| Author |
Message |
| Registered: April 20, 2010 |  Posts: 11 |
| | Posted: | | | | ROFLMAO http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=676120&PageNum=LAST 3rd attempt for this title, i even accidentally used the wrong UPC ( the one from Moulin Rouge! digibook ) in all my haste Guess the text "3rd and last attempt for this title." actually did the trick ... pffttt. Come on guys and gals who is doing this kind of shiitake mushroom. Now i also see the reason why there's no name for whom declined a contribution. Also seems someone doesn't know what EAN means and we have to use UPC instead  | | | | Last edited: by StefaanD |
|
| Registered: March 18, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 1,633 |
| | Posted: | | | | Approvals could be better. I just had three profiles declined by a single NO vote and that individual was posting false comments on my contributions because he took issue with one of my votes. He also liked to use colorful language in one of those comments. "fake. Filmax S.A. is corrected. www.filmax.es. Ya esta bien de tocar los cojones" "fake. run time corrected is 93. tested with dvd decrypter" "fake. Aspect ratio on disc is 2.35:1. tested with dvd decrypter" The developers for DVD Decrypter stopped development in 2005 and it doesn't even support Blu-ray.  Mind you these were for Blu-ray releases. Seriously, where is the common sense in that. Already filed a support ticket and resubmitted the declined contributions. | | | | Last edited: by rdodolak |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 762 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting StefaanD: Quote:
ROFLMAO
http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=676120&PageNum=LAST
3rd attempt for this title, [b]i even used the wrong UPC ( the one from Moulin Rouge! digibook )
[/b]
Guess the text "3rd and last attempt for this title." actually did the trick ... pffttt. Come on guys and gals who is doing this kind of shiitake mushroom. Now i also see the reason why there's no name for whom declined a contribution.
Also seems someone doesn't know what EAN means and we have to use UPC instead Are you saying that you are giving fake/wrong information in your contribution notes? Not cool at all.  |
|
| Registered: March 18, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,633 |
| | Posted: | | | | Although I'm not advocating posting wrong info to contribution notes it does show the underlying issue. |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 762 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting rdodolak: Quote:
Although I'm not advocating posting wrong info to contribution notes it does show the underlying issue. The issue is there but it shouldn't be exploited to get a contribution approved. As you said before a support ticket is the way to go or a post about the problem here. Giving false contribution notes is the wrong way! |
|
| Registered: April 20, 2010 | | Posts: 11 |
| | Posted: | | | | wrong by mistake, yes. Certainly not willing. |
|
| Registered: May 8, 2007 | | Posts: 823 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting StefaanD: Quote:
wrong by mistake, yes. Certainly not willing. You should probably edit your original post to say, "I even accidentally used the wrong UPC" | | | | 99.9% of all cat plans consist only of "Step 1." |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 6,730 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Grendell: Quote:
Quoting StefaanD:
Quote:
wrong by mistake, yes. Certainly not willing.
You should probably edit your original post to say, "I even accidentally used the wrong UPC" And lie? From his post it's becoming quite clear that no accident was involved. | | | 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 |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 762 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Lewis_Prothero: Quote:
Quoting Grendell:
Quote:
Quoting StefaanD:
Quote:
wrong by mistake, yes. Certainly not willing.
You should probably edit your original post to say, "I even accidentally used the wrong UPC"
And lie?
From his post it's becoming quite clear that no accident was involved. I agree. |
|
| Registered: April 20, 2010 | | Posts: 11 |
| | Posted: | | | | @Grendell, thanks i altered my first post in want i actually had to type in the first place. Sorry for the confusion  3rd attempt for this title, i even accidentally used the wrong UPC ( the one from Moulin Rouge! digibook ) in all my copy-paste haste.@TheDarkKnight, Lewis_Prothero, you guys are clairvoyant or what  You probably are also the same guys who wonder why there are less and less contributions on dvd profiler. That's certainly what i see in the three years i use dvd profiler. With your kind of attitude and approach to rather new members like me it can't be a surprise   And with new i mean, new to contributing what i have in my collection. Oh well, guess i'm all done contributing. Your loss, as there's certainly still stuff in my collection which needs be checked and contributed. | | | | Last edited: by StefaanD |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,730 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting StefaanD: Quote:
@TheDarkKnight, Lewis_Prothero, you guys are clairvoyant or what
You probably are also the same guys who wonder why there are less and less contributions on dvd profiler. That's certainly what i see in the three years i use dvd profiler. With your kind of attitude and approach to rather new members like me it can't be a surprise
And with new i mean, new to contributing what i have in my collection.
Oh well, guess i'm all done contributing. Your loss, as there's certainly still stuff in my collection which needs be checked and contributed. ??? First of all the remark wasn't directed at you, but at Grendell who advised you to write a lie. I saw no reason to do so, because from your (uncorrected) OP it was very clear that you did use the incorrect EAN on purpose. Since you decided to copy this lie and obviously planned to continue this in your contributions the loss of the community is in fact quite low. If there is one thing we don't need it's another liar. EDIT: BTW your "corrected" statement now reads very funny. You state that this contribution was your 3rd attempt, this means that you had at least two weeks to check for possible errors. So why is it that you are in a haste? | | | 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: April 20, 2010 | | Posts: 11 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Lewis_Prothero: Quote:
???
EDIT:
BTW your "corrected" statement now reads very funny. You state that this contribution was your 3rd attempt, this means that you had at least two weeks to check for possible errors. So why is it that you are in a haste? Hey, did you actually read the Contribution comments, no you didn't ( hey if you can call me a liar i return the favour )  Where on earth do you get the "had at least two weeks to check" ? 1st attempt: Profile Contribution Declined May 16 2013 3:25PM, Image Contribution Declined May 16 2013 3:25PM 2nd attempt: Profile Contribution Declined May 18 2013 8:02AM, Image Contribution Declined May 18 2013 8:02AM 3rd attempt: Profile Contribution Approved May 18 2013 11:09AM, Image Contribution Approved May 18 2013 11:09AM Quoting Lewis_Prothero: Quote:
Since you decided to copy this lie and obviously planned to continue this in your contributions the loss of the community is in fact quite low. If there is one thing we don't need it's another liar.
Then better you'd remove the "Strength Through Unity" from your profile mister  Instead of immediately pointing your finger at me, maybe you could actually asked me a question first, and maybe just maybe help a bit by for example point me to some do's and don-t's. But no, it seems easier for you to just attack me. Oh well, i see there will simply be no reasoning with you at all, your were immediately fixed on calling me a liar And reading seems to be art that you apparently have not mastered fully yet. See above. Auf wiedersehn !!! |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,730 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting StefaanD: Quote:
Where on earth do you get the "had at least two weeks to check" ?
1st attempt: Profile Contribution Declined May 16 2013 3:25PM, Image Contribution Declined May 16 2013 3:25PM
2nd attempt: Profile Contribution Declined May 18 2013 8:02AM, Image Contribution Declined May 18 2013 8:02AM
3rd attempt: Profile Contribution Approved May 18 2013 11:09AM, Image Contribution Approved May 18 2013 11:09AM  Usually it takes about a week until Invelos decides over a contribution, that's where the "two weeks" came from. In your case this was significantly faster. Nevertheless why is it that you never saw a reason to look for a reason for this decline? Why is it that you didn't ask the community first, before you came here to claim that the screeners are to stupid to recognize an incorrect EAN (which obviously they did the first two times)? AND: Why is it that after 3 days and two attempts you still claim to have been in a haste? Quote StefaanD Quote:
and maybe just maybe help a bit by for example point me to some do's and don-t's Help is given those that ask for it. In your OP there was no question for help, just the reproach of incompetence, so how on earth should I have known that you were asking for help? | | | 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 |
|
| Registered: May 8, 2007 | | Posts: 823 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Lewis_Prothero: Quote:
First of all the remark wasn't directed at you, but at Grendell who advised you to write a lie. You guys are just mean, man. | | | | 99.9% of all cat plans consist only of "Step 1." |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 5,734 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Lewis_Prothero: Quote:
Usually it takes about a week until Invelos decides over a contribution Usually it takes less than a day for initial contributions. | | | | Don't confuse while the film is playing with when the film is played. [Ken Cole, DVD Profiler Architect] |
|
| Registered: April 20, 2010 | | Posts: 11 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Lewis_Prothero: Quote:
Nevertheless why is it that you never saw a reason to look for a reason for this decline?
Why is it that you didn't ask the community first, before you came here to claim that the screeners are to stupid to recognize an incorrect EAN (which obviously they did the first two times)?
AND: Why is it that after 3 days and two attempts you still claim to have been in a haste?
This is my last reaction. First you call me liar, and now you also accuse me of calling names to people i don't even know. That does it. Then what was wrong with my first contribution ? It reads as follows; [i]source 3388330043100 - front & back cover ( own scan )[/i] only thing to make it a bit more clearer was i needed to add UPC or EAN: so like this; [i]source EAN:3388330043100 - front & back cover ( own scan )[/i] I remedied this in my second attempt [i]- copy from EAN:3388330043100 - front & back cover ( own scan )[/i] now tell me what was wrong with the second attempt ??? |
|