| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 1,242 |
| | Posted: | | | | I have a situation whereby a user has changed the content and artwork from an Originally uploaded 3-Disc Boxset and has uploaded data and artwork into a 4 disc set that was released a few years later.
I am now trying to revert this erroneous upload and return said profile into it's Original state and have been informed via the voting that the new upload states I am in error.
I am right in requiring he removes his No Vote or have the Contribution Rules been changed so that anything can be uploaded including totally different data from an Original entry?
Steve
Anybody wanting to Know it is for a Child Profile of Box Set 5039036018166 UK | | | | Last edited: by snarbo |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 950 |
| | Posted: | | | | No, you're right. What I'd do is make your contribution notes quite firm-you can edit them if you haven't already done this-that the current scans/info is from a re-release and that what you're contributing is the original information. Make it clear that yours is the original-give details like what you have here.
If for some reason your contribution is declined (the screeners have been known to make mistakes) just resubmit and that should do it. | | | | Lori |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | In addition to what LJG said, which was spot on, you might want to include the release date of both versions. | | | 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: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,279 |
| | Posted: | | | | I'd also highlight the other two child profiles for this set, where the attempted updates to the quadrilogy data were correctly declined, as neither those with the original nor those with the quadrilogy get a fully complete box set the way this is currently set up. | | | | IVS Registered: January 2, 2002 |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Since we are here in the general discussion, I would say that I see no problem to update old profiles when new editions are different. People who have old ones probably already downloaded the old profile, and people buying the new edition probably prefer to see in the online what they have in hand. Another point where I totally disagree with current rules. | | | | Images from movies |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | But Surfer51...
That would mean 2 things. 1 - everyone that has the original release must lock down their info and neither contribute or accept any more release data info from the online (as well as removing one back-up) and 2 - It their online collection will be changed.... at the very least the cover-art will not match their release.
Why should this be for those that has the original release? Why should something they have had (probably for years!) be suddenly taken away just because there is a newer release?
All that is not even to mention... what about people that buy older/used sets. just because there has been a re-release don't mean there isn't any of the original release out there left to get. Not like the original release just suddenly disappeared from existence.
A change in this rule is something I would fight with everything I have.
No... what needs to be done is Ken getting on another way to submit new profiles when the upc and/or disc id is already taken. That way everyone's info can be online correctly | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,279 |
| | Posted: | | | | 100% agree with you Addicted, I don't get why people keep advocating putting a sticking plaster over a gaping hole in the program functionality.  | | | | IVS Registered: January 2, 2002 |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,242 |
| | Posted: | | | | Update to this thread. The No voter has now removed their No Vote, Thank you to the No Voter (I wont name you here). As for the suggestion by Addicted for Ken to find a way of allowing for variations of Profiles  But until then we will all just have to follow the Contribution Rules. I know I have some titles with different Covers / Data, all I do is have the Different Covers / Data locally and lock them. Now to wait and see what the screeners will do. Steve |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote:
A change in this rule is something I would fight with everything I have. A change in any part of the rules is something you would fight with everything you have.  About your points 1/ and 2/, this is just what you have to do if you have the new edition, not the original one. The problem is that, now, many titles have a first edition which is quickly (3 to 6 monthes) changed to something more simple (and cheaper) (for example metallic case changed to plastic case, or slip cover removed), and we have probably much more users with the new edition than with the original one. | | | | Images from movies |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting surfeur51: Quote:
Quoting Addicted2DVD:
Quote:
A change in this rule is something I would fight with everything I have.
A change in any part of the rules is something you would fight with everything you have. That is the biggest bunch of bull I ever read!  There is several rules I disagree with... and many rules that I have worked hard to get changed... even when it showed quite a bit of resistance. Or do we not remember the thread started to get rid of the rule not to be able to submit alternate disc ids by themselves?... just to mention one. Quote:
About your points 1/ and 2/, this is just what you have to do if you have the new edition, not the original one. The problem is that, now, many titles have a first edition which is quickly (3 to 6 monthes) changed to something more simple (and cheaper) (for example metallic case changed to plastic case, or slip cover removed), and we have probably much more users with the new edition than with the original one. And that does not change my opinion in the slightest... we don't need a rule change here. All profiles should remain as originally released. As I said... what needs to change is for Ken to make a new type of key identifier so we can submit profiles for these re-releases as they are... without messing up the profiles for those that do have the original release. I do believe that is the only true answer to the problem. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,279 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting surfeur51: Quote:
The problem is that, now, many titles have a first edition which is quickly (3 to 6 monthes) changed to something more simple (and cheaper) (for example metallic case changed to plastic case, or slip cover removed), and we have probably much more users with the new edition than with the original one. I usually find Steelbooks have their own UPC and don't get replaced with a plastic cased version later as this was released simultaneously under its own UPC. As for slipcovers the only material difference is the slip cover, usually with no difference in the artwork, so what is the real benefit in updating to the non-slip cover version, apart from unticking the slip cover box? Many people don't bother with or own a scanner so chances of getting an updated cover scan seem slim, with no guarantee it will be a better scan. Then lets take this Die Hard case as an example. the original trilogy release was out several years before the quadrilogy was released, as it appears it was just a case of them adding the fourth film and not upgrading the first three films in any way. If I'm in this situation I'd just buy the fourth film separately. So we have a scenario where more people own the original than the new release, so by your majority argument more people will want to see the old data in the database. Once again the point is you're arguing for the sticking plaster not the solution. | | | | IVS Registered: January 2, 2002 |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Lithurge: Quote:
...As for slipcovers the only material difference is the slip cover, usually with no difference in the artwork, so what is the real benefit in updating to the non-slip cover version, apart from unticking the slip cover box? Seems you never got relective slip covers with horrible scans... | | | | Images from movies |
|
| Registered: May 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,475 |
| | Posted: | | | | The ability to have the covers match what I have in hand is something I have been requesting for years.
But, this program is not designed to fill that request so until it does original releases trump later ones. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,279 |
| | Posted: | | | | On the contrary I've made horrible cover scans from metallic covers, as well as some very good ones where the metallic colour/material has allowed. However where the metallic coating is the only difference then I've followed the rules and used the inner cover. | | | | IVS Registered: January 2, 2002 |
|
 | Blair | | Resistance is Futile! |
| Registered: October 30, 2008 | | Posts: 1,249 |
| | Posted: | | | | There are many rules that I find over-complicated and frustrating, but this is one that I agree with fully.
Until there is a way to hold multiple datasets for the same UPC so that you can download the specific cover that you want and such, the best (read: easiest) solution is to stick with earliest release.
Why?
If you go with the "current release" then the interpretation may be up for grabs with different people thinking that the version that they have is the current release. The cover changes, special features change, the audio track and subtitles may be different as well meaning a fight over a lot of data on which one is the "current" one. Then, a year down the line, it may have to all be changed again.
But it's a lot easier to know (or even just to find out) which is the original release. Stick with it across the board on all UPCs and it gives one less thing to steadily argue about on here. | | | If at first you don't succeed, skydiving isn't for you.
He who MUST get the last word in on a pointless, endless argument doesn't win. It makes him the bigger jerk. | | | | Last edited: by Blair |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 762 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting surfeur51: Quote:
Since we are here in the general discussion, I would say that I see no problem to update old profiles when new editions are different. People who have old ones probably already downloaded the old profile, and people buying the new edition probably prefer to see in the online what they have in hand. Another point where I totally disagree with current rules. I am not sure if there is a bigger can of worms you could open. Can you imagine the ping ponging of data that this would cause?????? |
|