Quoting Berak:

Quote:
In my opinion there is no such thing as too much information.... 

If it takes twice as long for the screener to read your notes, then it does mine, then yes there is

When editing a profile, the crappiest part is writing the notes. I usually add more or less the same text to the notes, i add as much as the rules require me to add, example of my notes.
Though i must add that i usually dont use any external programs to check the disc.

Quoting whispering:

Quote:
example of my notes.

You can give more or less detail, but in your contribution notes you say the truth, anyway.  In that example you took Cast&Crew from the US release, thus you wrote "Taken from the US release", not "Source DVD" like Wasserglas would do according to his words.

Quote:
Always write "Source DVD" no matter from where your data is.

This thread is not dead yet?

Wasserglass use a lot of name here and if I understand well we are not suppose to do it.

To quote Ken from this topic "Trinitron_FX68-8. Latest actions..." :

"Threads targeting a specific user, regardless of the verity of the statements, will be closed."

So why this is not lock yet?

Quoting whispering:

Quote:
The "source" in contribution notes has gone to ridiculous levels. The ONLY time Wasserglas has to provide more detailed explanation is, if hes changing cast/crew, he has verified there is a discrepancy between the box and the actual content of the DVD, he is making a subtle change that may be hard to spot or he is removing incorrect information. The way i see it, that wasnt the case.

There are a couple of reasons to write more extensive notes, even which player you used. For example:

Region Code - Cover shows RC2, checking with NeroInfoTool it is RC2 and 4. If you write in your notes "verified with Nero InfoTool" I know that I don't must check it.

Stating which player you used could also be important. There are a couple of stand alone players which doesn't show the correct run time if there is a copy protection like X-Protect on the DVD.

Subtitles - If you write in your notes "verified with IfoEdit" I know the profile data comes from the disc itself, not from the cover.

Never trust a cover text 

I agree with Berak: "In my opinion there is no such thing as too much information...."

Quoting whispering:

Quote:
SpaceFreakMicha is violating the voting rules. Just because someone is violating the rules, doesnt mean you can too.

Sorry, but I can't see any violation of the voting rules. He was suspicious (and had good reasons for that) and I don't think he or Lexxx made "funny no votes".

Quoting Wasserglas:

Quote:
Quoting SpaceFreakMicha:

Quote:
Wow, I never knew how much impact my voting has on the screeners... 

I read you have had credibility, can't confirm this by myself.

However, you (and Lexxx) have become dishonorable Funny-No-Voters. Just for the fun of it. With this disservice to our project you both have disqualified yourselves, go away.

ROFLMAO, and you sir have become a dishonorable Contributor. You have stated your intent to lie in your notes, you have presented Contributions which do not conform to the Rules and you are complaining? Give us all a break, Wassen and cut the garbage.

Skip

Quoting AESP_pres:

Quote:
Quoting Lithurge:

Quote:


The difference is your thread was headed Triniton and had a go at his contributions.

This one was started by Waserglass and was a statement of intent that some people have suggested is not the best way of contributing.

Yes I know. But now he point directly to some users who vote on his contribution, and this is when this thread cross the line in my opinion. I've no trouble with his statements (not that I agree with them like you could see on my previous answer here) at the beginning, but now yes.

But maybe I misinterpret how it's work, since I'm relativly new here if we count the old forum

I can't see any trouble in Wasserglas's mentioning other users. - He is - from my point of view with success - leveling his reputation in this forum to gain the one he already harvested as contributor... - I wouldn't be offended...

But on the bright side of life he stopped contributing, what saves a lot of time of double checking

Regards, AA

Well, since I was named as one of the "funny-no-voters" as well, I take the liberty to add some more insight on the "always correct but just a tid bit unsourced" contributions by the thread starter:

On Sept. 13 he contributed changes to the profile Der Texaner [7-321921-125881], stating in his notes "+ CoO. All information from DVD."

Well, as it turns out, he also changed the SRP of said profile, from 20.43 € to 14.99 €, a value that's 100% wrong, since the release date of the DVD is prior to the introduction of the € in Germany.

Upon changing the SRP back to the value the profile carried before (btw, a profile imported into the Invelos db on Mar 13 as it was at IVS), guess who votes no, claiming the change back to be unsourced (although the notes state it's simply a change back to the old status quo due to the obvious incorrectness of the last contrib) and further claiming to possess a source indicating a different SRP than the one sourced and approved at IVS....

So, for all your crying foul and blaming others to be unfair to you, and your claiming to only wish to improve the db.... I don't believe you any more than before, rather less.

And you can bet that every future contribution by you (that is if you actually have the nerve to contribute ever again) that's not 100% according to the rules content and note wise will get an instant "No" from me, regardless of the change. I will not put up with crosschecking your contribs, you're untrustworthy and have proven to be willing to disrupt the db, which is completely unacceptable, and I'm going to do my part to keep bad data out of the db or even avoid the risk for it to enter.

Quoting AESP_pres:

Quote:
Quoting Lithurge:

Quote:


The difference is your thread was headed Triniton and had a go at his contributions.

This one was started by Waserglass and was a statement of intent that some people have suggested is not the best way of contributing.

Yes I know. But now he point directly to some users who vote on his contribution, and this is when this thread cross the line in my opinion. I've no trouble with his statements (not that I agree with them like you could see on my previous answer here) at the beginning, but now yes.

But maybe I misinterpret how it's work, since I'm relativly new here if we count the old forum

Hard to say to be honest. It relies on Ken or Gerri picking up on the thread, and it's much easier to spot a 'headlined' thread like yours against a known problem than some posts buried in an increasingly lengthy thread.