Quoting Ken Cole:

Quote:
To be clear:

Quote:
Are you serious that during the time screeners accept/decline the data contributed, the data isn't compared against the accepted data???

The above is not correct.  Submitters, screeners, and voters always see the latest accepted data.

That's what I thought, otherwise it would have sounded insane.

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:

Ummm yeah, at least every week, sometimes every day. Right now we have FOUR Contributions for The princess and The frof and 2 of them I had to vote No on for duplication. I bet we get several more.

Skip

Because non of 'em hasn't been approved yet. When screeners approve the first one and go to next one, they cannot see the identical fields anymore. Similar as our client interface.

Quoting Kulju:

Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Thatnks for the reply Ken.

Speaking for myself, unless the second contribution is adding more data than the first, I will always vote no, with the notes, "If approved, this contribution will remove data being added by a pending contribution."

In whole I agree, but just out of conversation,

If first contribution adds fields
a,b,c
and second a & b, how does that remove anything?

I guess I should have been more clear...in your example, I would vote 'no' with the notes, 'More complete contribution pending'.  What I was originally refering to was what Corne mentioned.  One contribution adds complete cast/crew and the second adds minimal cast and crew.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
One contribution adds complete cast/crew and the second adds minimal cast and crew.

That makes sence, but how do you "weight" the contributions? For example: Another contribution has 15-20 correct entries, but minimal Cast & Crew. The other one has 2 correct entries, but with complete Cast & Crew. No incorrect entries on neather one. I would feel oblicated to vote "yes" to both of 'em and let the screeners to do their work. Do we KNOW that they cannot do partial acceptions? I don't.

Another example: First contribution has six correct entries. Second one has also six correct entries. Three of entries are same. No Cast or Crew on eather one... Do we have table in somewhere which says which fields are more important than the others? I would vote "yes" again to both of 'em.

Quoting Corne:

Quote:

Correct. In that case the additions in the first contribution will get undone by the second contribution.

Again, if you assume that screeners cannot exclude Cast & Crew when they approve profiles. Which I by the way think that they can do.

Why and who are you arguing with, Kulju? ken provided the answer and so did the Rules, that should be that. End of subject, we don't know anything about the screener side of the equation, we can speculate all we want, but that means nothing. As for being able to selectively take parts of a contribution, Ken has repeatedly said that is not the way it works, For the screeners it is all or nothing. The only exception the Cover Art is separated from the data, thus data can be approved and art declined or vice versa. I have repeatedly said that if I were to design the database I would do it differently from Ken...now there's a surprise. I have seldom if ever seen two programmers produce the same solution for a problem. But I don't understand what you are going on about and what the apparent hostility is about.

Skip

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
Why and who are you arguing with, Kulju?

I'm not arguing with anyone. It's called a conversation. I know it's unfamiliar concept for you

Quote:

ken provided the answer and so did the Rules, that should be that.

Yes, and I agreed, which you would know by know if you could read.

Quote:

End of subject,

And who gave you to say when I must stop having a conversation? If you don't like the subject, please leave Forum Moderator: Removed

Quote:

we don't know anything about the screener side of the equation, we can speculate all we want, but that means nothing. As for being able to selectively take parts of a contribution, Ken has repeatedly said that is not the way it works, For the screeners it is all or nothing.

Link please, I've never seen that.

Quote:

The only exception the Cover Art is separated from the data, thus data can be approved and art declined or vice versa.

We don't know that.

Quote:

I have repeatedly said that if I were to design the database I would do it differently from Ken...

I absolutely agree. It wouldn't be even close to this one.

Quote:

now there's a surprise. I have seldom if ever seen two programmers produce the same solution for a problem. But I don't understand what you are going on about and what the apparent hostility is about.

There was no hostility before you came in (again), just curiosity.

Am I still curious, yes.

Quoting Corne:

Quote:
Even if they could, how many contributions are there every day and how could they remember every contribution from Yesterday or the day before?

But they don't have to. Like Ken said every time they compare a contribution, they compare against last accepted profile.

I'm pretty sure that I've seen contributions combined. It's easier when your location have maybe 5-10max. active contributors. I have contributed a full audit except with minimal Cast & Crew and voted "yes" for another contribution which didn't have a lot of info that I contributed, but a complete Cast & Crew and when I have downloaded that profile all my data is there, except with more complete Cast & Crew. How is that possible?

Again, just out of curiosity. Not arguing with anyone.