I thought it was unquestionable that Disc-ID profiles contained only info from that Disc-ID. To me, a Disc-ID profile with a Disc-ID from a different disc is a corrupt profile.

As a result of this thread, I realize I can no longer trust any Disc-ID profiles in the Invelos database. 

Quoting Mithi:

Quote:
ehm, you might want to climb of your high horse, just because Addicted2DVD doesn't want to fill up the database with unneeded copies of profiles.


cya, Mithi

No, for once, I'm afraid I won't 'climb down' off my 'high horse'. Too often I read people's comments in this forum listing their reasons for not doing one thing or another because they 'don't understand' or 'don't have the time'.
I'm sick of it.

I do have the time and I've taken the time to learn the things I didn't understand - so that I can better serve this database by contributing accurate and useful profiles to the database. So, why can't other people put themselves out?

I simply don't understand the prevalent attitude of "oh, somebody else will do it" that is so common around here. It is selfish to always leave work for others and to constantly take, take, take.

This Disc ID issue is very simple to me. If the Disc ID that was used to create the profile is different to the one on your disc then it's the wrong profile and to think otherwise is not only damaging the database, but it's against the rules.
From the rules: "Use individual UPCs if they are available or use Disc ID"

So, by not correctly creating a profile based on the Disc ID of the disc in question, Pete is not complying with the contribution rules. It's that simple.

And, I really don't care if his feelings have been hurt. This attitude of 'I'm alright, Jack' or 'let others do the work' or 'why the hell should I do that' is all too common around here. It's not just Pete, it's a common attitude. No one with that attitude deserves the work that others do; and if that means I'm on a high horse then so be it.
Personally, I think it's more a case of finally speaking out against the lazy people here. And, based on the amount of people who gave me a positive rating for my post I'm not alone in my thinking.

Quoting Mithi:

Quote:
BTW: on UPC-based profiles the Disc-IDs and the Profile-ID don't match also.


cya, Mithi

That's because there is an EAN/UPC present.
In the absence of an EAN then the Disc ID must be used to create a profile. The Disc ID used is read by Profiler by putting the disc into the drive.

This whole 'cluttering the database' argument is rubbish. Why do we have multiple profiles of the same film in the database? Because they all have a different EAN?
So, why is different Disc IDs any different? It isn't.

Quoting Pantheon:

Quote:
Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
But because I disagree with you on one thing I am selfish... I am inconsiderate...

Not because you disagree with me...but because you would rather have the wrong profile in your collection so you can benefit from the work of other people, instead of complying with the rules and having to do some work yourself.

If that's not a perfect example of selfishness then I don't know what is.

If in doubt, here's a dictionary definition:
Adjective
(of a person, action, or motive) Lacking consideration for others; concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure.

As I stated in the very beginning of the thread... I do not believe I am going against the rules at all... and I still don't read it the same way most of you do. 

And I am not "concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure." First and foremost I see it as completely senseless to have multiple profiles in the database with all the same info (except the disc id).  Not getting updates is just a side peeve I have in this situation.

and I always felt I was considering others by making it so there isn't multiple profiles with the same exact info in the database to choose from. Not everyone has a DVD-Rom to just pop in the disc. Some will either just download the children with the parent or search by title if they are not attached to the parent profile. I know... there was a time when that is how I had to do it.

obviously going by Ken that isn't (or doesn't have to be) the case.

I am done talking about the same thing over and over again in this thread. Ken posted his decision and when to and when not to add alternate disc ids.  That is what I will go by.

Quoting Forum Moderator:

Quote:
Please cease the namecalling, or this thread will be locked and other actions may be taken.

I'm sorry? What name calling?

If you are referring to behaviour being called a certain descriptive adjective then I think we have a very different definition of name calling.

Derogatory terms such as idiot, moron, fool and numerous swear words could be called namecalling. But, if identifying behaviour for what it is can be called that then I certainly need to find a different playground where the skin is a little thicker.

Anyway, enough said on this topic.

Kulju has nailed the issue on the head and it has been ignored. I'm done with this charade.
The attitude of some people really does make me wonder why I bother with this program.