 |
|
|
|
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 2 3  Previous Next
|
|
Partial Contribution Acceptance (read post before voting) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: May 26, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 599 |
| | Posted: | | | | Two Green for Sam and Merrik. And by the way Merrik, I'm sorry I forgot about you being an editor too.  |
| | Registered: September 30, 2008 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 1,805 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting samuelrichardscott: Quote:
As an ex-Spot editor I agree with Forget_the_Rest. The partial declinations worked very very well and people were very eager to resubmit the one section and if not, they could actually PM us to discuss in further depth for necessary action to be taken. I personally think a more personal approach from screeners would be better, a way to contact them and a way to perhaps solve problems. Yes, it did add time to how much workload we could get through, but I certainly think, for the most part, people were happy with the hands on approach and whilst there were a lot of grievances, at least it was discussed and people weren't left in the dark wondering wtf happened.
(voted other as agree with 1 b ut not 2) I mostly agree with the more personalized approach, but in a simpler way. At DVDSpot, as nice as it was that we could converse with the users who sent us pm's to discuss stuff, it also led to a WHOLE lot of bitching and whining and people trying to get some imaginary power struggle going with us (stuff like that was sometimes the best part though, wasn't it?). Hell, at this point I’d settle for something as simple as any of the screeners actually stepping foot into the forums to actually answer questions and/or concerns instead of letting best guesses and interpretations run wild, which is basically what’s been happening around this place for at least as long as I’ve been a member. They could stay anonymous for all I care, but a simple, solid, final word answer on ANYTHING from someone who has the power to say “yes” or “no” around here would be nice. It would also hopefully cut down on the usually absolutely useless last 25 pages of a thread where nothing happens but people trying to see who can scream the loudest to get their opinion heard. | | | | The night is calling. And it whispers to me soflty come and play. |
| | Registered: May 20, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,934 |
| | Posted: | | | | The problem i think, is not so much the perceived all or nothing system.
While I will contend, that when I first started contributing, I felt the need to contribute the entire profile. But as you move along, and under stand the system, you only have to contribute what you want.
I made a suggestion about the possibility of section voting a while back. I would be very much in favor of that. How to get the screeners to give you better responses, I would have no idea. I find that if I look at the no votes, I can get a fairly good idea what is wrong, not always, but most of the time.
What I think needs to happen, is a mandatory tutorial, introduction, or something for new subscribers to explain the principle behind the program and the contribution system. If, when I was a new user, somebody would have explained or coached that I did not have to make whole contributions, and I could contribute the sections that I wanted (with accuracy of course), i would have probably become more comfortable in a shorter period of time.
As far as the workload of the screeners, I would not venture a guess. I only have abt 1300 profiles, And I don't see what I consider a whole lot. I am aware that I am onlty a very small part of the whole. If there are 500000 titles that are edited from around the world, increasing the number of votes for the screeners may get overloaded, but only Ken can really shed light on this. |
| | Registered: September 30, 2008 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,805 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Antares: Quote:
Two Green for Sam and Merrik.
And by the way Merrik, I'm sorry I forgot about you being an editor too.  Absolutely no worries. Sam ALWAYS got all the credit anyway. Son of a bitch.  | | | | The night is calling. And it whispers to me soflty come and play. |
|   | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Merrik: Quote:
Hell, at this point I’d settle for something as simple as any of the screeners actually stepping foot into the forums to actually answer questions and/or concerns instead of letting best guesses and interpretations run wild, which is basically what’s been happening around this place for at least as long as I’ve been a member. They could stay anonymous for all I care, but a simple, solid, final word answer on ANYTHING from someone who has the power to say “yes” or “no” around here would be nice. IMHO, that's what we need more than anything else. |
| | Registered: July 31, 2008 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 2,506 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Quoting Merrik:
Quote:
Hell, at this point I’d settle for something as simple as any of the screeners actually stepping foot into the forums to actually answer questions and/or concerns instead of letting best guesses and interpretations run wild, which is basically what’s been happening around this place for at least as long as I’ve been a member. They could stay anonymous for all I care, but a simple, solid, final word answer on ANYTHING from someone who has the power to say “yes” or “no” around here would be nice.
IMHO, that's what we need more than anything else. I'd agree with that. Would stop the 10+ page threads that have about 9 pages of going over the same arguments over whether or not something is part of a title or if something is part of an overview, etc... |
| | Registered: September 30, 2008 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,805 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting CharlieM: Quote:
The problem i think, is not so much the perceived all or nothing system.
While I will contend, that when I first started contributing, I felt the need to contribute the entire profile. But as you move along, and under stand the system, you only have to contribute what you want.
I made a suggestion about the possibility of section voting a while back. I would be very much in favor of that. How to get the screeners to give you better responses, I would have no idea. I find that if I look at the no votes, I can get a fairly good idea what is wrong, not always, but most of the time. While better responses would be amazing at this point, I think that if partial acceptances were implemented, it would at least cut down on SOME of the confusion that seems to stampede around here. The user would at least know which section they messed up on and instead of throwing their hands up in frustration trying to figure out which field got their contribution declined, they could specifically see that "oh, whoops... I messed up somewhere on the video aspects of the dvd... better double check". I wouldn't go as far as saying that actual section voting would be necessary. The entire contribution would still be made, the voters would still see everything that was changed all at one time for the same profile, just the screeners, while going over the entire contribution, would be able to decline one section of it (If I misunderstood what you meant, please ignore this last paragraph! ) | | | | The night is calling. And it whispers to me soflty come and play. |
| | Registered: May 26, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 599 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Merrik: Quote:
Quoting Antares:
Quote:
Two Green for Sam and Merrik.
And by the way Merrik, I'm sorry I forgot about you being an editor too.
Absolutely no worries.
Sam ALWAYS got all the credit anyway. Son of a bitch. Actually, I had you confused with Bebopman for some reason. |
| | Registered: September 30, 2008 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,805 |
| | Posted: | | | | | | | | The night is calling. And it whispers to me soflty come and play. |
| | Registered: May 26, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 599 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting CharlieM: Quote:
While I will contend, that when I first started contributing, I felt the need to contribute the entire profile. But as you move along, and under stand the system, you only have to contribute what you want. But how many times has a noob tried to contribute, put in hours of work, had it rejected and said "screw this place"? For a database and its participating community to grow and prosper, you need fresh blood to pick up the slack for people who have already done their share. |
| | Registered: September 18, 2008 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,650 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Merrik: Quote:
Quoting Antares:
Quote:
Two Green for Sam and Merrik.
And by the way Merrik, I'm sorry I forgot about you being an editor too.
Absolutely no worries.
Sam ALWAYS got all the credit anyway. Son of a bitch. I think that's because I was the gobby shiitake mushroome.  From some of the awesome hate mail I got, I think I got more than my fair share of the credit for when we went on strike and the site closed But I agree with everything you've said. The personal approach doesn't always mean nice PM's etc, but it does make it feel like the editors/screeners actually care taking that extra minute to let folks know why something has been declined or to even be involved in the forum. Just makes it feel more welcoming and that your efforts are not being declined with a standard note that can be really hard to figure out. | | | | Last edited: by samuelrichardscott |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,372 |
| | Posted: | | | | I don't know how many contributions DVD Spot had per day/week/month but I do know back in the IVS days they used to have a site that gave the statistics of contributions processed. It typically was around 1000/day or 30,000/month.
I have no idea how many more or less are processed these days but I'm guessing it would be similar.
How does that compare with what Spot did? |
| | Registered: May 26, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 599 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting samuelrichardscott: Quote:
I think that's because I was the gobby shiitake mushroome. I was just about to ask what the f*ck this meant, but realized it was the censoring software. |
| | Registered: September 30, 2008 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,805 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting samuelrichardscott: Quote:
I think that's because I was the gobby shiitake mushroome.
From some of the awesome hate mail I got, I think I got more than my fair share of the credit for when we went on strike and the site closed
But I agree with everything you've said. The personal approach doesn't always mean nice PM's etc, but it does make it feel like the editors/screeners actually care taking that extra minute to let folks know why something has been declined or to even be involved in the forum. Just makes it feel more welcoming and that your efforts are not being declined with a standard note that can be really hard to figure out. The strike was pretty awesome. Volunteers going on strike because "management" let it go to such sh*t. Still makes me laugh. Totally agree with your last paragraph. A more personal approach would've been extremely nice when I first migrated here. It would be nice now actually. | | | | The night is calling. And it whispers to me soflty come and play. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting samuelrichardscott: Quote:
But I agree with everything you've said. The personal approach doesn't always mean nice PM's etc, but it does make it feel like the editors/screeners actually care taking that extra minute to let folks know why something has been declined or to even be involved in the forum. Just makes it feel more welcoming and that your efforts are not being declined with a standard note that can be really hard to figure out. This has been brought up before and, from what I remember, Ken has stated that this just isn't possible. The screeners don't have the time to address each and every decline. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
| | Registered: September 18, 2008 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,650 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting lyonsden5: Quote:
I don't know how many contributions DVD Spot had per day/week/month but I do know back in the IVS days they used to have a site that gave the statistics of contributions processed. It typically was around 1000/day or 30,000/month.
I have no idea how many more or less are processed these days but I'm guessing it would be similar.
How does that compare with what Spot did? On a Tuesday, up to 2000, Wed-Fri/Monday - anyway from 200-500, Sat-Sun about 500-2000. If there isn't enough time for screeners, get more.  Some weeks were really quiet, others stupidly busy but we were averaging over 1000 a day (according to the statistic that used to show in the editors pages). | | | | Last edited: by samuelrichardscott |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |