 |
|
|
|
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 5 6 ...12  Previous Next
|
|
Gold Audited Profiles - Proposal |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: December 27, 2009 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 5,131 |
| | Posted: | | | | I'm in a wait and see mode. I need to see what info will be collected (Real or interpreted) pretaining to cast, crew/roles and studios. those I my main concerns with DVDP. I track Sound recordists/Supervisors even if there is a PSM, expanded SFX, ADR, loop. and I also use common sense into translation of crew roles, which the rules of DVDP do not allow. | | | | Last edited: by ateo357 |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 762 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Pantheon: Quote:
I will say this though....the fact that the majority vote in this poll are the 'don't care' group it really does support what I said the other day: most users are lazy and selfish and don't care about this program.  Do you think more people will contribute and help when they are called selfish and lazy? I find this actually a pretty rude comment. Most users paid for the program and it says nowhere that you have to contribute to the database to use it. I am thankful for everybody who submits data for the discs I have in my collection but I would never blame other users for not contributing. | | | | Last edited: by TheDarkKnight |
| | Registered: March 18, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,463 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TheMadMartian: Quote:
... There is no requirement, by invelos, to use their database. We have been given the ability to modify all of the data in our local and I know that there are users, two that I know of for a fact, that don't use any data from the on-line database. What is basically being suggested is the creation, and sharing, of custom profiles, so I don't think this would be an issue I agree with this perspective. Also, remember that this project is in full view of Invelos, even with a request for their support, and an explicit statement that says we "do no harm to Invelos." | | | Thanks for your support.
Free Plugins available here.
Advanced plugins available here.
Hey, new product!!! BDPFrog. |
| | Registered: March 18, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,463 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Parsec: Quote:
Hmm maybe I am reading mediadogg's brief different to other people, but it looks to me as the idea of this gold audited is to ensure profiles are correct and within the current profiler database rules. I believe the idea is to ensure profiles are functionally correct and not just copies of existing profiles which may themselves already had errors within them.
I can also see the extra functionality where there could be additional fields to cater for other things not currently under the rules ie: surfeur51's desire to use correct name spelling. This is easily obtainable under a database system as an optional cast field thus people could prefer to use that within their own local profiles.
mediadogg.. what sort of hosting would be required for the website? Spot on, exactly what I meant. I wish I had written it as clearly. I liked a lot of what @eommen and @Pantheon had to say as well. The hosting would be a place to store a repository of Gold Audited Profiles, ability to download by DVDP users, some sort of App to maintain or change profiles by a limited set of authorized users (profile "owners"). I think it would be a mistake to try and host yet another Forum though. As long as Invelos allows it, we do our communications here - that's my thinking anyway. I think of it in a similar way to the Headshots DB. That is a successfully implemented example for us to learn from. Oh yeah, we need some sort of App that facilitates the certification process- goes kind of like this: - Let's say I have 1000 profiles in my local database that I have audited to have the best data since ice cream, following all the rules. - Using the upload App, I become the owner of these Candidate profiles on the web site - After approval by the (??? Rules Committee ???), the profile gets marked as "Gold." It is protected from any changes by the Invelos "anybody can contribute" process. Only the original owner can make changes. - Any authorized person (?Forum member?), can download and enjoy a perfect profile and lock it within his own database The value of this is that we all get to enjoy all those thousands of audited profiles sitting locked in local databases in order to protect them from bad data, or possibly never even submitted. | | | Thanks for your support.
Free Plugins available here.
Advanced plugins available here.
Hey, new product!!! BDPFrog. | | | | Last edited: by mediadogg |
| | Registered: March 18, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,463 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting ateo357: Quote:
I'm in a wait and see mode. I need to see what info will be collected (Real or interpreted) pretaining to cast, crew/roles and studios. those I my main concerns with DVDP. I track Sound recordists/Supervisors even if there is a PSM, expanded SFX, ADR, loop. and I also use common sense into translation of crew roles, which the rules of DVDP do not allow. Guaranteed way to be disappointed. Take an active role and share your detailed ideas for what you think makes a good profile. | | | Thanks for your support.
Free Plugins available here.
Advanced plugins available here.
Hey, new product!!! BDPFrog. | | | | Last edited: by mediadogg |
| | Registered: March 18, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,463 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Pantheon: Quote:
... I will say this though....the fact that the majority vote in this poll are the 'don't care' group it really does support what I said the other day: most users are lazy and selfish and don't care about this program. ... I prefer to think of it as a gesture of passive support and trust. After all, they could have just as easily voted "no." When I ask for something I want, I much prefer to be told "Do your thing" than "No."  As has been pointed out previously, the number of folks participating in the Forums is a very small fraction of Invelos customers, and an even smaller number make contributions and / or follow threads like this. The fact that someone takes the time to read the poll and reply indicates to me a person that does in fact care very much. Maybe in this case they don't agree with our approach, but next week, they could be your best ally. You never know. | | | Thanks for your support.
Free Plugins available here.
Advanced plugins available here.
Hey, new product!!! BDPFrog. | | | | Last edited: by mediadogg |
| | Registered: June 15, 2012 |  Posts: 428 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting mediadogg: Quote:
- Let's say I have 1000 profiles in my local database that I have audited to have the best data since ice cream, following all the rules.
- Using the upload App, I become the owner of these Candidate profiles on the web site
- After approval by the (??? Rules Committee ???), the profile gets marked as "Gold." It is protected from any changes by the Invelos "anybody can contribute" process. Only the original owner can make changes.
- Anybody authorized person (Forum member?), can download and enjoy a perfect profile and lock it with his own database The only problem I see with this is... Aren't those 1000 profiles with the best data since ice cream already in the normal database? I think a user should be credited with the profile, but not the owner of the profile. other users can suggest alterations to any profile (even gold ones) - all these suggestions go before the committee though and only they can authorise any profile change. it's these suggestions that are then discussed here on these forums - if needed. I think most of it will be profiles that are uploaded and trying to achieve gold with the input of others who see errors or things missing or whatever to those profiles. |
| | Registered: March 18, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,463 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Parsec: Quote:
Quoting mediadogg:
Quote:
- Let's say I have 1000 profiles in my local database that I have audited to have the best data since ice cream, following all the rules. ...
The only problem I see with this is... Aren't those 1000 profiles with the best data since ice cream already in the normal database?
I think a user should be credited with the profile, but not the owner of the profile. other users can suggest alterations to any profile (even gold ones) - all these suggestions go before the committee though and only they can authorise any profile change. it's these suggestions that are then discussed here on these forums - if needed.
I think most of it will be profiles that are uploaded and trying to achieve gold with the input of others who see errors or things missing or whatever to those profiles. I hear what you are saying. That deserves some thought. But projects like this often grow conceptually to a size that sinks them before they even get started. We don't want to replace or duplicate the whole profile review process already implemented by Invelos. I keep going back to the Headshot Master DB. Think how valuable that is - and how simple a process. Yet, it still takes a lot of work and dedication to keep it going. I think we have to be careful not to conceptualize something that we realistically could never do. One new thought that comes to me based on your insight, is that maybe we need to allow for multiple copies of a profile? Not sure if that makes sense, maybe not. But I feel strongly that the original auditor should control the profile. It is a source of great pride and represents a lot of work. | | | Thanks for your support.
Free Plugins available here.
Advanced plugins available here.
Hey, new product!!! BDPFrog. | | | | Last edited: by mediadogg |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 3,197 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting ateo357: Quote:
I'm in a wait and see mode. I need to see what info will be collected (Real or interpreted) pretaining to cast, crew/roles and studios. those I my main concerns with DVDP. I track Sound recordists/Supervisors even if there is a PSM, expanded SFX, ADR, loop. and I also use common sense into translation of crew roles, which the rules of DVDP do not allow. I haven't voted in the poll. I like to know what I vote for first. But like I said, I'm positive to anything that can make the database better. But I also realize that what's "better" is subjective to each user. | | | | First registered: February 15, 2002 |
| | Registered: March 18, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,463 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Kathy: Quote:
I'm willing to help if needed. Absolutely. I put you on a couple of Teams. One of the hardest tasks that we all keep dancing around is the Rules. What (hopefully minor) tweaks are needed in the rules do we need to satisfy the most serious auditors? Can you think about that and make a statement, or lead a thread about it? I would hope that the folks that have audited many hundreds or thousands of profiles, have similar notions of what is needed. If that is not true, then that challenges the notion of even having a perfect profile. If you can't agree on a definition, then maybe it doesn't exist, and the project is doomed. In this project, the profiles will be stored in a non-Invelos database, so we could even entertain changes that are not yet supported by Invelos. The download process would need to contain an option to recast the expanded profile into DVD Profiler format, with documented limitations. In my dream scenario, Invelos will be watching all this, and warn us if we are doing something that might never be supported in the future. | | | Thanks for your support.
Free Plugins available here.
Advanced plugins available here.
Hey, new product!!! BDPFrog. | | | | Last edited: by mediadogg |
| | Registered: October 30, 2011 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 1,870 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting mediadogg: Quote:
Quoting Parsec:
Quote:
Quoting mediadogg:
Quote:
- Let's say I have 1000 profiles in my local database that I have audited to have the best data since ice cream, following all the rules. ...
The only problem I see with this is... Aren't those 1000 profiles with the best data since ice cream already in the normal database?
I think a user should be credited with the profile, but not the owner of the profile. other users can suggest alterations to any profile (even gold ones) - all these suggestions go before the committee though and only they can authorise any profile change. it's these suggestions that are then discussed here on these forums - if needed.
I think most of it will be profiles that are uploaded and trying to achieve gold with the input of others who see errors or things missing or whatever to those profiles.
I hear what you are saying. That deserves some thought. But projects like this often grow conceptually to a size that sinks them before they even get started. We don't want to replace or duplicate the whole profile review process already implemented by Invelos. I keep going back to the Headshot Master DB. Think how valuable that is - and how simple a process. Yet, it still takes a lot of work and dedication to keep it going.
I think we have to be careful not to conceptualize something that we realistically could never do.
One new thought that comes to me based on your insight, is that maybe we need to allow for multiple copies of a profile? Not sure if that makes sense, maybe not.
But I feel strongly that the original auditor should control the profile. It is a source of great pride and represents a lot of work. Single threading work in an internet community is a bad idea. People leave, people may find a new tool, people have personal issues that may cause absences, etc. People sell/trade DVD's which amy mean your "owner" no longer has that title. With proper rule clarification to ensure that they are more cut and dry the current contrbution system would work fine. There does not need to be a single threading of control, nor should there be. This is after all not our jobs, we do this because we want to. If a change to a profile needs to be made and it is valid we should not be having to track down an "owner" to make that change. A lot of what you have been discussing requires a lot of "buy in" from Invelos and much of it also requires coding changed by Invelos. The biggest thrashing we have that leads to errors is the cast/crew/BY/common name which can only be rectified by a new linkage system which Ken is looking into. With that solved I see no reason for "ownership" since the rest of the data can be easily controlled by clarifications in the rules. |
| | Registered: March 18, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,463 |
| | Posted: | | | | @Scooter1836,
Points well taken and understood. I would love for Invelos to step up to the plate.
Given your points, can you think of a smaller, simpler project that takes care of that major issue, in a way that we can share the efforts of each other?
A smaller project would stand a greater chance of success. | | | Thanks for your support.
Free Plugins available here.
Advanced plugins available here.
Hey, new product!!! BDPFrog. |
| | Registered: October 30, 2011 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,870 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting mediadogg: Quote:
@Scooter1836,
Points well taken and understood. I would love for Invelos to step up to the plate.
Given your points, can you think of a smaller, simpler project that takes care of that major issue, in a way that we can share the efforts of each other?
A smaller project would stand a greater chance of success. I think the initial thing that should be targeted is the Invelos rules. We need to remove the ambiguity in several areas. We also should work with Ken and get a more structured, yet streamlined process for updating the rules. I would be willing to help with that. We should also have a clear identification of what specific areas require change so we can target smaller projects. Because some of these are very large since some of the issues reflect the base issue of the Invelos data model. |
| | Registered: March 16, 2007 | | Posts: 280 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Kathy: Quote:
I'm willing to help if needed. A far too amusing statement, considering the posts immediately preceding it. |
| | Registered: March 29, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,750 |
| | Posted: | | | | I would be willing to help if I can. I almost always do a complete reaudit whenever I contribute. | | | | Marty - Registered July 10, 2004, User since 2002. |
| | Registered: March 16, 2007 | | Posts: 280 |
| | Posted: | | | | I haven't voted yet, though at present it would most likely be, "do your own thing".
My main concern is that there's still a fair bit of ambiguity in several of the rules that have never been resolved in the various discussions over the years, and that ambiguity often seems the major stumbling block in getting a 'complete' profile done.
If you're trying to reach a 'gold standard' based on the current rules, and you want to be able to get as many complete profiles as possible, either you're still going to ignore the ambiguous titles, or you're going to have to figure out some way to resolve those ambiguities. Given the glacial pace of resolving past issues, I can't help but imagine that this is going to get bogged down over such things in a relatively short period of time, and mostly not go anywhere.
This becomes a larger concern since you don't actually present a means of getting through these issues; you just defer the problem as "something to be figured out".
Plus there's the fact that this will require a huge time investment that I'm not willing to commit to. Even just filling in data for a handful of discs that I've been trying to clean up recently, I can expect it to take several hours for just a couple TV series. Frankly, I shouldn't even be spending the time doing that; there are other important things for me to get done. |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4 5 6 ...12 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |