Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
We have tried Guidelines, they don't work. And you know that, Mark. Or do i need to remind you "They are only Guidelines, we don't HAVE to follow them." And the database was a total wreck.

The guidelines by themselves were a bad idea.  Having guidelines with a voting system, more robust contribution system & partial acceptance of updates hasn't been tried yet.  I'm not saying that we throw all the rules out the window.  But I do sometimes question if we're making things too complicated.  I can't think of a better example at the moment than this very thread.  We're allowing the rules to back us into a corner where we're forced to make stupid contributions.

The rules should be a tool to ensure that the database is populated with good data.  Let me repeat that since so many seem to be missing the point.  The rules should be a tool to ensure that the database is populated with good data. Instead we're putting ourselves into a position where we're allowing the rules to dictate to us that we place bad data into the database.  How can that be considered a good thing?  And no, this isn't an endorsement of your theory that things were good before we had the rule changed and you tried to save us and we wouldn't listen.  The previous rule was just as bad.  It forced us to enter a small percentage of bad data just because the rules said so.

The solution to the problem isn't more rules.  So unless we can find the perfect wording to cover every conceivable problem that might arise, we're left with putting bad data in from time to time or allowing some room for common sense (combined with the voting system, robust contribution system and partial acceptance of updates) or some other idea that we’ve not thought of yet.

I was once told that if what you're doing isn't working, it's time to try something else.  I would say that rule upon rule upon rule is forcing us to put bad data into the database.  That isn't working to meet the goal of having a good database (I would hope we can all agree that that should be our ultimate goal).  So perhaps it's time to try something else.

Quote:
Quoting VibroCount:

Quote:
I believe following the rules for the common database is a necessity. What you do with your local database is entirely personal, and I should have no say in it, just as you should have no say as to how I modify mine.

Exactly my opinion on this. Why we have to come and come again on this subject? The rules work as they are right now. I don't say that I agree 100% with them, but this is a public database and the most acurate one. If I don't like a rule I don't use it on my personal database, that's all.

Quote:
Did this really need its own thread?

The Star Wars titles in the database now match the DVD covers. That's good data in my book.

Quote:
...

I had contributed a change to a DVD (Cheech & Chong's Up In Smoke) and all I did was remove the quotation marks from around UP IN SMOKE since they did not appear on the cover. I thought that was a ligitimate contribution and thought nothing more of it.

I go into my profile to look at the contributions and I scroll down through them and happen to notice that I had a NO vote for that particular one. I am not upset when I see this ... but I do click on the yes & no to see what I could have possibly done wrong.

The comment in there was that between CHEECH & CHONG's was not really an "&" but was indeed a "Y". What did that have to do with what I contributed. Why vote NO on my contribution because you find an error that is not related to my contribution? I did not understand it.

Again ... I am not wanting to open a can of worms over something as minor as that. I guess my point here is that you should not penalize someone by voting no on a contribution if what they are contributing is not what you are complaining about.
...
.

Quote:
Just to respond to this...uhm...who says it's bad data?

Quote:

I have dozens of foreign titled dvd's which I have changed locally to the English title.