| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | I'll agree with you there, Antares. NOW explain why Subs would be handled in a DIFFERENT way. Everything in that statement could just as easily be applied to Subs...including the Easter egg.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting samuelrichardscott: Quote:
Let me explain it to you.
1) Ken amends the rules with the same thing he posted in the forum when he posts it. It takes him 14 seconds.
2) I submit.
3) It's accepted.
4) I don't have to ask for clarification, search forums, resubmit, wait another 3-5 days and use that time to submit other stuff.
I am the WINNAR. Except it is just not the way it works here... no matter how much me, you or any of the users would love it to. So all you can do is either go with how it is done here... or decide not to with the results of no votes and declines on some of the contributions. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: December 10, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 3,004 |
| | Posted: | | | | I don't see how Gerri's statement support you, Skip. She clearly said audio track selectable by the audio button should be included, which you have been arguing against. You could parse her statement to mean that if a DVD has only one audio track, you shouldn't list it because it isn't accessibel through the menu or the audio button, but that would be ridiculous. This situation is the same as burned-in or forced narrative subtitles. |
|
| Registered: May 26, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 599 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Woola: Quote:
NOW explain why Subs would be handled in a DIFFERENT way. Everything in that statement could just as easily be applied to Subs...including the Easter egg.
Skip Have you not been reading the posts by Sam that you have been replying to. He sums it up pretty well. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 681 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote:
If you click on the link it is about both Audio and subtitles Yes, the thread title is about both, but all Ken's comments seem to be specifically about audio tracks. And even with those, it appears clear that he is using the menu selectability only as comparison to the easter egg type subtitles. Nobody in that thread mentions forced subtitles - and I believe Ken simply didn't give them any thought as nobody brought that subtitle-type up in discussion. Again, I would be VERY surprised if forced subtitles were outlawed in any future rule amendments. It would be really, really absurd. | | | Mika
I hate people who love me, and they hate me. (Bender Bending Rodriguez) |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Draxen: Quote:
But your quote of Ken is about audio tracks, not subtitles. Or am I missing something here?
...
The information people look for when checking whether some particular release has subtitles or not, is if they can (better) understand the movie as far as language goes. "Hiding" this information in online database, and denying contributing the info, just for the reason that you can't switch off the subtitles makes absolutely no sense.  We are here in complete non sense. People will find anything to try to justify their proposal of the most eccentric solutions to solve problems that do not exist. Except sabotaging the interest of online data, I hardly see why they do that. Or perhaps they only want to exist through endless logorrhoea. | | | | Images from movies |
|
| Registered: September 18, 2008 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 2,650 |
| | Posted: | | | | If my submissions were to get declined on the basis of the subtitles, I will gladly resubmit (exactly the same) with a note for the screeners stating I am following the rules, I should not be expected to search forums when I am following the rules and that if the screeners believe it should be declined, respectfully ask the screeners to make sure an update to the rules is added and that until then, I would keep locally. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | As I said... I been here for a good 10 years now. Even though I would love it to... I do not see how it works around here changing now. And as I also said.. it is up to each of us how to decide to handle it. But if you purposely go against clarifications you are told about (I am talking in general here... any and all clarifications)... all I can say is you can expect plenty of no votes/declines on the contributions. And I am also sure any that is accepted wouldn't be long before someone submits a correction per the clarification pointing to said clarification. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: September 18, 2008 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,650 |
| | Posted: | | | | But why should be people have to be pointed to clarifications in the forums?
I'm sorry, 'because it's been that way for 10 years' is no excuse for bad website management. If Ken expects the site to improve, he must also take his head out of his arse when it comes to the forums and the wording of the rules, especially considering how little time it would take. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Plain and simple... that is not our choice. It is Ken's site and it is Ken's online database... In my eyes we do not have the right to dictate how he must do things on his site... for his database.
In my eyes... the only right we have is the decision to either contribute per his rules/clarifications or decide not to. No more and no less.
Can we suggest how we would like to see it? Hell yes! that is no problem in my eyes. But to say plain and simple we will not do it your way... on your site... for your online database? Nope... I do not feel we have that right at all. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: September 18, 2008 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,650 |
| | Posted: | | | | No we don't have a right to expect decent customer service. It's not like we paid for it or anything.
Let's all wallow and just accept it.
As long as people keep sticking up for poor decisions, the more Ken will not bother with the necessary improvements. If you want to see a change for the good, then you have to say so, instead of just letting it go by the wayside because 'it is what it is'. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,242 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote:
Plain and simple... that is not our choice. It is Ken's site and it is Ken's online database... In my eyes we do not have the right to dictate how he must do things on his site... for his database.
In my eyes... the only right we have is the decision to either contribute per his rules/clarifications or decide not to. No more and no less.
Can we suggest how we would like to see it? Hell yes! that is no problem in my eyes. But to say plain and simple we will not do it your way... on your site... for your online database? Nope... I do not feel we have that right at all. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting samuelrichardscott: Quote:
No we don't have a right to expect decent customer service. It's not like we paid for it or anything.
Let's all wallow and just accept it.
As long as people keep sticking up for poor decisions, the more Ken will not bother with the necessary improvements. If you want to see a change for the good, then you have to say so, instead of just letting it go by the wayside because 'it is what it is'. did you not read the last part of my post? I said we have the right to ask for changes that we want to see made... and I have publicly said I wanted updated rules on many occasions. But what I won't do is ignore Ken or Gerri's clarifications on this forum until it is in the rules. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,242 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting samuelrichardscott: Quote:
No we don't have a right to expect decent customer service. It's not like we paid for it or anything.
Let's all wallow and just accept it.
As long as people keep sticking up for poor decisions, the more Ken will not bother with the necessary improvements. If you want to see a change for the good, then you have to say so, instead of just letting it go by the wayside because 'it is what it is'. Still doesn't give you the right to request Ken to get his head out of his arse. How would you like it if this was your site and I said that to you, if not me then anybody else in the forum. It's not down to customer service either. This is a one man operation, and you seem to be requiring that one man to be everywhere and do everything immediately, main program updates, mobile program updates, website management, customer service, rules updates, forum moderation etc, etc. Again this is Invelos a One Man operation not Microsoft.Com |
|
| Registered: September 18, 2008 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,650 |
| | Posted: | | | | If you're happy with a sub-standard service, more fool you.
I should note, I am extremely happy with the program and it was a fine purchase for the money, and one I don't regret. But for the owner to ignore it's users is disgraceful. If you expect rules to be followed, update the rules. I'll admit I was a bit strong in saying Ken should take his head out of his arse, but he should be making some effort. Really, how long would it take. Will the disruption of 10 minutes a day from development kill the program? No. In fact, it will go a long way in getting more sales. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | And I would agree that I would like to see it too. As I said... said it many times before. But you can't just ignore his clarifications on the forum and expect that to fly. | | | | Pete |
|