of the contributor. The interest of what he contributes should not be for him (he has already what he wants in his local), but for the other users that will download the profile. I'm convinced that a contributor will know what to do very soon. I take an example : He submits dividers in a cast list that had none. After ten such contributions, he sees that 80% are accepted (or refused). He will soon know if the majority of other people are interested or not by dividers. As I wrote, to please the majority is more important than to please the ego of the contributor. At present time, many people do not vote because they would like to vote yes to something which is against the rule (a new cover scan without original stickers, for example, or non reflective though the original edition was), or no to something which is per the rules (adding spelling mistakes on accented names, for example). If people could say, yes, I like it, or no, I don't want that in my local, things would go better. | | | | Images from movies |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4 5 6 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |