I have left copious comments on Credits created by user JazStationBib asking that they conform to the standards of the site, standard capitalization. In each instance, I have modified the title so it conforms to the Guidelines.

This didn't have any effect, so I sent polite private message about four days ago, explaining the conventions of the site in regards to standard capitalization for Credits. I see the user is still creating Credits with surnames in all capitals.

You have to admire people who don't give a s*** for the rules and create duplicate Credits because they know better than everyone else.

Got a link to any of his/her contributions so we can help keep on eye on it.

Thanks, didn't know it was that easy locating a user!

GruenerTee knows all the tricks. It is good to see you are back.

Just an update: I got a PM from JazStationBib​ yesterday saying that in future they will try to comply with the site Guidelines. I notice that they have stopped adding Credits using idiosyncratic capitalisation, so that is a start.

GruenerTee​ I noticed that you marked a couple of this user's Credits as Duplicates. Just be aware that this user has a habit of posting a comment (using the Post Comment facility) to the effect that it is a duplicate and needs to be deleted.

I have been in contact with the staff about this and they have expressly forbid repurposing Credits that have comments posted on them. Instead I prepare a list of these Credits and send them off to the staff as an SR. They then delete the Credits from the system.

If anyone comes across a duplicate Credit that has a comment posted on it, please retitle it as Do Not Use and I will deal with it.

I have asked JazStationBib​ to stop posting comments on duplicate Credits, but I'm not sure if this directive has been heeded, and I don't know if the staff have been in contact with the user.

As much as I dislike the Discogs voting system which can be subject to abuse, it does have some advantages such as curbing persistent errant behaviour.

I have been in contact with the staff about this and they have expressly forbid repurposing Credits that have comments posted on them

Thanks for the info, wasn't aware of that. The only things i retitled Duplicate were originally titled with "to be deleted", so i dont see a problem in that cases.

As much as I dislike the Discogs voting system which can be subject to abuse, it does have some advantages such as curbing persistent errant behaviour.

I feel the same. If there would be a voting system at the moment, it should be all positive, honouring only contributions the community considers as good. My arguments for such a system are:

  • We simply can't afford such a strict policy at the moment. If we got 1.000.000+ contributions and 10.000+ new each month, we should reconsider this. At the moment, filling the big white fields in the landscape of book should be a bigger priority.
  • We just can't expect the expertise to do complete submissions from everyone. People study for just knowing how to correctly read a colophone in a scientific way.
  • Its really hard to decide at the moment, what a "complete" submission is.
    There are still big open questions in my opinion, especially when it comes to titeling.
  • Upvoted submissions may work as a more direct example than the abstract guidelines. Lot of people learn by doing, including myself.
  • If upvoted submissions can be highlighted in a series page, its way easier to add another one from the same series. For example: I want to add another book to the series Reclam Universalbibliothek. My book has 2001 as the printing date. Now i see, theres an upvoted contribution in the series from 2002. Chances are, that most of the informations given there are the same as on my book, so i can skip a lot of redundant work by just hitting "add one like this". In fact, i use bookmarks for this system at the moment.

I despise the Discogs voting system as it tends to bring out the worst (or maybe it is their normal personality) in some people. Instead of respectful conversation, some users just shoot first. Even when they have voted incorrectly the innocent party is still penalised. It is a nasty system when placed in the hands of morons.

The only problem with Bookogs is that if someone is flagrantly breaching the Guidelines, they can continue to act with total impunity.

I left numerous comments on this person's submissions after correcting the errors, but admittedly they might have their notifications switched off. I then tried to contact them by PM, and that didn't have the desired effect. In the meantime, I probably corrected 200+ Credits, so the novelty was starting to wear thin. My next ploy was to name and shame in the Forum and see if the user responded to a link I left in one of their submissions. If that didn't work then I was going to file an S.R.

It seems the matter has been sorted, but there must be a simpler solution.

I'd like to see them try to improve the communication tools first, before even considering any kind of voting system. The current notification system only encourages people to turn it off, and report the notifications as spam.

I do not believe a voting system would improve the site much, as even "all positive" voting systems can be misused, and can discourage people from contributing. Users will insert their personal views/feelings into the process, no matter what you do.

That still begs the question, how is a user stopped if they are inadvertently doing the wrong thing, or worse still on the site with malicious intent?

One advantage of the Discogs voting system is that if someone is creating havoc, then the community can eventually put a stop to it by applying EI votes and placing the user in CIP.

I am taking the role of Devil's advocate here, as the Discogs voting system is largely the reason I don't contribute to that site anymore.

Maybe an improved communication system is the answer, or possibly a way of flagging multiple infractions to the staff so they can deal with the problem. I'm not talking about a few errors here and there, but consistent, prolonged non-adherence to the Guidelines. Admittedly, in my experience it is a rare occurrence.

Login or Register to post a reply to this topic.