nerdfly wrote:

1. Built in image optimizer with the uploader (plus no restriction on image sizes if people want to see all the fine print on LP's - the optimizer can take care of load times)

2. Auto Capitalization code in submissions (it always strikes me as odd that when i make a submission and miss a capital or two i get a warning, so the check code is there. Why not give me a 'fix' option like with spellcheckers where it lists every mistake and gives the option to fix it? the time saved on pressing 'auto capitalize' would be immense and make submissions so much easier/quicker)

3. Better search filters/subfilters (already mentioned - 1000 times apparently)

4. More options in 'Orders' and 'Manage Inventory' pages (imagine being able to select multiple orders via tick boxes and have a single button to mark all as shipped, payment received etc... rather than entering each one separately. In inventory page, more filters to show just singles/cd's/vinyl etc... and the ability to select multiple items and change prices via a percentage would be fantastic)


That's enough to be thinking about for now i reckon:) just need some input here to see what anybody else thinks?

nerdfly wrote:

'what discogs needs?' - obviously not ;)

makbo wrote:

Agree. It's odd, bizarre, fly-over software programming... ;-)

Try adding or voting on these enhancements here (they could already be in the works, I'm surprised the auto-capitalization request isn't there, or at least I couldn't find it).

http://www.discogs.com/disbugs/features

Dr.SultanAszazin wrote:

Problem is sometimes the capitalization needs to be overruled. That's why it has been kept to a warning...




Yes, at least: less restriction, it sometimes looks like discogs stood still since 2004...




yes indeed: about time they give at least a reaction to this.
That stood still for 5 years too!

filters and search are rather scandalous
(using a google search including site:discogs.com yields better results often)

nerdfly wrote:

"Problem is sometimes the capitalization needs to be overruled. That's why it has been kept to a warning..."

yeah good point Dr.Sultan but you can overrule a spellchecker - this could work in the same way... you could 'fix all' or run through individually, or if you needed something to stay as you entered it...do like you do at the moment. Meaning if the error shows up and you intended it then just tick the warning acknowledgement box and press submit. Jobsa good'un.

nerdfly wrote:

...i noticed that with google too!

Dr.SultanAszazin wrote:

That's a good idea!

very simple & effective.

manfromzaandam wrote:

I'm pretty new at discogs but I think it needs a lot easier fill in form. What is more important? A database with no faults or a database with as many records as possible? I think the second one.
Why is there not one box where you can copy paste all the tracks at once?
Today I tried to admit a Double CD Barcelona Raval Sassions no 2 and aftr half an hour work about 20 from 36 artists were not known on discogs. What does this mean? Not many contributions from Spain, English is not the main language and that's my main point:make it more user friendly and get much more contributions.
Or stay a website for a small club, but I'm gone than too because its too time consuming to put all the records that I have and that are not on discogs to admit. (my colection is not that weird but there's still a lot missing on Discogs)

manfromzaandam wrote:

I'm pretty new at discogs but I think it needs a lot easier fill in form. What is more important? A database with no faults or a database with as many records as possible? I think the second one.
Why is there not one box where you can copy paste all the tracks at once?
Today I tried to admit a Double CD Barcelona Raval Sassions no 2 and aftr half an hour work about 20 from 36 artists were not known on discogs. What does this mean? Not many contributions from Spain, English is not the main language and that's my main point:make it more user friendly and get much more contributions.
Or stay a website for a small club, but I'm gone than too because its too time consuming to put all the records that I have and that are not on discogs to admit. (my colection is not that weird but there's still a lot missing on Discogs)

manfromzaandam wrote:

I'm pretty new at discogs but I think it needs a lot easier fill in form. What is more important? A database with no faults or a database with as many records as possible? I think the second one.
Why is there not one box where you can copy paste all the tracks at once?
Today I tried to admit a Double CD Barcelona Raval Sassions no 2 and aftr half an hour work about 20 from 36 artists were not known on discogs. What does this mean? Not many contributions from Spain, English is not the main language and that's my main point:make it more user friendly and get much more contributions.
Or stay a website for a small club, but I'm gone than too because its too time consuming to put all the records that I have and that are not on discogs to admit. (my colection is not that weird but there's still a lot missing on Discogs)

manfromzaandam wrote:

He I sent it only once

LadyBlacktronika wrote:

Agreed.

LadyBlacktronika wrote:

Its about correct information. I agree that certain things that are hidden in the fill out form should be made more plain. However accuracy is very very important to me and most Oggers. Just like Wikipedia has rules and such to insure that the information is true and correct.

Its not just about having records listed either, its about having an accurate database that is cross referenced.

manfromzaandam wrote:

The price is that it stays a site for a small cultgroup,to be honest I find it more of a problem that so many records are still missing than that musician X played bass on track 3

makbo wrote:

You can submit a release with no credits at all (beyond artist).

Myriad wrote:

As makbo said, only the following fields are required for a basic submission:

•Main Artist
•Title
•Label / Catalog Number (These fields always required. If there is no label, use "Not On Label", if there is no catalog number, use "none," as seen here)
•Format (Full physical format descriptions are always required, for example Vinyl, 12".)
•Genres
◦Style is only required when using the Electronic genre
•Tracklisting

http://www.discogs.com/help/su...For_A_New_Submission

manfromzaandam wrote:

you.re missing thr point:filling in all the tracks is too time consuming,copy paste in one box would be much faster.
Only filling in the tracks took me about half an hour (okay it was a double CD).
If it takes too much time only diehards will contribute.

manfromzaandam wrote:

you.re missing thr point:filling in all the tracks is too time consuming,copy paste in one box would be much faster.
Only filling in the tracks took me about half an hour (okay it was a double CD).
If it takes too much time only diehards will contribute.

marcelrecords wrote:

There are 74.102 contributors to Discogs at the moment...
http://www.discogs.com/stats/contributors?start=74100


Submit singles...

jweijde wrote:

There might be 74102 contributors, but it's far more important how active they are. The vast majority of those 74102 are not regulars.

marcelrecords wrote:

Fortunately!

alone-in-aforest wrote:

new user how to alter my details postage contact details e.t.c
cheers. in grading why no EX?

alone-in-aforest wrote:

new user how to alter my details postage contact details e.t.c
cheers. in grading why no EX?

ahlbomper wrote:

the discogs grading scale is the goldmine grading scale http://www.discogs.com/help/mp-grading.html

to change settings, click on "settings" (top of screeen)
then click on "buying", change what you need & "Save information".

if you update directly after posting at forum it creates double-posts.

EDIT: if it's you seller setting that needs changing, click on selling instead of buying.

Axefield wrote:

1. Agree that a image correction thingy would be helpfull, it is used in so many websites, really easy. I would like that to have a cut function as well so when you upload a picture taken with a camera you can easily cut of the edges of the picture so you don't need to do that before uploading.

2. I don't agree with the automated capatalisation tool. Sometimes a word should not start with a cap on purpose, can be a language thing.

3. Have raised that topic several times too and made disbugs on some issues as well. There is room for improvement on that.

4. I prefer to be forced to handle one order at the time. It makes it harder to make a mistake, with checkboxes you are less likely to double check. I have noticed this with logistics and administration software at work. I would like more options on sorting of orders and purchases.

Overal number one 'what Discogs needs' is server improvement.

nerdfly wrote:

axefield - how often does a word NOT start with caps compared to how often it has to? auto caps would be a godsend for (pulling this % out of thin air) 95% of all submissions... as i say you can always keep what shouldn't start with a caps just the same way as you do now - by ticking the warning box...

Axefield wrote:

Well... as long as you can reverse that auto cap I guess it's ok but is that possible? Doesn't it than re-auto it or whatever? If that'd be the case it wouldn't be an approvement again.

ahlbomper wrote:

you should also be aware of this http://www.discogs.com/help/mp-uniquereleases.html

nerdfly wrote:

axefield - how often does a word NOT start with caps compared to how often it has to? auto caps would be a godsend for (pulling this % out of thin air) 95% of all submissions... as i say you can always keep what shouldn't start with a caps just the same way as you do now - by ticking the warning box...

ahlbomper wrote:

and if not ticking it, it automatically converts the data to the discogs standards when you click submit.

that would of course mean we can click submit without ticking the box.
(could that mess-up the systems view on the other warnings ? maybe something deeper had to be changed for it to work & not affect the other warnings ?)

nerdfly wrote:

sorry double post...

it could work like a spell check, you could auto capitalize everything then make changes, if needed, and submit after ticking the warning box. It's obviously of most use in the tracks/credits - the notes field, artist and label and other fields could be overlooked by it. I'm guessing those fields are the ones most likely to go against capitalization anyway. Or you could have tick boxes next to each field that you could tick or untick if you wanted them capitalized or not.

It would really give people the incentive to make more in depth submissions... the amount of work that goes into these 4 disc compilations with full artist credits submissions is insane and having auto capitalization would probably tempt more people to go the full monty - it would me!

Another option could be 'as-you-type' where a capital automatically shows after a space and you can press shift to keep the character small. Obviously this work best in the credits/tracks fields. The artist/label/cat# fields are not too hard to manually capitalize and are most likely to need all caps or no caps etc...

I've only been here a few months and really have very little idea about subs that totally go against the caps rule, so i'm only basing this on the submissions i've done... does anyone know of a sub where this idea would make life more difficult?

nerdfly wrote:

lINk tO fOlLowInG pOst: http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/topic/199190

manfromzaandam wrote:

[quote=jweijde][/quote]
and 74.000 is not even 1% of all record collectors in the world!

musicmann1 wrote:

I'd like to see just catalog number, label, format, title and country of issue being the minimum requirements for submitting. We can always add details later on. Still so many things not in the database and it takes so long to add new stuff at the moment.

I still think the potential for site site is enormous, but if it stays the way it is, it will only remain a site for elitists.
I really hope one day, most people will sell their stuff here instead of Ebay, but unless things change the site will probably get beaten by rateyourmusic and others and get left behind.

manfromzaandam wrote:

[quote=musicmann1][/quote]
I agree completely with you, this is a cult site. If they dont make it more user friendly it will stay that way.
I get no reaction on my suggestion to put all the titels in one box so you can copy paste.
And what about a fill in function or suggestion function so that you can see that there are more bands with the same name or aliasses?

manfromzaandam wrote:

[quote=musicmann1][/quote]
I agree completely with you, this is a cult site. If they dont make it more user friendly it will stay that way.
I get no reaction on my suggestion to put all the titels in one box so you can copy paste.
And what about a fill in function or suggestion function so that you can see that there are more bands with the same name or aliasses?

Kergillian wrote:

Country is far too contentious to be mandatory, IMO.

Main Artist and tracklisting are 100% a must for any release - especially for the purpose of uniqueness.

And how does it take so long to 'add new stuff'? I can sub a minimal sub in a minute or less.





Data correctness is the most important aspect of a database such as this. The database is useless if you have to sort through a quagmire to get information.

And believe me, there are enough issues with data corruption as it is. If many of us 'elitists' had our way, we would return to the moderation system - and if you think it's tough now, you should have tried life under the old system.




While the marketplace is an important aspect of Discogs it is, and shall always be, secondary to the database.




It's not a cult site at all - it's not the largest site out there, but traffic-wise (from users not registered) is far greater than you'd think.





I highly doubt it would be possible to implement. It would be difficult to be able to properly separate tracks - especially with odd track numbers and/or index tracks.

And you would still have to format the titles - not just for capitalization, but to make sure everything from the spacing to the apostrophes to the punctuation to the remix formatting is correct, and that no extraneous information is present.

It would likely take more time to edit and format the titles than to just type them in.

(And I don't know how it takes you a half hour to type in a tracklisting. Even with durations I can type out a double-CD tracklisting in less than a minute).




It exists. When you preview your submission, hover over the artist names and you'll see a list of alternatives.

manfromzaandam wrote:

well if somebody is wasting his time to tell me I should type Not for sale, free sampler instead of Free sampler, not for sale than yes this is a cult, repeating its matra about correctness and just not seeing the potential of this site.
As I said not 1% of recordcollectors is contributing and that will stay as long as this side is run this way.

Kergillian wrote:

You think that out of 75k people on the site there aren't going to be morons, idiots, trolls, and other ignorant, anal or obsessed people - like any other web community?

Just because someone makes a comment that seems overly anal to you does not make it a cult site. In fact, you will most likely not have any contact with the vast majority of users of this site.





How many record collectors have proper internet access?
How many record collectors have an interest in an online database?
How many record collectors are aware of the site's existence?
How many record collectors use this site but don't wish to register?
How many record collectors are interested in using the site but not interacting or contributing?
How many record collectors have any interest in contributing to this site at all - regardless of how easy or difficult it is to do so?

How many record collectors are there in the world?
How do you define 'collector'?

ahlbomper wrote:

that would mean you call more than 1/10 of world-population record collectors.

jweijde wrote:

How many tracks are on those cds then?
Oh, and I don't really get the point you're trying to make with all those questions about record collectors. Offcourse we will never attract all record collectors, but the more we do attract the better.
The point manfromzaandam is making is one I see more and more around submitters lately. People become disappointed in the site because things take too long (submitting+approval) or because of the voting system and the behaviour of some voters.


I do agree with this to some extent.

Kergillian wrote:

Of course the more we attract the better - but to start throwing around numbers like 'less than 1% of record collectors are contributing to Discogs' as though the only reason for this is that the site is 'a cult' and 'difficult to use' is ridiculous, IMO.

The point of those questions is to qualify his generalization.





Again: Voting means nothing. There is no 'approval'. Every submission is live immediately.

Compared to the mod system, this is paradise for mass submitters...





Maybe so - but making the site into a massive, open wiki with all data being questionable would defeat the purpose. It kills me to see how much this site's quality has deteriorated as it is.

manfromzaandam wrote:

[quote=ahlbomper][/quote]
7 januari 2009 Total worldpopulation 6,79 miljard, 10% is 679 milion, if 0,5% of collectors is on discogs than 100% is 15 milion so I don't know how you come to that conclusion.

All-Vinyl-Experience wrote:

4 more days and I'm a year old on 'Ogs - well happy B'day to me!


I'm still plodding through my collection and loving every minute. ( Thanks to NLK for some patient advice through the early listings.) It's not easy working to someone else's rules - nothing easy is really worth it is, just quicker! So, over the year I've also rediscovered loads of forgotten gems - and found some crap. I don't reckon I'll be alive when I finish as there's more music out there to be heard, bought, played, danced to, and filed to be found again...
Big club, small club, I don't care. The bottom line is, is it's about the music.
In a wistful mood...

manfromzaandam wrote:

Maybe so - but making the site into a massive, open whttp://www.discogs.com/help/fo...ic/198769#previewiki with all data being questionable would defeat the purpose. It kills me to see how much this site's quality has deteriorated as it is.

This is also from the correctness mantra cult , it kills me to see how many records are missing.
Nobody ask you to make it a wiki make the form simpler and faster to fill in and look at what people want and not only the ones who started it and want the world to stay the same forever.

jweijde wrote:

I know voting means nothing, but most (new) submitters don't seem to get it. I think that's mainly because there are still many traces of the old mod system in v4.

hmvh wrote:

So false information is OK with you? Add what you can, at your own pace, and do it as accurately as you can. What's the rush?



The form is filled in as fast as you can type.

What's so difficult about looking up the right label, an artist or more and filling in the track titles and copying off some cat#s and other minor things?



Out of the question. If that's what you consider useful to anyone including yourself, you've come to the wrong place.



Control-C + Control-V works quite well.

In fact, where exactly are you copying this information from, if I may ask?

manfromzaandam wrote:

[quote=jweijde][/quote]
Thats right,as a new user I havent got a clue who is reacting at my submission. I want to be useful so |I do what the guy/girl says but it makes me think why am I doing this anyway?

manfromzaandam wrote:

In fact, where exactly are you copying this information from, if I may ask?

Jesus Christ, thats another part of cults:paranoia.
Maybe you dont know but there many records that are not on this site that are easily found on the internet. Copy past from another site is quicker than typing the titels from the CD.
From this discussion I already notice that the correctness cult doesnt want changes.
I think only the linked info (artist,labeland maybe some I forget should be correct in the first place),the rest can be changed later.

ahlbomper wrote:

i missed a 0.
more than 1/100 of everybody is a record-collector?
(doesn't really matter)

what does matter is having good data. we don't want millions of duplicates & releases nobody can identify.
it is also important trying to make things easier. also for newer submitters, but not for any price.

manfromzaandam wrote:

what does matter is having good data. we don't want millions of duplicates & releases nobody can identify.
it is also important trying to make things easier. also for newer submitters, but not for any price.

Again the correctness mantra.

Kergillian wrote:

Considering how many billions of recordings have been released throughout history and how many millions are released every year, it doesn't matter how many contributors we have or how little information is acceptable - it's going to be a loooooooong time before this site ever comes even fractionally close to complete.




How is it not fast or simple to fill out?

And this site has evolved drastically from its inception. Imagine a site that couldn't even allow proper credits, that had no genres outside of Electronic (not even hip-hop or pop) and that didn't allow any form of digital release, with a moderation system that needed 5 yes votes before your release even appeared in the database!

That was how the site originally was.




Which is why so many of us are calling for the abolition - or at the very least, overhaul - of the voting system.




And do you OWN these records? Because if not, how do you know the information is legitimate?




So if the artist and label - and say the title and format for argument's and common sense's sake - are all that are mandatory, how do you know which version you have when you have an artist that releases several recordings of the same name? Or which version is which when you have 30 versions of a single record from different years, countries, masters, etc?

It has nothing to do with the 'correctness cult' but simple, common sense when creating a database that has so many releases and so much information pouring through it. You have to have certain basic tags to be able to identify the difference between various releases.

hmvh wrote:

Nope. Correctness is our credo. We stand by it. Nothing else will do.

If you want to enter any old crap online so the world can see it, you'd do best with a blog or go scribble on wikipedia.

PS: You might want to correct some of your submissions.

manfromzaandam wrote:

and in my counting its 1 on every 400 people but why is everybody here so bloody serious, it looks a bit like a meeting from the communist party, 1%, 5 % whatever, the point is that many many collectors are not on this site because its no fun to contribute.

ahlbomper wrote:

who does what ?

EDIT: clearer question.

hmvh wrote:

No, not communists, I believe the correct insult would be "grammar nazis".

Now please run along and have a look at the discussion at http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/topic/199319 and see what "incorrectness" can cause.

manfromzaandam wrote:

Nope. Correctness is our credo. We stand by it. Nothing else will do.

If you want to enter any old crap online so the world can see it, you'd do best with a blog or go scribble on wikipedia.

Why are you always saying the same, and always make changes ridicilous? And what do you mean by we? are you the owner of this site?
In the communist party they also never listened to other opinions.

ahlbomper wrote:

i have used "the bracket police" myself.

manfromzaandam wrote:

I give up, these people cant be helped, good luck with youre hobby site I hope it still exsist in 5 years Im off to an non communist site

manfromzaandam wrote:

Can anyone tell me how to delete my account?

ahlbomper wrote:

come on who is that fears a change of mind.
1 or more have tried to consider & answer all questions you have asked.

do you consider & answer the points or questions we make.

Kergillian wrote:

The vast majority of the active community. Which includes those who try to keep their collections on the site and those who use the marketplace and would prefer not to get the wrong versions of the release they purchase.

Kergillian wrote:

It's been going strong for almost 10 years now - I don't foresee it disappearing any time soon ;)





Wow that's extreme. You don't get the right piece of cak so you leave the party, huh?

Here you go: http://www.discogs.com/users/delete

kthxbye. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

manfromzaandam wrote:

You just dont get the point: all the submissions I made are in my possesion, I put a picture with it and all this people here do is moaning about correctness wich in 99% of the cases is about capitals or saying free sampler not for sale instead of the other way round. I made some mistakes with some bands in the beginning because I didn't know they had alliasses or there where bands that have the same name and of course I know that is vital information that can fuck up a database so I understand that that information must be wright.
All the cult people reacting here think Im lazy and want to put in wrong information.
The point is this site is so unfriendly to newcomers that I'm off already again.
If this happens a lot this site has no future.
And this is 2010: young kids dont have the patience to in a record in 10 minutes.
Almost all reactions are defencive:thats not a good way to make something better.

manfromzaandam wrote:

This is what I mean
Error:
Oops, there was an error when trying to delete this account.

manfromzaandam wrote:

And why do the we think this site still excist in five years?
There is somebody paying the bills and if not enough money comes in its end of the site, the we who think they own the site have nothing to say then.

ahlbomper wrote:

like other individuals you'll sometimes have to accept some things you don't agree with.

i want to hear other views on things.

i'm also happy being corrected if it means an improvement.

manfromzaandam wrote:

i'm also happy being corrected if it means an improvement.
Me too but the overall feeling here is very defensive (thats very human by the way) and I have no problem with the fact that a lot of people find it more important that all information is 100% correct (although thats impossible).
I think its not the best way to get much more people at the site
but after this discussion tonight I think its pretty useless to try to get something changed here because everybody here behaves like he is the owner of the site,
I have tried to get some discussion here but I'm pretty dissapointed in the reactions.

ahlbomper wrote:

did you correct me 1 or 2 times ?
(was it enough to prove the point that correctness matters ? even in a situation where it doesn't really matter)

nobody thinks the database can be 100% correct.
all us "owners" can only try our best (defensive statement)

what do you want from the discussion ?
if most don't agree it's not a good discussion ?
(maybe you can be a little more constructive?)

again, the database is still evolving. there are many things happening at the moment.
but i think & hope quality of the data will always be very important.

musicmann1 wrote:

I would rather the site had the basics of every release rather than BS details like who farted on a song etc.
The details can be filled in at a later date. If you agree that it will take years to even come near complete, then unfortunately as great as the site could be, something other than Discogs will more than likely supersede it. I was reading a forum on rateyourmusic which I am not a user of and people had criticism for this site and were bragging about stealing data for that site.
This is so much better than RYM, but this site runs the risk of being a Beta in a world of VHS.

musicmann1 wrote:

I also think the site needs to be more inclusive of others and have a friendlier environment. We all need to get the word out and reward contributor's somehow to make them want to contribute more.

musicmann1 wrote:

The database is important to me first and foremost, but there is no reason it couldn't be both. Unlike Ebay the details on releases here are much more descriptive and there is no reason this site couldn't be the premier site for buying and selling music over the internet. How good would it be if this was the one stop shop for buying music over the internet?
It could be that with the right direction.

ahlbomper wrote:

besides main-artist nobody is forced to add ANY credits (with a very few exceptions)
i also think it's more important trying to add some notes or something that makes the release as easy to identify as possible.


generally i think people are helpful on this site.
but no doubt it sometimes gets rough at the forums (but that's at least as often because of newer users as more established users tone/attitude i think)

but sometimes also the helpful people make mistakes.
& sometimes people are (half?) joking/having fun.

loukash wrote:

I guess that's what most people do submit anyway. The basic requirements for a correct submission are not that high. Anyone who can (*cough*) read and type should be able to submit a release within a few minutes while still conforming to the Discogs guidelines. (OK, provided the user has already figured out all the quirks of the current submission form. :)

But the good thing about Discogs is that you can include every "fart" you hear on a release, if you only want. And frankly, I do want. I'm not here to have "fun" (well, sometimes yes :). I want to be able to work with the data I'm submitting (and with the submissions from other users in my particular area of interest). Given my tempo and accuracy, it may take a few years until I've got my complete record collection all here, but for me it will pay. It already paid that I've been maintaining an offline record database for more that 15 years now - but that's a "closed ecosystem". Discogs allows me to put my records into a "global" context.

In that sense:


Yep. That's Discogs. And obviously that's what we the "Discogs Party comrades" are expecting from new members. ;)
It took me a few months to get used to it. I still have some reserve regarding certain practices and tendencies in terms of submitting or handling certain data, or regarding communication between users, but the overall benefits overweight the flaws by far. After wasting a couple of months on RYM, studying AMG, Wikipedia and other sites, I'd say that Discogs is the most advanced project of its kind that there is…

cheers

musicmann1 wrote:

I think it would help make things quicker when submitting if the tracks were already numbered for you, so you didn't have to add them manually.
Also, if you could be asked what you were listing. For instance CD/DVD, then the tracks would already be numbered for you in a correct format. It would also make everything more uniform.
That shouldn't be hard to implement.

jweijde wrote:

Well, in recent times I see more and more voters requesting submitters to provide credits.

Anyway, Discogs surely can use some improvements to the submission process.

9228289 wrote:

contribution:
there may be a reward for contribution work. how about 0,5% from all sales refound to contributors.
discogs-union:
I am sure from discogs side will there be no interest in any reward. So I feel there should be a representation settled with a person who sometimes goes to the discogs headquater with the authority to negotiate acting in the name of 74102 active discogs workers.
Let us set up a discogs-union.

Kergillian wrote:

It's not just recent times - there will always be voters who ask for unrequired information. If you don't wish to comply, simply say:

"No, sorry, that's not mandatory..."




Why would they possibly pay money to people who are willing to work for free? Nobody is forcing you to contribute. If you don't want to do so for free, don't do it ;)




What does this tell you? That a second-tier site with second-tier information has to rely on the better site to improve itself. In which case, it will always be a step behind ;)

9228289 wrote:

exactly this is one more point to set up a discogs-user-union.

musicmann1 wrote:

It doesn't have to be money, but it is in the website's interest to have happy users. Maybe every time you submit something you have a chance of winning free listings or a free gift voucher to spend here. Little things to promote contributing and to make people feel important goes a long way.
After all it is us guys that make this site. Without us, it is nothing.

buddahs_records wrote:

nobody was saying they have to pay those who are willing to work for free. i am not talking about money too (maybe creditpoints/ other fees on sellings/ icon behind the user-name... btw. this would be also nice to mark voters), but the site would benefit from those that are NOT willing to work for free for sure ;-) i know i would read less in the forums and spend my time on submissions. but for now, i don't have more records i want to sell through discogs, so i do not submit. i have records from my personal collection that are not entered in db, so i wait for s.b. else to enter them...

ahlbomper wrote:

maybe there's a way i don't see, but think that's impossible (or no advantage) for vinyl & cassette (media with 2 or more sides)
different number of tracks on the sides.
and if it's a cd it don't take long to type.
1
2
3
4
.
.

manfromzaandam wrote:

I checked Rate Your Music and I must say its much more userfriendly (e.g. guides in many differnet languages) and almost al entries I was making here were already there so I'm off to RYM.

loukash wrote:

You did notice that button at the bottom of the tracklisting form, didn't you…? :)
[Auto-number Tracks]

musicmann1 wrote:

That sucks, we don't want people leaving to go there. I hope you come back.

ahlbomper wrote:

don't know if you asked me.
i have seen it. not really noticed it. i have only submitted 1 non-vinyl.
so clicking that after creating the right number of tracks will fill in:
1
2
3
.
.
?

ahlbomper wrote:

here's a discussion on RYM about RYM Versus Discogs:
http://rateyourmusic.com/board...7&board_id=2&show=20

loukash wrote:

Yes, it will probably suit you better. (And I mean it. No insult intended.)


Why not? Everyone's free in their decision where to spend their time.
And hey, isn't it nice to have a choice? And isn't it nice that both sites are sort of competing? I consider the "competition" a Good Thing™.
(It's sort of like the old Mac vs. Win question: Mac OS X wouldn't be superior if it weren't for the real world dominance of Windows… ;)


I use it even for vinyl.
First I fill in the plain numbers to have a basic overview.
Then I add "A" for side A, then I overwrite the rest with B1, B2 etc.
Surely there could be a better solution (almost anything is programmable these days) but for most parts this suffices.

ahlbomper wrote:

but then you also have to first delete 5, 6, 7.... or when it's time for the b-side.

loukash wrote:

Caps Lock ON --> Click --> command-A (or whichever shortcut on other operating systems) --> B1 --> Tab-Tab-Tab --> command-A --> B2 --> Tab-Tab-Tab --> command-A --> B3 --> etc.

or (on notebooks where you don't need to waste time and energy to move your hand to the mouse and back on the keyboard)

Caps Lock ON --> Click --> command-A --> B1 --> click --> command-A --> B2 --> etc.

or (also on notebooks)

Caps Lock ON --> double-click (double-tap) --> B1 --> double-click --> B2 --> etc.

ahlbomper wrote:

maybe because some things are different on my keyboard, some of these decriptions i don't understand right now
(and i don't have to. but i will look at again & again anyway until i understand:)

didn't think about just double-clicking when i said you have to delete 1st.
maybe i can save a second or two doing it that way.

loukash wrote:

command-A is a Mac shortcut = control-A on the "other" operating systems… :)


In fact, I'd like to see something which RYM has implemeted long time ago:
There you can switch the tracklist form into a free text field, compose your tracklist as text (which means using all available bells and whistles of your plain text editor of choice, including e.g. regex) while using the pipe character | as the field delimiter. Then, with a click of a button, you can convert the plain text back to the tracklist form. (That said, RYM's tracklist form is VERY basic, of course…)

Kergillian wrote:

teehee. I loves mah Mac. :)

All-Vinyl-Experience wrote:

Surely, for those wanting to list Cd's/Dvd's or any of those new fangled things, why can't a simple barcode autofill be used and peel the data off another data base? [Pointless in my view but quick enough to satisfy the digital age that want it yesterday] We use it daily to list Cd's, Dvd's on the works site. It's quick, easy enough for any monkey to use and almost accurate!
Credits and farting can be added later.
Digital isn't my cuppa (nor Windows) - I liken it to Vodka which is for drinking, not thinking....
By the way...are policemen looking younger these days?!

Kergillian wrote:

The main reason why a barcode would not work would be that very often different versions of a release have the same barcode - you would still have to fill in a variety of mandatory information.

buddahs_records wrote:

FEE CHARGING BASED ON THE RANKS

9228289 wrote:

this is also nice thought
I still prefere:
contribution:
there may be a reward for contribution work. how about 0,5% from all sales-fees (=discogs profit) refound to contributors. In charge going are only submissions that were followed by sales by other discogs users. So when I sell a record not submitted by myself, i.e. 0,5% from the discogs fee will go to the submitter. this may also be refounded on discogs fees only (you pay less fee as seller or also as buyer). Now think, this will only benefit you when your submission causes a profit also for discogs!
And why? it is a motivation. And it also gives you feedback about the profit in relation to your work. I even felt motivated when I saw an item I added to discogs was sold (even without reward).
Umberto Tozzi - Gloria
:D

hmvh wrote:

And how do you think that database got created? Someone had to enter the information from somewhere by hand. The root source of all databases is manual input.



Yes, it could be if people would only stop moaning in forums and fixing the mistakes pointed out to them numerous times, like http://www.discogs.com/Various...1995/release/1924504 . Perhaps you'd like to lead the way?



So you go to the butcher and order a kilo of meat. He gives you 900g but charges you for the full kg. And you're OK with that because well... it's almost a kilo.

'nuff said.

buddahs_records wrote:

exactly my thoughts. i suggested this in another thread some time ago where i said i'ld pay up to 10% fees if this will be introduced. and yes, the site will definately benefit from this, because than the labels will start to submit here aswell...

musicmann1 wrote:

[quote=9228289][/quote]
This is a great idea. Hopefully Nik can implement something like this. People would be fighting to list new stuff in the hope of revenue.