Contributor Improvement Program

We have just turned on a new feature called the Contributor Improvement Program (CIP). This is designed to identify submitters who are having difficulty learning the Discogs system and have them read the guidelines and try to improve their contributions. It’s also a way to minimize potential disruptions to the database from incorrect submissions and error prone users.

The system works by looking at the votes that have been given to a user in a number of different ways, and picking out the users that get consistently low votes. Users who fall below certain thresholds are then automatically added to CIP. They are emailed about the program, explaining why they are on it and what they can do to get off of it. Users on the CIP are restricted to three submissions at any one time. Getting off the CIP entails them making submissions that receive positive votes (‘correct’). Users will remain on the CIP for a minimum of 2 weeks. In exceptional cases, users can be added or removed from the CIP manually by any of the site admins.

The names of the users on the CIP won’t be made public initially, although this is a possibility for the future. And we may adjust and develop this program as required.

Return to Discogs Blog
102 Comments
  • Jun 9,2018 at 9:47 pm

    It’s been way past 2 weeks (I believe since January actually) and I’m still on the CIP, plus my side account which had nothing to do with this got blocked, which I thought was disgusting and unfair. Can I FINALLY have my account back thank you?

  • Nov 28,2017 at 6:35 pm

    this is utter nonsense. so a bunch a nerds have put me on this as “punishment” for CORRECTING their willful errors and retarded “contributions” on MY OWN RECORD LABEL AND ACT – this is exactly what is wrong with life in the 21st century – it is run by gutless, faceless, brainless keyboard warriors, infantile social networking and wealthy guilt – tripping do-gooders conning hard-up everyday people into coughing up for “charity” when they have barely the means to make ends meet themselves.

  • Jul 25,2013 at 1:30 pm

    I’m currently on the CIP program with 3 pending submissions at a time and do my best to correctly submit a new release but with misspellings or lack of on Labels/Cover/Inserts I don’t feel it’s my fault that it’s incorrect. I only list what I see

  • Jun 7,2013 at 3:52 pm

    Discogs’s manager is allowing to add false information about artists. Shame…and of course FRAUDULENT.

  • May 27,2008 at 6:24 am

    [quote=fleshmeatdoll]v4 was to give the ability to rate the quality of any release whether still pending submission or voted on.
    the vote should reflect on the current state the release is in, except if the last edit was entirely incorrect in which case the vote (automatic revert) reflects only on the last action/ edit.

    why than, does the vote that reflects the current state of the release rather than the last edit only penalize the submitter of the last edit and not all the users who contributed to the state the release is in (including the original submitter)?

    is this how it is supposed to work?[/quote]

    more examples of how this mixed list of per-release and per-edit voting options are unintuitive, inflexible, and now: functionally broken.

    these basic problems were picked up [i]immediately[/i] by voters using the system, yet the management have yet to address them. proof, if any were needed, that a change like V4 should never have been made live before a beta-test period with current voters.

    relevant ticket: http://www.discogs.com/disbugs/436

  • May 26,2008 at 9:38 pm

    [quote=Drama_Ft._Justified]and I usually like to start at the bottom of someones list since it’s been sitting there longer.[/quote]

    YES, it would be most helpful if there was an option to reverse the automatic ‘jump to the next release’ feature recently added.

  • May 26,2008 at 8:52 pm

    [quote=Drama_Ft._Justified]And lastly, could we have an option to turn off the damn shortcuts? It interfears when you try to type something in the search engine. That, and I usually like to start at the bottom of someones list since it’s been sitting there longer.[/quote]

    i created a bug report some time ago.
    there was no response.
    http://www.discogs.com/disbugs/483

  • May 26,2008 at 7:30 pm

    [quote=julesparis]can you guys please quit voting needs major changes my updates that were removing Canada from the release title, that’s getting tedious really – get in touch with initial submitter as that’s the only option there is with v4 – i have no idea what the *label* should be and all those votes are doing is undermining my quality factorness

    http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1294662#latest
    http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1294660#latest
    http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1294671#latest

    cheers. [/quote]

    Sorry, Jules. I voted on that a long time ago though, before the wonderful CPI & everything was even mentioned. Speaking of edits damaging people, I have about 300 submission edits where I only fixed 1 thing and the rest of it is trash…i’m only lucky that they are sooo deep in the recesses of this site that no one else has found them yet. I question what i’m going to do when someone acually does…

    [quote=fleshmeatdoll]I am kind of confused with the concept of v4.
    [/quote]

    Concept? There was a concept?…What was it again…I swear I don’t remember any concept or reason ever mentioned for V4’s existance. Then again, can it really even be called a version since when it was implimented there were over 20 something programs that weren’t finished. Everyone says it was for the money, but according to stats there has no rise or decrease in profits. You now officially can’t edit anything that you don’t own for fear of the CPI. The new voting system hardly works. Notification is a mess so it’s even hard to keep track of your own stuff. What really was the idea? What was V4 suposed to accomplish?

    And lastly, could we have an option to turn off the damn shortcuts? It interfears when you try to type something in the search engine. That, and I usually like to start at the bottom of someones list since it’s been sitting there longer.

  • May 26,2008 at 6:59 pm

    [u=teonik]
    can we have a clarification on this please? i am kind of confused with the concept of v4.

    v4 was to give the ability to rate the quality of any release whether still pending submission or voted on.
    the vote should reflect on the current state the release is in, except if the last edit was entirely incorrect in which case the vote (automatic revert) reflects only on the last action/ edit.

    why than, does the vote that reflects the current state of the release rather than the last edit only penalize the submitter of the last edit and not all the users who contributed to the state the release is in (including the original submitter)?

    is this how it is supposed to work?

  • May 26,2008 at 10:55 am

    can you guys please quit voting needs major changes my updates that were removing Canada from the release title, that’s getting tedious really – get in touch with initial submitter as that’s the only option there is with v4 – i have no idea what the *label* should be and all those votes are doing is undermining my quality factorness

    http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1294662#latest
    http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1294660#latest
    http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1294671#latest

    cheers.

  • nik
    May 26,2008 at 10:47 am

    There was a bug that didn’t allow any user on the CIP to edit their current submissions, this has now been fixed.

  • May 26,2008 at 8:11 am

    depends on your mood

  • May 26,2008 at 8:09 am

    ^^nah, CIP

  • May 26,2008 at 7:17 am

    I wonder if we all will be VIP soon.

  • Ory
    May 26,2008 at 7:13 am

    What a farce.

  • May 26,2008 at 6:14 am

    It’s sad when a phrase like “Edit At Your Own Risk” can be attributed to a website “Community”.

  • May 26,2008 at 4:17 am

    Same thing just happened to me: I do an edit, voter votes NMC for something completely different. Next to that the change requested wasn’t even a mandatory thing.

    This is starting to look like the whole submission limit crap we had around the go-live of v3. Back then we didn’t update because we were not allowed to, now we’re not going to update because you will get punished for errors you didn’t make.

    Another thing:
    What happens when a voter is CIP’ed? Is he still allowed to vote then?

  • May 26,2008 at 4:08 am

    sorry, jules, but it looks like you will have to adjust your editing behavior.

    from the other thread.
    http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/topic/163626

    [quote=quisquilia]
    If one corrects a faulty entry for formal reasons (obvious mistakes such as {Vinyl, 12″ + Vinyl, 45 RPM} -> {Vinyl, 12″, 45 RPM}) and is faced with release specific mistakes (e.g. wrong track positions: 1, 2, … instead of A1, A2, …, B1, …) in addition, the latter of which one cannot correct, one often gets voted “Needs Minor / Major Changes”, lowering one’s average.

    Hence, one leaves crappy entries in their states of crappiness.

    Is that how the system is supposed to work?
    [/quote]

    [quote=nik]
    It is better to update releases where you can do your best to make the whole release correct, and not just chip away at small updates, that require voters attention but leave errors in the release data. Leaving a comment / vote would be better in this situation.
    Hopefully, users who know what they are doing and have okayed it with other users. [/quote]

    apparently, the freedom of editing and contributing to v4 comes not very easy to those who want to help out the database.

  • May 26,2008 at 4:08 am

    :-P

  • May 26,2008 at 2:50 am

    please people in charge of CIP remove this vote from my average calculation

    here: http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1299057#latest
    my quality rating is dramatically tarnished by this vote that refers to the scan when all I done was killing off an incorrect artist entry from your database – if i understand correctly i am now only a mysterious number of such votes away from the rehab programme and scared shirtless to tell you the truth
    thanks.

  • May 23,2008 at 4:48 pm

    I completely LOL’d when I read this:
    [quote=nik]The user should be able to edit submissions that don’t have votes, I will check this out.[/quote]
    ..in response to md’s post. Goes to show nik doesn’t give a shit about anyone’s opinion other than his own. SHAME.

  • May 23,2008 at 3:05 pm

    [quote=Haze]QFT[/quote]
    AOL

  • May 23,2008 at 2:55 pm

    [quote=md]It’s perfectly clear that nik has long since lost any ability or will to do good for this site and its community[/quote]

    QFT

  • md
    May 23,2008 at 1:29 pm

    [quote=Pauli]he removed my post ’cause of being a personal attack. I still think he should though[/quote]
    It wasn’t a personal attack. It started with a request – “please resign”, and was followed by a statement (I forget the exact words but something along the lines of “you clearly don’t have the capabilities for the job”. In any case, it was a statement that is irrefutably true and has been proved true by nik’s actions over the past 12-18 months innumerable times. It’s perfectly clear that nik has long since lost any ability or will to do good for this site and its community.

  • May 23,2008 at 1:10 pm

    [quote=massivan]why isn’t there any control-instance over the new programs you put online and over the functionality of those softwares? [/quote]

    Many people have asked that question, but there’s never any answer. If I were to speculate as to the reason why teo seems incapable of following anything resembling modern standards or best practices for webapp development and implementation, nik would no doubt send me a whiny PM full of dowdy aphorisms, asking me to stop being so negative.

  • May 23,2008 at 12:57 pm

    he removed my post ’cause of being a personal attack. I still think he should though

  • May 23,2008 at 10:23 am

  • May 23,2008 at 10:17 am

    this is almost funny..
    why isn’t there any control-instance over the new programs you put online and over the functionality of those softwares?
    and why does nik erase comments like “nik, you should resign” in this list? that’s not really exemplary..

  • May 23,2008 at 9:03 am

    what´s again the reason for being 2 weeks on that CIP?

  • May 22,2008 at 6:05 pm

    I’ve never seen so many programs and/or systems activated before they were finished…

  • May 22,2008 at 5:13 pm

    [quote=nik]The user should be able to edit submissions that don’t have votes, I will check this out.[/quote]

    Wow, fantastic Nik – you really need to go into politics. I don’t think I’ve ever seen such a fantastically minimal single answer to a series of questions without actually answering them.

  • May 22,2008 at 10:22 am

    [quote=quisquilia]That might stem from the fact that once you comment as a voter, you cannot vote on an update UNLESS another update takes places. So if a voter chooses to ask you in a comment first and then it is confirmed there is a mistake, said voter cannot vote anymore and cannot mark the edit / release as in need of an update. Another stroke of genius of the management.[/quote]

    This was fixed. The vote thing does disappear after commenting but, if you leave the page or simply hit the refresh button, it’ll reappear. Why this happens or must be done is a mystery to me.

  • May 22,2008 at 5:39 am

    [quote=ForkMe]I’ve also had needs minor or needs major changes votes just on a query. I don’t mind the query, but surely that doesn’t need the vote. Sometimes, I have been right.[/quote]
    That might stem from the fact that once you comment as a voter, you cannot vote on an update UNLESS another update takes places. So if a voter chooses to ask you in a comment first and then it is confirmed there is a mistake, said voter cannot vote anymore and cannot mark the edit / release as in need of an update. Another stroke of genius of the management.

  • May 22,2008 at 5:14 am

    [quote=jweijde]Or do get owners get notified when someone only posts a comment on a submission and does not vote?[/quote]

    They do if they have their notifications set up right. I’ve had quite a few people who have commented on changes without voting. I’ve then been able to go straight back and correct it.

  • May 22,2008 at 5:12 am

    [quote=lostin_music]then you need to also instruct your voters on what to vote. receiving a ‘Needs major changes’ vote along with a question (!) to verify the label (without even contacting first) really brings down the average![/quote]

    Quite, I’ve had a few “needs minor changes” that were plain wrong. My average has changed from correct to needs minor changes.

    The most common wrong one is people asking to change the catalogue number to the normal way used by a label, when the current guidance is to put it exactly as it is on the label.

    I’ve also had needs minor or needs major changes votes just on a query. I don’t mind the query, but surely that doesn’t need the vote. Sometimes, I have been right.

  • nik
    May 22,2008 at 3:16 am

    The user should be able to edit submissions that don’t have votes, I will check this out.

  • May 21,2008 at 11:16 am

    Nik, please resign!

    it’s time for someone else to become Community Manager. You are not capable for the job.

  • md
    May 21,2008 at 11:06 am

    [i]On 05/21/08, 06:57AM, massivan wrote:
    hi md,

    i’m trying to find out why you put me on this program, maybe you can give me a clue? i still have tons of submissions to do and i’d love to do so. i checked the accepted submissions (they were all accepted without any comment) and answered to every message about pending submissions you sent me, so i now just don’t understand why you block me.

    i’d appreciate your help.

    kindest regards
    ivan

    On 05/21/08, 07:33AM, md wrote:
    Hi Ivan,

    I didn’t put you on a program, unfortunately this is a new idea introduced by Discogs management, and as usual their ideas are more of a problem than a help. You can read about it here if you haven’t already: http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/topic/163608

    I’m not sure exactly how it works but I guess it’s something that happens automatically and is connected to the votes you receive. Also I’m afraid that due to numerous destructive changes introduced by Discogs management, people who vote are no longer able to go back and find the submissions they voted on to check for reactions/further updates.

    With regard to submissions accepted without comment – once again, due to badly planned changes introduced by Discogs management, ALL submissions now take effect without any checking from moderators, so that is not an indication that the quality or content of a submission is acceptable.

    I’ll take another look through your recent submissions and see if I can find some to vote “correct” – I believe this ought to accelerate your progress through this so called “program”. But in the meantime I advise you to spend some time reading and learning the submission guidelines – they can be quite complex and getting a single character wrong somewhere can lead to information being terribly incorrect and misleading.

    md

    On 05/21/08, 09:26AM, massivan wrote:
    hello again md,

    thanks a lot for your time and explications. unfortunately now that i am on this program, i’m absolutely blocked. i can’t either go and remove the groupnames from the massivan profile (as you told), nor change some submissions i made. i’m wondering how they imagine that somebody who’s in the program ever will be able to come back and make contributions.
    i will take some time and read all the instructions, although i don’t know if i ever will be able to contribute again. :-(

    all the best
    ivan

    On 05/21/08, 10:35AM, md wrote:
    Ivan,

    With your permission I will post this message on the forum discussion for Discogs management to comment on. Let me know if you don’t want me to do that.

    md

    sent by massivan to md on 21-May-08 05:40 PM
    md, you have my absolute permission to do so.

    thanks
    ivan[/i]

    So, how is someone on this crackpot scheme supposed to get off it?

    [quote=nik]The system works by looking at the votes that have been given to a user in a number of different ways, and picking out the users that get consistently low votes. Users who fall below certain thresholds are then automatically added to CIP. They are emailed about the program, explaining why they are on it and what they can do to get off of it. Users on the CIP are restricted to three submissions at any one time. Getting off the CIP entails them making submissions that receive positive votes (‘correct’). Users will remain on the CIP for a minimum of 2 weeks. In exceptional cases, users can be added or removed from the CIP manually by any of the site admins.

    The names of the users on the CIP won’t be made public initially, although this is a possibility for the future. And we may adjust and develop this program as required.[/quote]
    In other words, it’s as fucked up and useless as the rest of the changes you have been implementing. What a load of fucking garbage.

    Please explain how this user is ever going to be able to submit again, considering:

    1) they are “restricted to three submissions at any one time” – an utterly meaningless statistic, since, contrary to to the nonsensical “Pending Submissions (22)” on this user’s profile, there are no pending submissions. These 22 submissions have already taken effect and are, I assume, unvoted, and like almost all submissions since v.4 will probably remain unvoted indefinitely, as they sit amongst the vast majority of submissions (by all users) that will [u]never[/u] be voted on, because as anyone with even the slightest intelligence has observed, v.4 DOES NOT WORK.

    2) your continued failure to do anything that is productive rather than destructive means that voters are still prevented from helping users by finding previous votes and checking for changes, or being notified of changes to submissions we’ve voted on. The utterly bewildering replacement of a working submission review interface with this utterly SHIT java frame bullshit is just so….awful.

    3) these failures on your part coupled with the idiotic design of this program, further prevents anyone who would like to overcome the damage you are doing by helping the users stuck on this program. Not only do you ensure that the program will not work by piling shit idea on top of shit idea in another of many examples of design by lobotomy, you also ensure that people who would like to work around your ineptitude can not do so, by hiding the identities of the users stuck in this situation.

    4) evidently, but not surprisingly, this user has not had it explained to them adequately WHY they have been added to the program, WHEN they will be able to submit again, and HOW they are able to get to that point. Again, this is YOUR FAULT.

  • May 20,2008 at 9:00 am

    [quote=kwulf]And this is only because it’s still vague to me if the edit or the whole submission is voted upon[/quote]

    you and everyone else. it’s apparently only the whole submission, unless it’s a vote of ‘entirely incorrect edit’ which overrides the ‘entirely incorrect (release)’ vote for some reason, and obviously applies only to the most recent edit. this is all assuming you have in your possession the Goblet of A’nak Tahum and have previously done the Special Dance.

    relevant tickets:
    http://www.discogs.com/disbugs/434
    http://www.discogs.com/disbugs/436

  • May 20,2008 at 8:30 am

    [u=Kenny Dope] – [url=http://www.discogs.com/history?artist=Kenny+Dope#latest]Needed Vote[/url]
    [u=Kenny Dope Unreleased Project] – [url=http://www.discogs.com/history?artist=Kenny+Dope+Unreleased+Project#latest]Needs Vote[/url]

    Both non-existent artists. Presumably under normal circumstances after a manual clearout and removal of releases, the invisible artist page will then sit around forever waiting in vain for a vote.

    (yawn)

  • May 20,2008 at 4:37 am

    [quote=Axefield]Search result on Kenny Dope: [/quote]
    That’s because profile wasn’t cleared after the recent ‘minimal database disruption’. I can still vote on it too:
    [url=http://www.discogs.com/history?artist=Kenny+Dope#latest]v4 FARCE[/url] + [url=http://www.discogs.com/update/images?artist=Kenny+Dope]Images[/url]

    This profile is now sitting waiting to be reactivated when some new user types [a=Kenny Dope] into their submission.

  • May 19,2008 at 9:25 pm

    [quote=nik]Users who fall below certain thresholds are then automatically added to CIP[/quote]

    well, see you soon then: 1 entirely incorrect vote + a removal request. why ? because this is a duplicate of itself!!! : http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1304390#latest

  • May 19,2008 at 6:57 pm

    lol

    good profile, no?

  • May 19,2008 at 6:42 pm

    Search result on Kenny Dope:

    Kenny Dope
    Kenny Dope DO NOT USE THIS ARTIST PAGE! ALL ARTIST NAME VARIATIONS ARE COVERED ON THE [a=Kenny … “Dope” Gonzalez]-PAGE. and doctor_trance is a dumbass.
    http://www.discogs.com/artist/Kenny+Dope

  • May 19,2008 at 6:29 pm

    Just to get this one straight. A bad submitter gets a limit to three submissions instead of being limited to zero submissions? The way I see it you’re making it worse.

    Another thing. You can’t see where the votes you have received came from. If you have one release that received several low votes and few to none other releases voted upon, which is realistic even when you have nearly 200 pendings like me, you have a terrible avarge without knowing why or how to do something about it. The same thing happens when you have submitted a large number of whitelabels that have limited info, you get low votes because there’s limited info on the relase and there’s just not a lot to be able to enter, hence a low avarage.

    Adding it all up together I feel you’re giving more freedom to bad submitters and are limiting the ones that are ok.

  • tom
    May 19,2008 at 12:58 pm

    [quote=0]Shooting yourself in the foot after the horse has bolted[/quote]

    Quite frankly, I’m surprised [u=nik] has any toes left the amount of times he’s shot himself in the foot.

  • May 19,2008 at 10:35 am

    I’m glad I stopped submitting/editing and don’t have to worry about this bullshit.

  • May 19,2008 at 9:15 am

    I’m guessing a Remove Release counts toward movement into this CIP.

    A minimum of 2 weeks seems pretty rough – not that I don’t think there are plenty of submitters who would be better off just excommunicated from Discogs, but still. I’d think that if they get enough Correct+ votes on previous submissions, they’d get out of the CIP instead of waiting out the remaining 14 days (at the very least – that is!)

  • md
    May 19,2008 at 3:49 am

    [quote=jweijde]True. We need some kind of ‘Needs verification’ vote for asking questions. Because voting is the only way to bring a question under attention. Or do get owners get notified when someone only posts a comment on a submission and does not vote?[/quote]
    The verification should be added by the submitter before pressing submit. If it’s missing then it does indeed Need Major Changes.

  • May 18,2008 at 9:47 am

    [quote=corne_mo]LOL, just got a message from doctor_trance that I’m messing up Kenny Dope releases.[/quote]
    At least you now know how to revert them…

  • Anonymous
    May 18,2008 at 12:36 am

    Shooting yourself in the foot after the horse has bolted.

  • May 18,2008 at 12:16 am

    LOL, just got a message from doctor_trance that I’m messing up Kenny Dope releases.

  • May 17,2008 at 2:02 pm

    [quote=jweijde]We need some kind of ‘Needs verification’ vote for asking questions[/quote]

    I corrected most of my incorrect submissions, if you mods would like to take a look at them, thanks.
    But don´t forget the popcorn ;D

  • May 17,2008 at 1:21 pm

    Only 1 release left on the [a=Kenny Dope] profile now which is a duplicate of an already existing entry.

    Were Carl Gonzalez and Kenny Dope Gonzalez aliasses or ANV’s before doctor_trance messed around with it?

    I’ve tried to clean up as much as possible. Be careful when voting cause there were about 10 releases that are new to the DB that have now my update pending too.

  • May 17,2008 at 7:47 am

    [quote=nik]Any damage is revertible, and in the act of voting EI to revert, the submitter gets closer to being put on this program. [/quote]
    A manual EI on every change made… performed by who exactly?

    [a=Kenny Dope] damage still present over a week later.

    Who’s job is it to clear up?
    Where is the clear up procedure defined?
    How many EIs to undo [url=http://www.discogs.com/history?release=41827#latest]this[/url]?
    When will you admit v4 is a failure?
    When does the Management Improvement Program start?
    Are you booked on it?

  • nik
    May 17,2008 at 2:51 am

    [quote=deejsasqui]A submission limit? But is it implemented AFTER they have a significant number of submissions voted as needing minor/major corrections or entirely incorrect? If so, it seems reactionary instead of preventative. [/quote]

    Whereas the previous limit was based solely on the weight of contributions, and started from a presumption of everyone needing a limit, this new system is based on votes received (the weight of submissions doesn’t matter), and presumes the majority of users don’t need to be limited (borne out by the percentage of users falling under the CIP).

    [quote=corne_mo]With the most recent changes you’re actually trying to say that V4 is a mistake.[/quote]

    This function was always planned for v4:

    [quote][url=http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/topic/156385#2011408]Forum Post[/url] – [b]Users who receive too many poor votes that show they are unable to reach a reasonable standard will be limited or even blocked from interacting with the database[/b].[/quote]

    [quote=helix]Won’t work as the damage is already done before a vote is cast. [/quote]

    Any damage is revertible, and in the act of voting EI to revert, the submitter gets closer to being put on this program.

    [quote=McVicar]If I submit an relatively obscure release with numerous artists and other credits, and one of those names is incorrect (e.g. Artist instead of Artist (5)), then the submission could be voted as ‘Needs Major Changes’, when in fact the rest of the information may be correct.

    It’s surely better to include as much information with a release as possible, at the risk of some of it not being correct, than to exclude information in case it’s wrong. The sorts of mistakes I’m thinking of here are ones that maybe only people closely associated with a release will notice.[/quote]

    The system will be adjusted as necessary to try to avoid any unfair situations. It is ultimately the responsibility of the submitter to try their best to get the names linked up correctly (this is a large part of what makes the site work). Submission notes, asking in forums, searching, and researching, all will help to avoid undue ‘Major Changes’ votes, and is what a conscientious submitter should be doing in any case. We are planning to have further error checks for artist and label names to try to help find the correct one, so the submission form can and should be improved to try to minimize any possible error.

  • May 17,2008 at 1:07 am

    [quote=jweijde]True. We need some kind of ‘Needs verification’ vote for asking questions. Because voting is the only way to bring a question under attention. Or do get owners get notified when someone only posts a comment on a submission and does not vote?[/quote]
    Yes, people get notified when someone comments. unless they do not get notifications (you can disable it in your preferences, but then you don’t get the ‘voted’ messages either).
    But funny that you should be the one who agrees with me. [url=http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1135087#latest]Seeing it was you who gives ‘Needs Major Changes’ votes[/url] on things that needs verification. did not see the ‘needs minor changes’ option there then ?

  • May 17,2008 at 12:58 am

    [quote=lostin_music]then you need to also instruct your voters on what to vote. receiving a ‘Needs major changes’ vote along with a question (!) to verify the label (without even contacting first) really brings down the average![/quote]
    True. We need some kind of ‘Needs verification’ vote for asking questions. Because voting is the only way to bring a question under attention. Or do get owners get notified when someone only posts a comment on a submission and does not vote?

  • May 17,2008 at 12:36 am

    [quote=nik]The system works by looking at the votes that have been given to a user in a number of different ways[/quote]

    then you need to also instruct your voters on what to vote. receiving a ‘Needs major changes’ vote along with a question (!) to verify the label (without even contacting first) really brings down the average!

  • May 16,2008 at 8:33 pm

    good luck getting votes on the 3 out of 200.000 edits that currently need votes.

    especially since there is not yet a feature which informs voters of activity on subs they have commented on.

    this will be fun.

  • May 16,2008 at 4:37 pm

    [quote=nik]The system works by looking at the votes that have been given to a user in a number of different ways, and picking out the users that get consistently low votes.[/quote]

    For this initiative to be effective, submissions and edits should be judged by the quantity of information submitted and the portion of that information which is correct or incorrect.

    If I submit an relatively obscure release with numerous artists and other credits, and one of those names is incorrect (e.g. [i]Artist[/i] instead of [i]Artist (5)[/i]), then the submission could be voted as ‘Needs Major Changes’, when in fact the rest of the information may be correct.

    It’s surely better to include as much information with a release as possible, at the risk of some of it not being correct, than to exclude information in case it’s wrong. The sorts of mistakes I’m thinking of here are ones that maybe only people closely associated with a release will notice.

  • May 16,2008 at 3:38 pm

    [quote]You will pass the Contributor Improvement Program once you have three contributions in a row voted on as correct. [/quote]

    This sounds like a deranged sense of humour to me, since the last couple of days I am “back” modding (ehm… voting), but mainly all I do is pick very simple “Correct” or “Needs Minor Changes” stuff (especially the second type). And this is only because it’s still vague to me if the edit or the whole submission is voted upon (at least in cases where multiple edits have been going on after V4 implementation), so if I keep doing what I am doing I am going to “push” a lot of people here to CIP “probation”.

  • May 16,2008 at 2:50 pm

    Yeah right, where’s the salty popcorn now?

  • May 16,2008 at 12:36 pm

    [quote=_kerry]
    Rolling On (the) Floor Laughing Out Loud[/quote]

    got it, I was aware of lol…

    anyway, thanks to the guys that helped me on my submissions currently

  • May 16,2008 at 12:15 pm

    [quote=Drama_Ft._Justified]roflol[/quote]
    what´s that mean?

  • May 16,2008 at 12:13 pm

    [quote=Drama_Ft._Justified]roflol[/quote]
    what´s that mean?

  • May 16,2008 at 12:13 pm

    [quote=buddahs_records]
    what´s that mean?[/quote]

    Rolling On (the) Floor Laughing Out Loud

    This concludes our lesson for today on internet-speak =P

  • May 16,2008 at 12:12 pm

    [quote=Conceited_2]It’s just too weird imo to prevent selling your own drafts, but not drafts of others. And I do believe it will happen (more, because of CIP)… I was just thinking to start a couple more additional accounts to do ALL my submitting now…[/quote]

    Lol. Yeah, but then again a lot don’t make sense here anymore.

    Apparently they are doing other things…like disabling HTML & putting a block on it in submissions, which I discovered when I noticed my draft copy of the ISS (International Space Station) is now completely dead & can’t be fixed…so not fair, I liked that thing!!! Random thought, disregard.

    [quote=buddahs_records]hat´s that mean?[/quote]

    Hey, don’t use my name!…I didn’t say it. :-D

  • May 16,2008 at 12:11 pm

    [quote=Drama_Ft._Justified]roflol[/quote]
    what´s that mean?

  • May 16,2008 at 12:05 pm

    I fear we’re getting a bit off topic, but…
    [quote=Drama_Ft._Justified]I’m confused as to what’s funny…I believe people would do it[/quote]
    It’s just too weird imo to prevent selling your own drafts, but not drafts of others. And I do believe it will happen (more, because of CIP)… I was just thinking to start a couple more additional accounts to do ALL my submitting now…

  • May 16,2008 at 11:56 am

    *sighs* We’re back at the same point again. The whole bunch of people in the CIP will start complaining. Soon, things will get out of hand, i.e. the CIP will be overloaded of submitters because the quality of submissions is ever-decreasing and it is not going to improve submitters’ skills. Then the administration will have no choice but to remove this “program” just to make users happier.

    This looks just like a vicious circle that the administration is taking a whole lot of pleasure in.

  • May 16,2008 at 11:50 am

    ^I want some too…but, only if it’s salty.

    [quote=Conceited_2]Ok… roflol![/quote]

    I’m confused as to what’s funny…I believe people would do it. It’d be easier just to go somewhere else but, if you wanna sell everywhere, just make 2 accounts on here, put a bunch of drafts in 1 & sell them all from the other. I’m sure there are people who would do it. :-D

  • May 16,2008 at 11:44 am

    ^Please pass me some. ;-)

  • May 16,2008 at 11:44 am

    [quote=Drama_Ft._Justified]you can’t sell your own draft, you can sell someone elses…how easy is it to make multiple accounts again?[/quote]
    Ok… roflol!

  • May 16,2008 at 11:44 am

    [quote=MR_E](makes popcorn)[/quote]
    Salt or sweet?

  • May 16,2008 at 11:38 am

    (makes popcorn)

  • May 16,2008 at 11:38 am

    [quote=Conceited_2]Is that so?

    “Error:
    You cannot sell a draft release”[/quote]

    Really??

    http://www.discogs.com/release/696908

    Correction, you can’t sell your own draft, you can sell someone elses…how easy is it to make multiple accounts again?

  • May 16,2008 at 11:36 am

    So if you got some negative votes you get an e-mail telling that you should try better. And who’s there to learn these submitters how the site works? The good old experienced and filled with in-depth knowledge about both music and site modsquad is mostly gone.

    [u=nik] and [u=teo]. With the most recent changes you’re actually trying to say that V4 is a mistake. Problem seems to be your ego’s. Set them aside for the benefit of the DB, apologise for the mess you created, turn back to march 20th.

  • May 16,2008 at 11:35 am

    [quote=Drama_Ft._Justified]Drafts can be still be sold in the marketplace[/quote]
    Is that so?

    “Error:
    You cannot sell a draft release”

  • May 16,2008 at 11:34 am

    :-D

    My second account has been CIPed. Wondrous.

  • May 16,2008 at 11:33 am

    [quote=Haze]And imagine what will happen that they can’t list lots of items for sale because of being on that list. I wonder what will happen then[/quote]

    They´ll sell on other places ;-)

  • May 16,2008 at 11:32 am

    [quote=Haze]And imagine what will happen that they can’t list lots of items for sale because of being on that list. I wonder what will happen then[/quote]

    They´ll sell on other places ;-)

  • May 16,2008 at 11:32 am

    [quote=nik]Getting off the CIP entails them making submissions that receive positive votes (‘correct’)[/quote]
    So, that means a submission-ban for most of these users…

  • May 16,2008 at 11:23 am

    [quote=quisquilia]auto-converted long url

    Mind, I disagree with this approach, but it’s nik’s reasoning that all file formats / bitrates deserve unique entries.[/quote]

    I’ll haveta remember that…they should be together, but that might make it look weird. Whoever keeps yesing those, I would tell them to stop if there was voting history…

  • May 16,2008 at 11:23 am

    [quote=Haze]And imagine what will happen that they can’t list lots of items for sale because of being on that list. I wonder what will happen then[/quote]

    They´ll sell on other places ;-)

  • May 16,2008 at 11:19 am

    [quote=Drama_Ft._Justified]Quisquilia, are you sure it is suposed to be separate? [/quote]
    http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/topic/162480#2090186

    Mind, I disagree with this approach, but it’s [u=nik]’s reasoning that all file formats / bitrates deserve unique entries.

  • May 16,2008 at 11:13 am

    [quote=little_alien]You wanna make me go to rehab I say no no no…[/quote]

    Just what I needed in my head today…god damn you. :-D

  • May 16,2008 at 11:13 am

    I´m in too. Maybe there should be a CIP-club for all of us who´re in trouble to understand how it works. Especially to understand why the contributor writes that a submission needs to be changed, but won´t explain the concern, or just to change by himself to teach the submitter.

    I followed this link: http://www.discogs.com/mycontributions
    and could find all my contributions, after browsing 40 of them without any comment I was fed up.

    Maybe this is the way you guys would like to explain me the matter?

    thanks

  • May 16,2008 at 11:10 am

    You wanna make me go to rehab I say no no no…

  • May 16,2008 at 10:58 am

    Quiaquilia, are you sure it is suposed to be separate?

    http://www.discogs.com/release/1171632

    http://www.discogs.com/release/1171613

    http://www.discogs.com/release/1171631

    As a side thought, isn’t it strange how they are all from the same user & all voted on…do a search for File, mp3, Wav.

    [quote=Haze]And imagine what will happen that they can’t list lots of items for sale because of being on that list.[/quote]

    Drafts can be still be sold in the marketplace. The system only prevents SUBMITTING more than 3 things at a time, it doesn’t say anything about hindering selling…how intriguing.

  • May 16,2008 at 10:57 am

    This sounds good, I hope it works.

  • May 16,2008 at 10:54 am

    [quote=Villars]Now, I am considered as a bad submitter.[/quote]

    You’ve always been one.

    Re: the new feature

    As mentioned above, a lot of damages can be done before someone pops up on that list. And when the first users start begging in the forums for votes so that they can get off list can also get funny. And imagine what will happen that they can’t list lots of items for sale because of being on that list. I wonder what will happen then.

  • May 16,2008 at 10:47 am

    [quote=Donc]I tried to ask about the problems x user had with my submissions and nobody got back to me. Go figure? I know my submissions were correct and true to the very line and one submission got a ‘needs major changes’ rating.[/quote]
    [u=md] told you. You weren’t listening.

  • May 16,2008 at 10:45 am

    [quote=Donc]I am considered a bad submitter as well, for putting the correct and relevant information towards entires for the label I represent. I tried to ask about the problems x user had with my submissions and nobody got back to me. Go figure? I know my submissions were correct and true to the very line and one submission got a ‘needs major changes’ rating. All the information is there and easy to understand. As much as I am for the site to be correct, I am also for these reviewers to be to the point and concise with what the problems are they happen to have. I can’t tell if it’s vindictiveness or not, but I had READ THE GUIDELINES & I should know what the label I work for is doing over whoever was in a bad mood when they reviewed my submissions. Furthermore, it’s a digital label, a category that hasn’t even really been broadly defined here yet.[/quote]

    You are updating the format wrong, basicly over & over again. Md could have pointed you to the guideline portion since you are new & everything, but don’t be expecting nice people at a time like this. It’s a bad time to be a new member regrardless of if you care about your submissions or not, everyone’s angry and willing to throw out Needs Major Changes & Entirely Incorrect on a dime. This is a wonderfull example of how the CPI WONT WORK!!!…at least not until you can make more people happy Nik.

  • May 16,2008 at 10:41 am

    [quote=nik]It’s also a way to minimize potential disruptions to the database from incorrect submissions and error prone users. [/quote]
    Won’t work as the damage is already done before a vote is cast.

    e.g. recent farce
    [a=Kenny “Dope” Gonzalez]
    [a=Kenny Dope]

  • May 16,2008 at 10:36 am

    I am considered a bad submitter as well, for putting the correct and relevant information towards entires for the label I represent. I tried to ask about the problems x user had with my submissions and nobody got back to me. Go figure? I know my submissions were correct and true to the very line and one submission got a ‘needs major changes’ rating. All the information is there and easy to understand. As much as I am for the site to be correct, I am also for these reviewers to be to the point and concise with what the problems are they happen to have. I can’t tell if it’s vindictiveness or not, but I had READ THE GUIDELINES & I should know what the label I work for is doing over whoever was in a bad mood when they reviewed my submissions. Furthermore, it’s a digital label, a category that hasn’t even really been broadly defined here yet.

  • May 16,2008 at 10:35 am

    wow that rehab program sounds like serious business – also sounds kinda funny when one recalls that we ended up with V3 and V4 cause a No vote was considered by management a majorly traumatizing experience for happy users.

  • May 16,2008 at 10:28 am

    .

  • May 16,2008 at 10:28 am

    This is going to be fun. Let’s see how many users who normally get correct votes, get around 5 needs minor changes votes in a row by accident and end up on the CPI. Then on the other hand, just think about how many horrible submitters that have never received any votes due the to size the ‘needs votes’ portion and no proper interface to browse it…what’s going to stop them?

  • May 16,2008 at 10:05 am

    Thanks to moderator [u=choenyi] who gives me a high number of N-Votes for a RSG that he doesn’t learn himself…
    Now, I am considered as a bad submitter.

    Just have a look on my older submissions:

    http://www.discogs.com/submissions#item=release/1198641
    http://www.discogs.com/submissions#item=release/1230630
    http://www.discogs.com/submissions#item=release/1226417
    http://www.discogs.com/submissions#item=release/10597
    http://www.discogs.com/submissions#item=release/1294763

    Etc…

  • May 16,2008 at 10:04 am

    What? A submission limit? But is it implemented AFTER they have a significant number of submissions voted as needing minor/major corrections or entirely incorrect? If so, it seems reactionary instead of preventative.

    And if anyone is wondering what the email looks like, here’s a copy (sent to my delinquent account =)

    [quote]noreply@discogs.com to [i]username[/i]

    Dear [i]username[/i],

    Based on recent votes made on your contributions to the database, you have been put on the Contributor Improvement Program. This is designed to help you improve your contributions to the database.

    You are now limited to a total of three contributions waiting for votes at any one time. If you have more than this currently waiting for votes, these will remain in the database, but you won’t be able to submit any more until they are voted on, or you pass the Contributor Improvement Program. You are still able to edit your current contributions, and it is recommended that you do this after understanding why you have been put on this program, and how to improve your contributions.

    First, you should check your past contributions ( http://www.discogs.com/mycontributions ) and see the comments and votes placed on them. Note any mistakes you have made that others have brought to your attention.

    Secondly, you should have a good read of the Submission Guidelines ( http://www.discogs.com/help/submission-guidelines-release.html ) and try to understand more about what the database is looking for regarding good quality contributions.

    Third, you should review and try to improve any remaining submissions you have, or have made, in order to make them correct. If this isn’t possible, you can also make new contributions.

    You will pass the Contributor Improvement Program once you have three contributions in a row voted on as correct. Then your submissions will not be limited anymore, but if you are not able to keep the quality of your submissions up, you may be returned to this program, or even blocked from contributing to the database.

    Thanks,

    Discogs.com[/quote]

  • May 16,2008 at 9:47 am

    Convoluted
    Idiot
    Protection

Leave A Reply