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->Posts by Magmadrag Page: 1  Previous   Next
Message Details
Well, we could turn this around the circle several times:

I created a profile by Disc-ID - so Profile- and Disc-ID are identical ones from day one.

Some got a re-release with obviously new Disc-ID. So it is definitely wrong to change the ID IN the profile. The only chance to keep it correct would have been to create a new profile with the new ID!

The one and only chance that he sees the same Disc-ID a different way is a driver change

(see: )

But even in this case Profile-ID AND Disc-ID must technically be the same.

You can't built a Ferrari and update it with an engine from a Mercedes!

If you are still so totally sure that you are right (like always): Keep it! The Disc-ID can change for a EAN/UPC-Based profile, if it changes for an ID-based profile, then definitely a new profile has to be created! If you believe in yourself: Be happy! If you got doubts, ask the ones who teached you computer if you really could be right....
Topic Replies: 37, Topic Views: 10875
@GSyren: Have you checked one of those profiles in your collection? Because technically it IS impossible!

You can't add a profile for a Rolls Royce and then the engine is a Ferrari....

If it is an ID-based profile and there is a difference between the profile ID and the Disc ID IN the profile, then every profile should be checked.

The ONLY possibility how this could happen is that the disc section of a profile reads (the same) Disc ID on a different way.

But in the case of the so called "update" the ID of the disc is still the same and an Alt. Version had to be created instead of wrongly changing the ID.

@scotthm: Do you have any prove that I broke any rule? If I really did, then 10.000+ contributions should be checked by someone. Will you spend the time to find what I've done wrong? Contributions positively voted by countless members? Hm, anybody has a personal problem with me and banned me. Not my problem anymore. My data becomes better.... and the one in here stays worse... 
Topic Replies: 37, Topic Views: 10875
Either you don't understand or you think wrong:

A Profile, based on Disc ID, can't have another Disc ID entered as Disc.

As an example: I create a profile without EAN/UPC by Disc ID and it's ID is ABCDE.
This way automatically the same ID ABCDE is entered for the Disc. Finished!

If the same movie is released with another ID again, then it has to be a new profile.

It is (technically and logically) impossible that a single disc profile, based on ID ABCDE has entered a disc with CWXYZ. That doesn't work! It is simply impossible!
Topic Replies: 37, Topic Views: 10875
And the updates against any logical understanding go on.....

Within the last few years I bought a bunch of docu-DVDs from "Spiegel TV", each in an envelope, so no EAN/UPC/Barcode, only to be added via Disc ID. I added them or - if not existing yet - created new profiles. And now the joke of the day: A bunch of them - remember: profiles based on Disc ID - get updates with a new ID for the disc itself. It's definitely clear that they have been released more than once but with different Disc IDs. But a contribution can't be accepted/released if it is a profile, basing on a Disc ID, with a different Disc ID then entered for the disc itself.

For sure I block such crap but I can't imagine how this could ever happen? I am sure that this is not the first time with such a "modification", but did nobody ever claim this before? I don't think so! Especially as the contributions are released mostly automatic - at least what I heard within the las couple of months. And a machine could be programmed to avoid such stupid updates! And once again I am on the "license to contribute" as if the contributer would have known what "Alt. Version" means, then he had created a 2nd identical profile, only with different Disc ID.

Additional to my explanations ofr contributions: The text has been the same for years and the few times I got problems with was when I added a neccessary BY and my explanations in the BY thread itself were to weak.

If one of my explanations is to weak, tell me which one - but if they were, how could thousands of contributions be released (and the few which were not mostly only happened when the voters didn't read my explanations, only read the contrubtion itself):
- initial profile, basic data from the cover, studios from opening titles, rls. date from jpc.de
- initial (child-)profile; made it a box set; see child profiles for details; corrected running time, sum of all episodes = xxx Min.
- initial (child-)profile; all cast & crew from the parent profile; only gave the episodes their respective numbers
- initial (child-)profile; all cast & crew from Same Disc-ID (former release, same ID)
- initial (child-)profile; all cast & crew from the opening titles and end credits of every single episode
- initial (child-)profile; for cast & crew see UPC below (same series, BluRay release)
- initial (child-)profile; all data from the parent profile
- initial (child-)profile; basic data from the parent profile, for cast & crew see EAN below (same movie, EAN-Version)
- initial (child-)profile; baisc data from the parent profile, overview, cast & crew from the booklet
- initial (child-)profile; all data from the parent profile; as the id is used for another version of the whole season w/o EAN/UPC, this is an alternative version
- initial (child-)profile; basic data from the cover, release date from amazon; see child-profiles for further details
- initial (child-)profile; basic data from the parent profile, all cast & crew from the end credits of every single episode
- as none of this box set contents has an EAN/UPC, I had to replace them by Disc-ID versions (see new child profiles for details)
- initial (child-)profile; for all data including cast & crew see UPC below
- according to the common name thread (http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=807936&PageNum=1) replaced "aaa" with "bbb"
- as the child profiles are from a different release, I created Alt. Versions to keep the correct covers/case/release date for the childs
- initial profile; the season has been released with same EAN but different case/release date

Those are the texts I am using every single time. As I don't want to type the same lines again and again, I created my txt-file and copy from it. If I need another explanation not used so far and probably needed again in the future, it becomes part of my txt-file. And I can ensure you that the explanation include every single info neccessary.

Okay, there is one more text for the - mentioned in the past - disappeared profiles. Imagine you got movies bought 10 - 15 years ago and added them to your collection. Then the profile was there. Maybe someone who only has 10 - 20 discs could remember where the data of each came from, but even that I don't think. So when I recognized that a profile didn't exist anymore, I contributed with a text like this:
@SCREENER: Profile disappeared from the database; bought/added on October 3, 2007. How could this happen? As I don't remember that I changed anything of the profile within the last couple of years, I can't remember where the data came from.
So if those contributions were the rulebreakers as I didn't even check the data for at least 20 but I believe much more profiles - especially as I didn't change anything at them - then I am guilty. But then I have to say: If these kind of contributions break the rules, why are they released then?
Topic Replies: 37, Topic Views: 10875
Quoting scotthm:
And Magmadrag admits to knowingly making contributions that don't follow the rules.  I don't think we really need to ask the question of what the cause of the ban was.


If this would have been the reason (maybe 5 contributions of 10.000) then those profiles shouldn't exist anymore. But they are not deleted. Others are! Not sure if they were once initialized by myself or someone else. Like mentioned before: During the check of my collection for updates I found here and there regular official profiles in my collection for which I couldn't get an update as they are not part of the database anymore. So with every re-contribution I messaged the screener the date when I bought/added them. At those dates they either have allready been part of the database or became my initial contribution allready then. So anything obviously seems to go wrong as I am sure for at least one thing: If everyone here would check every single profile in his collection for an update, there will be a lot of other profiles, too, which have been deleted. If automatically or manually, who knows? But if there IS a reason for that and it was not kind of an "accidental deletion", one more time there is missing one thing: Communication/Explanation!

Keep laughing about my frustration! There is always a payback for everything in life! And I am curiously looking forward to your reaction of partial desctruction of the work you spent a lot of time for.
Topic Replies: 37, Topic Views: 10875
The only disappointing fact about my ban is, that either the screener (if this is a person) or the automatic process doesn't do it's job as he/it should...

Just one example: A couple of months ago I corrected box set contents for the BluRay Box of 6 Movies fast & furios. All childs were EAN-Versions altough they don't have one. So I created DiscId profiles with the (correct) cover of the parent.

Well..... I just got an update (and had to block it) as someone replaced at least one of the child-covers with the one of the new parent (7 Movies Box of F&F). One more contributer who obviously has never ever heard of "alternative versions". And this is by god not the first one! But obviously I am the one breaking the rules.....

According to my Good-Bye-Post in December: I tried to leave - at least this confusing world of the forum. But I still kept correcting data, nearly every single day. And after the all the mistakes/troubles I found this way, there was no other chance than to post threads here and there. Altough most of the answers didn't show knowledge, only presumptions - as nobody really seems to know in a lot of cases.

But this definitely wrong update today would bring me back to the point: "license" to contribute... Or maybe the screener (if this is a person) needs to learn, too? Somebody might say now: He only sees the data, he has not the DVD/BluRay in front of him. This might be right, but for a profile created 6 years ago, there can't be the cover correct if it is from a release from just five years ago.

Keep your contributors, even if they update correct data with wrong.... and ban ones who spent hundreds of hours to clear common names, box sets etc. A couple of months ago at least my released contributions made me feel like being part of ONE BIG database. Now there are at least two: My (more and more) correct one - and the big one with a lot of updates from good to bad.

@GSyren: If a forum post according the thought of fake birthyears is allready a definition of "breaking the contributions rules", how many contributors would remain then if everyone is allready banned for what they THINK?
Topic Replies: 37, Topic Views: 10875
It's simple: Then my contributer time is over. I will do the work for myself, but why should I beg to be able to support others? A lot of things happened in here, and this now simply is too much!
Topic Replies: 37, Topic Views: 10875
"Ken's return"? Is this what we are waiting for for years?
Topic Replies: 37, Topic Views: 10875
Interesting, that there is still no reaction.

At least in theory that wouldn't be a problem, but the last couple of DVDs&BluRays I just bought have
- no profile
- no covers
- no cast & crew

and a load of other missing data not be done by anyone.
Topic Replies: 37, Topic Views: 10875
I could say more, but that's enough. I only can read the accuse why I am banned from contributing (for two weeks meanwhile):

- Repeated and severe violations of the contribution rules
- Vote stuffing

The first one is hard to believe after more than 10.000 released contributions. And I got problems with the 2nd one, too, as I nearly got no time for voting. So who is responsible for this ban and able to end it?

And: If I have done anything wrong during the countless hours I invested to fill empty and correct full profiles, I'd appreciate an explanation. A ban saying "you did" doesn't help anybody. And explanation telling me WHAT I did wrong is the only chance to improve myself
Topic Replies: 37, Topic Views: 10875
Trying to submit
Michelle Collins (1962)
british actress, known for Darkman III, Inspector Barnaby, Coronation Street and many others

to separate her from
Michelle Collins (??)
american actress with just a few appearances in 7th Heaven, Jake & McCabe & Others
Topic Replies: 5628, Topic Views: 348116
Trying to submit:
Eric Mason (1927)
"real name" of an US actor, known for "Fahrenheit 451", "Hot Fuzz" and countless others

to separate him from
Ernesto Macias
another american actor, but quite often credited as "Eric Mason" and according to CLT "Eric Mason" is the dominant/common name, so no other chance to separate those two than by the BY of the first one
Topic Replies: 5628, Topic Views: 348116
Trying to submit:
Jeremy Taylor (1937)
British actor, appears (in my collection) at least at the series "Arthur of the Britons"

to separate him from
Jeremy Taylor (??)
US actor, known for "Men of Honor"
Topic Replies: 5628, Topic Views: 348116
Trying to submit:
Anthony Bailey (1931)
British actor, appears (in my collection) at least at the series "Arthur of the Britons" and "Die Profis"

to separate him from
Anthony Bailey (??)
US actor fro "Van Helsing" and "Charmed"
Topic Replies: 5628, Topic Views: 348116
Trying to submit:
Scott Forbes (1920)
UK actor & writer, appears (in my collection) at least at the series "Arthur of the Britons"

to separate him from
Scott Forbes (??)
US Visual Effects guy for "Addams Family Values", "Howard the Duck", "The Big Bang Theory" amo.
Topic Replies: 5628, Topic Views: 348116
Trying to submit:
Peter Miller (1935)
British Producer, appears (in my collection) at least at the series "Arthur of the Britons"

to separate him from the US  "sound guy"
Peter Miller (??)
known at least for "Rango" and several others
Topic Replies: 5628, Topic Views: 348116
Trying to submit:
Paul Lewis (1943)
British Composer, appears (in my collection) at least at the series "Arthur of the Britons"
BY found at his own homepage:

to separate him from
Paul Lewis (??)
US Production Sound Mixer for at least "Ally McBeal"
and a load of other movies and series
Topic Replies: 5628, Topic Views: 348116
Trying to submit:
Richard Lynch (1940)
US Actor for several movies & series (The Sword & The Sorcerer, Halloween, A-Team, Highlander and many others)

to separate him from
Richard Lynch (???)
UK Actor (Dangerfield)
Topic Replies: 5628, Topic Views: 348116
Invelos Forums->Posts by Magmadrag Page: 1  Previous   Next