 |
|
|
|
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... 5 6 7 8 9 ...13  Previous Next
|
|
What I would want... |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 4,651 |
| | | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | But Gunnar, that is not your job. For you people who love to complain about the Rules , please let me point something out to all of you. There are 500,000 users of Profiler, everyone of you had the opportunity to recognize the problems with the old Guidelines and that the database was complertely out of control, but you didn't, there were exactly TWO users that recognized the problems, and then they rounded up an international team to help with writing, talked to Intervocative/Invelos and tried to grab the bull by the horns, and now all you want to do is carp about it....WHERE WERE YOU...you had the same opportunity to see it and do something and you ignored it. this constant carping by the same few users who did NOTHING gets old.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 810 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr Pavlov: Quote:
But Gunnar, that is not your job. For you people who love to complain about the Rules , please let me point something out to all of you. There are 500,000 users of Profiler, everyone of you had the opportunity to recognize the problems with the old Guidelines and that the database was complertely out of control, but you didn't, there were exactly TWO users that recognized the problems, and then they rounded up an international team to help with writing, talked to Intervocative/Invelos and tried to grab the bull by the horns, and now all you want to do is carp about it....WHERE WERE YOU...you had the same opportunity to see it and do something and you ignored it. this constant carping by the same few users who did NOTHING gets old.
Skip And the rules belong to Invelos, not to you! You do not have the right to tell Gunnar "that is not your job", only Invelos can do that. pdf | | | Paul Francis
San Juan Capistrano, CA, USA |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | |  How typical. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 29, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
The rules were designed to standardize the data. I would say that rules should have been designed to standardize the data. But rules say nothing about data that needs standardization for linking or search purpose (names (problems of linking, sorting by family name), title (try to search "taxi 4"...), and, on the contrary, are very precise for data that do not need standardization (overviews...). Rules were made by people obsessed by ping ponging, something I never saw in my area (I do not say it didn't exist, I just say I never saw it...), and are based on an idea "exactly as found on the DVD" which leads to everything except standardization... I have no idea who is at the origin of this "simple" idea, but it is probably the most stupid that could be found.  | | | | Images from movies |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | As usual you are dead wrong in your assessment and don't understand ALL of the issues, surfeur. ping-ponging certainly was an issue.. But so was the linking, at that time we had a linking system which had been totally detroyed, so Ken had to design a new. So we had nothing that we could write Rules forn relative to linking, we did recognize that IF everybody were playing from the same page, then when a new linking system was designed, the linking would be relatively. Sadly, users never comp[rehended and while many did understand and followed the Rules while we were waiting, others did not, perhaps as a direct result of the carping of some, but as a result of this we now have a linking that does not function as it should..
Maybe one day, surfeur, you will understand, but i won't hiold my breath, I will however, keep my fingers crossed. You don't have all the answers or even some of them. There are some very basic things you must learn to grasp first.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr Pavlov: Quote:
As usual you are dead wrong... The fact is that I have not the same analysis than you, but nothing allows you to say that I'm "dead wrong". I've have been with dvdprofiler for se7en (  ) years, and knows its history as well as you. I just saw things going worse and worse, since I saw them through Region 2 France problems that have nothing in common with Region 1 US. | | | | Images from movies | | | | Last edited: by surfeur51 |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | When you make claim about "obsessed by ping-ponging" and youi have absolutely no first hand knowledge of that information, while i do. Yes I can tell you are DEAD WRONG because you are. Just as your claim relative R2 france being different from R2 France shows your utter lack of sophistication in understanding that there is not a separate database for each Region/Locality, what you do in Region 2 France affects every other user in every other region/locality in the world. If France refuse to follow the Rules then it is no wonder the CLT is screwed up and won't work properly.
***editted for personal attack*********
Right now, the very best thing we can do is wait and see what Ken is up to with the program and how that impacts things, and see if Gerri is going to make any interim modifications to the Rules, but get used to FACT that the days of the Guidelines and users, such as yourself, entering data in any form you choose and from whatever source you choose are over, and we aren't going back. The database today is so far superior to what it was almost 4 years ago is amazing even to me, and there is room for lots of improvement in a lot of different areas, sometimes we want to get the cart before the horse, but we all need to just learn patience, because getting the cart before the horse will only make a mess.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Forum Moderator |
| | Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr Pavlov: Quote:
Just as your claim relative R2 france being different from R2 France... Do not remember having said that...  | | | | Images from movies |
| | Registered: February 23, 2009 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 1,580 |
| | Posted: | | | | I see Skip is preaching from his mighty high throne again.  It's really starting to get very old, very quickly. With all due respect for people who have put in a lot of work and thought into the current rules and database submissions, but how long are you going to keep denigrating people on the forum? Each and every time a user comes along to point out there are flaws with the current rules and submission system, and in good faith attempts to provide or even suggest a solution, you attack them in a demeaning way, with a " Who are you to decide for 500,000 users?!?" type of reply. Well, I redirect the question, Skip: "Who are you to decide for all of us?" It's pretty easy for you to talk all our suggestions down and demean our opinions, since the current rules are exactly what you want them to be. Basically, the rules are there for a reason and I understand that reason. But on the other hand, the current rules aren't perfect, not by a long shot and saying so shouldn't brand a user as a heretic around here. I see a few posts above, you blame other users for not stepping in when things went wrong, not taking the bull by the horns. Well, now that some users ARE taking the bull by the horns and pointing out problems in the current version of the rules, they generally get the same response by a small but vocal group of users: - who are you to talk with your puny collection? - you're wrong. Because we say so. Period. and if all else fails: - the rules are what they are and we have to wait for Ken's input. So I ask you, what do you want from us now? Take the bull by the horns or not? You can't blame users for having been inactive in the past and now that some are (because at that time, perhaps they weren't around yet), you shoot down every single suggestion to change the current set of rules. Moreover, for someone who likes to point out to others that "they don't know what they are talking about", I find your lack of understanding in certain matters pretty troubling, like in the thread I started regarding romanization of Japanese credits. You came in the thread, guns blazing and yelling the WYSIWHT credo, but didn't even stop to consider that it's technically impossible to do just that, which was the reason the thread got started in the first place. Sure, you apologized in PM to me afterwards, but would it really hurt you to first try and understand another user's point of view before attacking them? The rules are there and it's good that they are there. But they are flawed and in certain aspects, severely so. The fact that you helped create them doesn't change that. So whether you like it or not, users will keep on trying to improve the existing rules and I think you'd better get used to the idea and instead take a more cooperative stance, instead of your current hostile stance. It seems that every single suggestion to change the rules here is treated by a very vocal minorty as an uprising that needs to be nipped in the bud. Why not create a more open atmosphere, so ideas can be bounced around and let Invelos sort it out? It seems like that vocal minorty want to silence every user that suggests an idea other than the current set of rules. Not everyone has to agree with each other, but at least, let's keep things open and allow ideas to flourish. If you have a different opinion, please try to say so in a respectful way without demeaning the other's opinion. | | | Blu-ray collection
DVD collection
My Games
My Trophies | | | | Last edited: by Taro |
| | Registered: December 22, 2008 |  Posts: 76 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Taro: Quote:
I see Skip is preaching from his mighty high throne again. It's really starting to get very old, very quickly. With all due respect for people who have put in a lot of work and thought into the current rules and database submissions, but how long are you going to keep denigrating people on the forum?
Each and every time a user comes along to point out there are flaws with the current rules and submission system, and in good faith attempts to provide or even suggest a solution, you attack them in a demeaning way, with a "Who are you to decide for 500,000 users?!?" type of reply.
Well, I redirect the question, Skip: "Who are you to decide for all of us?" It's pretty easy for you to talk all our suggestions down and demean our opinions, since the current rules are exactly what you want them to be.
Basically, the rules are there for a reason and I understand that reason. But on the other hand, the current rules aren't perfect, not by a long shot and saying so shouldn't brand a user as a heretic around here.
I see a few posts above, you blame other users for not stepping in when things went wrong, not taking the bull by the horns. Well, now that some users ARE taking the bull by the horns and pointing out problems in the current version of the rules, they generally get the same response by a small but vocal group of users:
- who are you to talk with your puny collection?
- you're wrong. Because we say so. Period.
and if all else fails:
- the rules are what they are and we have to wait for Ken's input.
So I ask you, what do you want from us now? Take the bull by the horns or not? You can't blame users for having been inactive in the past and now that some are (because at that time, perhaps they weren't around yet), you shoot down every single suggestion to change the current set of rules.
Moreover, for someone who likes to point out to others that "they don't know what they are talking about", I find your lack of understanding in certain matters pretty troubling, like in the thread I started regarding romanization of Japanese credits. You came in the thread, guns blazing and yelling the WYSIWHT credo, but didn't even stop to consider that it's technically impossible to do just that, which was the reason the thread got started in the first place. Sure, you apologized in PM to me afterwards, but would it really hurt you to first try and understand another user's point of view before attacking them?
The rules are there and it's good that they are there. But they are flawed and in certain aspects, severely so. The fact that you helped create them doesn't change that. So whether you like it or not, users will keep on trying to improve the existing rules and I think you'd better get used to the idea and instead take a more cooperative stance, instead of your current hostile stance.
It seems that every single suggestion to change the rules here is treated by a very vocal minorty as an uprising that needs to be nipped in the bud. Why not create a more open atmosphere, so ideas can be bounced around and let Invelos sort it out? It seems like that vocal minorty want to silence every user that suggests an idea other than the current set of rules.
Not everyone has to agree with each other, but at least, let's keep things open and allow ideas to flourish. If you have a different opinion, please try to say so in a respectful way without demeaning the other's opinion. Great post Taro, agree 100% But I think you should CAPITALIZE certain WORDS like the OTHER person here does so it GRABS people's ATTENTION and makes it LOOK like you're CONDESCENDING, and a KNOW-IT-ALL. Of course you won't catch ME using silly CAPITALIZATION to make my POINT. Poo |
| | Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,479 |
| | | Registered: August 7, 2007 |  Posts: 185 |
| | Posted: | | | | That was a great post Taro, I agree with you completely. In fact, I agree with just about all your posts in this thread.  This forum needs an attitude and atmosphere change, the negativity here is the main reason why I usually stay away from the forums. And I'm sure I'm not the only one... |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 820 |
| | Posted: | | | | I think that some of the problems that we have here with the rules are analogous to issues that occur everyday in the law in relation to the interpretation of legislation. A useful summary can be found here. The following extract illustrates my point: "The judiciary interprets how legislation should apply in a particular case as no legislation unambiguously and specifically addresses all matters. Legislation may contain uncertainties for a variety of reasons: Words are imperfect symbols to communicate intent. They are ambiguous and change in meaning over time. Unforeseen situations are inevitable, and new technologies and cultures make application of existing laws difficult. Uncertainties may be added to the statute in the course of enactment, such as the need for compromise or catering to special interest groups. Therefore, the court must try to determine how a statute should be enforced. This requires statutory construction. It is a tenet of statutory construction that the legislature is supreme (assuming constitutionality) when creating law and that the court is merely an interpreter of the law. In practice, by performing the construction the court can make sweeping changes in the operation of the law." In practice, various approaches are used to interpret the legislation. There is no "one size fits all approach". This is part of the problem that we have here in interpreting the Contribution Rules. We have various camps that apply their preferred interpretive method to any controversy. For example: We have those whole parse and apply the literal meaning of the rule (Literal form on interpretation); Those who focus on the intent of those who drafted the rules (Purposive from of interpretation); Those who focus on ensuring that the mischief or problem that was intended to be cured by the rule is considered (Mischief rule form of interpretation); Etc Here is a tip! There is no one correct approach and that is why each problem must be addressed on its merits. The rules here are couple of years old. No sophisticated approach has been developed for their interpretation. They are not The Ten Commandments written in stone. My suggestion is that we all need to accept that the rules are not perfect and probably never will be. They will need to evolve and change over time for a variety of good reasons. There are many different valid approaches for interpreting and changing the rules. Minds will differ as to what is the best approach. Advocating for particular positions before you have listened and understood all of the arguments is unhelpful. | | | | Last edited: by Telecine |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,651 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr Pavlov: Quote:
But Gunnar, that is not your job. You know what? You are absolutely right! My apologies. I should have said Some of us would like to see the music changed before the orchestra is reduced to a quartet... Quote:
this constant carping by the same few users who did NOTHING gets old. If someone had given us a heads up that the work was being done, I'm sure many of us would have been glad to offer our opinions at that time. But I'm not sure you would have been any more interested in them then than you are now...  | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1... 5 6 7 8 9 ...13 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |