 |
|
|
|
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 4 ...9  Previous Next
|
|
TV Series contributions - a definitive answer required |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 97 |
| | Posted: | | | | So if the profiles are there do we take it that despite the rules Invelos don't object to this?
As I've mentioned elsewhere the ideal situation would be to have the boxset profile containing all information and allow child profiles for each discs for those that wanted them. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 906 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Rifter: Quote:
Because despite what the rules say, that's the way most people want those sets done. There was a tacit agreement to do them that way some time ago, although some people will tell you I'm lying on that.
Some people, not most people | | | 
The colour of her eyes, were the colour of insanity | | | | Last edited: by reybr |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 906 |
| | Posted: | | | | Edit: Doublepost | | |
The colour of her eyes, were the colour of insanity | | | | Last edited: by reybr |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 |  Posts: 278 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Rifter: Quote:
There was a tacit agreement to do them that way some time ago, although some people will tell you I'm lying on that. It was never in any set of rules, but I got shouted down for voting 'no' towards contributions like that many times on the basis that 'it's been agreed for the next set of rules...'. It's still not in the rules. | | | | Guns don't kill people. Hammers do. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 2,694 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Kevin Coed: Quote:
Quoting Rifter:
Quote:
There was a tacit agreement to do them that way some time ago, although some people will tell you I'm lying on that.
It was never in any set of rules, but I got shouted down for voting 'no' towards contributions like that many times on the basis that 'it's been agreed for the next set of rules...'.
It's still not in the rules. I never said it was in the rules. I said it was a "tacit agreement" - a compromise - that has worked quite well for everybody but the diehard rule fanatics. | | | John
"Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice!" Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964
Make America Great Again! |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 188 |
| | Posted: | | | | John,
I'm a relatively diehard rules person and I personally don't object. Child profiles in the database don't hurt anything. Personally, I don't care how many like it or don't. The tacit agreement that you mention didn't come from Ken, it came from users. Still, I don't object. The agreement, if I remember correctly, did mention that box set info should be kept local, however. Child profiles could be uploaded and used but box set info was not to be uploaded. Everyone's happy that way. So I vote down box set info in TV sets. If Ken wants to change the rules so that box sets are to be included, then I will vote yes on those. There has been a whole new version released, with some minor changes to the rules, yet this one rule has not changed. Until Ken changes it (and I have no objection to his changing it, nor would I have any right to do so), I will vote on box set info in TV sets the way the rules are written. If changed, I'll vote that way. It does not matter to me.
Of course, that's why this thread was created. Now that Ken is posting and letting us know more, he may just come in and tell us. My guess is that's what the OP was hoping for. | | | | Build a man a fire and you keep him warm for a day. Set a man on fire and you keep him warm the rest of his life. |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 278 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Rifter: Quote:
Quoting Kevin Coed:
Quote:
Quoting Rifter:
Quote:
There was a tacit agreement to do them that way some time ago, although some people will tell you I'm lying on that.
It was never in any set of rules, but I got shouted down for voting 'no' towards contributions like that many times on the basis that 'it's been agreed for the next set of rules...'.
It's still not in the rules.
I never said it was in the rules. I didn't say you did. | | | | Guns don't kill people. Hammers do. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 467 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting RHFactor: Quote:
John,
I'm a relatively diehard rules person and I personally don't object. Child profiles in the database don't hurt anything. Personally, I don't care how many like it or don't. The tacit agreement that you mention didn't come from Ken, it came from users. Still, I don't object. The agreement, if I remember correctly, did mention that box set info should be kept local, however. Child profiles could be uploaded and used but box set info was not to be uploaded. Everyone's happy that way. So I vote down box set info in TV sets. If Ken wants to change the rules so that box sets are to be included, then I will vote yes on those. There has been a whole new version released, with some minor changes to the rules, yet this one rule has not changed. Until Ken changes it (and I have no objection to his changing it, nor would I have any right to do so), I will vote on box set info in TV sets the way the rules are written. If changed, I'll vote that way. It does not matter to me.
Of course, that's why this thread was created. Now that Ken is posting and letting us know more, he may just come in and tell us. My guess is that's what the OP was hoping for. I totaly agre with you. We must follow the rules as they are, not how they maby will be  |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 844 |
| | Posted: | | | | Like many, I have no objections to child profiles in TV series, Heck I use them myself when the seires in question uses box-set type packaging (a la Bewitched, or Wonderfalls). I do object when the info from the Parent profile is removed to the to the children. Especially disc IDs. Add the box set contents, but leave the disc information alone too. Besides, now that Ken has included the ability to add divider to cast and crew lists while entering the people as many times as necessary (my Favourite new Feature so far  Thanks again!), there is more reason than ever that is all can be entered in one massive shebang! There. Everybody happy? Of course you are.   |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 1,774 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
Who bundles multiple "SERIES" (Friends, Cheers, Buffy, X-Files) together into one unit and sells them? Nobody that I know of! In germany it's not so unusual to have "Complete Series Packs". - Friends - M.A.S.H. - Six Feet Under - Babylon 5 - X-Files - Ally McBeal to name some... |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 2,652 |
| | Posted: | | | | I have read with interest the debate about this subject. Personally, I prefer the single item approach to a Season/Series (I have some from UK), regardless how it is packaged  . It makes it easier to find in the base. I realise that I have in my collection some items where there are child profiles but that is due to how I found them and also at that stage the detail in the child profiles  . With the advent of the divider the single profile approach can give the same details and since the rules state, as previously mentioned, that these should be single items, I would agree that that is the approach we should be using especially as there is the option to load all the discs into the profile.  I agree there is problem where seasons like Friends had episode discs sold seperately  and also as box sets  and these should be treated as individual profiles that can be grouped under a parent profile, but where a season is sold ONLY as a single box set, then use single profiles.  I prefer to buy the complete season and usually do - the exception being Friends as at the time that was available only as single episode discs. Since then, box sets have been released. | | | <---------Mithrandir, Laverne and Shirley
Caroline |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,694 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting bob9000: Quote:
Like many, I have no objections to child profiles in TV series, Heck I use them myself when the seires in question uses box-set type packaging (a la Bewitched, or Wonderfalls). I do object when the info from the Parent profile is removed to the to the children. Especially disc IDs. Add the box set contents, but leave the disc information alone too. Besides, now that Ken has included the ability to add divider to cast and crew lists while entering the people as many times as necessary (my Favourite new Feature so far Thanks again!), there is more reason than ever that is all can be entered in one massive shebang!
There.
Everybody happy? Of course you are. Everybody seems to think having everything in one profile is so nifty keen, but it isn't. Try doing a lockup of a particular episode is a megaset of say, Buffy. You can find something a big pile of data much faster by looking at smaller chunks of it than you can having to go through the entire pile at once. Its much easier to scan episode data from 4 or 5 episodes on one disc than having to scroll through 30 odd discs worth of dividers in one profile. Then there is the issue of corrupted records. I don't know how many of you have database experience, but I learned a long time ago not to put all my eggs in one basket, because when the basket gets dropped, you lose all your eggs. Data should be segregated into smaller subsets that get accessed only when needed. It not only ensures data is less susceptible to damage, but is a hell of a lot faster to access that huge massive records with everything in one. In any case, this is a presentation issue. It doesn't matter a damn bit HOW the data is stored, what is important is it is DISPLAYED. If you want ALL the information to be in one profile on screen, the program can pull it all in from several small database subsets. It will LOOK LIKE its all in one record, but would stored in separate profiles as needed. Maybe that's too technical for some of you. | | | John
"Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice!" Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964
Make America Great Again! |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 775 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Rifter: Quote:
Everybody seems to think having everything in one profile is so nifty keen, but it isn't. Try doing a lockup of a particular episode is a megaset of say, Buffy. You can find something a big pile of data much faster by looking at smaller chunks of it than you can having to go through the entire pile at once. Its much easier to scan episode data from 4 or 5 episodes on one disc than having to scroll through 30 odd discs worth of dividers in one profile. Which wouldn't happen, because such a set would be a box parent to the individual seasons even under currently published rules. Quote:
Then there is the issue of corrupted records. I don't know how many of you have database experience, but I learned a long time ago not to put all my eggs in one basket, because when the basket gets dropped, you lose all your eggs. Data should be segregated into smaller subsets that get accessed only when needed. It not only ensures data is less susceptible to damage, but is a hell of a lot faster to access that huge massive records with everything in one.
In any case, this is a presentation issue. It doesn't matter a damn bit HOW the data is stored, what is important is it is DISPLAYED. If you want ALL the information to be in one profile on screen, the program can pull it all in from several small database subsets. It will LOOK LIKE its all in one record, but would stored in separate profiles as needed.
Maybe that's too technical for some of you. Quite being condescending. The one who acts like he knows every damned thing is rarely the one people pay attention to. |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,819 |
| | Posted: | | | | Personally, I never agreed with child profiles for TV shows.....until, the increasing lack of updates to the program made me reconsider.
My tv shows were a mess and my tidy mind couldn't put up with it. So, I went down the child profile route.
I can see the benefits of both.
However, now that we have the ability to use dividers I have reverted back and will remove all the child profiles I have locally for TV Shows.
I also think that there's every possibility that Invelos will eventually improve on TV series handling (eg. tell us which episode someone was in when clicking on their name).
In a nutshell, as long as no one removes the data from the parent profile everyone should be allowed to have child profiles if they want them. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,694 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Nadja: Quote:
Quoting Rifter:
Quote:
Everybody seems to think having everything in one profile is so nifty keen, but it isn't. Try doing a lockup of a particular episode is a megaset of say, Buffy. You can find something a big pile of data much faster by looking at smaller chunks of it than you can having to go through the entire pile at once. Its much easier to scan episode data from 4 or 5 episodes on one disc than having to scroll through 30 odd discs worth of dividers in one profile.
Which wouldn't happen, because such a set would be a box parent to the individual seasons even under currently published rules.
Quote:
Then there is the issue of corrupted records. I don't know how many of you have database experience, but I learned a long time ago not to put all my eggs in one basket, because when the basket gets dropped, you lose all your eggs. Data should be segregated into smaller subsets that get accessed only when needed. It not only ensures data is less susceptible to damage, but is a hell of a lot faster to access that huge massive records with everything in one.
In any case, this is a presentation issue. It doesn't matter a damn bit HOW the data is stored, what is important is it is DISPLAYED. If you want ALL the information to be in one profile on screen, the program can pull it all in from several small database subsets. It will LOOK LIKE its all in one record, but would stored in separate profiles as needed.
Maybe that's too technical for some of you.
Quite being condescending. The one who acts like he knows every damned thing is rarely the one people pay attention to. I wasn't being condescending. It's apparent you don't understand all of it. If you do a megaset like you describe above, you'll have a master and then a child for each season. You'll still have about 20 episodes in dividers in one profile. You still have to wade through that whole long list. If I want to see the data on an episode in the last quarter of the season, I jump directly to the disc with the last 4 or 5 episodes on it, and have only 4 or 5 eps. worth of data to sift through. But your whole premise falls apart at another level. Most of the megasets don't have UPCs on the individual season boxes anymore, so your stuck with profiling all 30-40 discs in the set in either one big monstrous profile, or breaking it down into easily managed chunks disc by disc. Much faster to do my way. | | | John
"Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice!" Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964
Make America Great Again! |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4 ...9 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |