| |
bugjam
Registered: Apr 2003
Posts: 2589 |
Release id #16195 : Graphic/Sprite-Mega-Object-Konverter
Please delete - apparently the same as Graphic/Sprite-Mega-Object-Converter . |
|
| |
Seven
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 202 |
Rather interesting that we're deleting the older of the two entries and keep the one with the incorrect naming. |
| |
bugjam
Registered: Apr 2003
Posts: 2589 |
Well, actually both were not correctly named, as it is "Converter", not "Konverter". (I corrected the hyphens in the other one now.) And a locked entry with no download cannot be considered very useful IMHO. |
| |
Seven
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 202 |
Locking an entry _could_ have be done to prevent others from changing info about the release, the fact that that also includes locking the entry from uploads of a file might or might not be intentional.
I might not be up to date on current CSDb politics, but I'd find it rather strange if "locked entry" equals "create a second entry, upload the file there and then have an admin delete the original entry".
That being said, I can't help but wonder which of the honored admins figured that that'd be the way to go. |
| |
Acidchild
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 476 |
calm down, seven, rather upload the releases of which you've created entries..there are plenty of them with missing file. |
| |
bugjam
Registered: Apr 2003
Posts: 2589 |
Quote: Locking an entry _could_ have be done to prevent others from changing info about the release, the fact that that also includes locking the entry from uploads of a file might or might not be intentional.
I might not be up to date on current CSDb politics, but I'd find it rather strange if "locked entry" equals "create a second entry, upload the file there and then have an admin delete the original entry".
That being said, I can't help but wonder which of the honored admins figured that that'd be the way to go.
1. It was not me who created the other entry, I merely noticed the doubling by chance.
2. As I pointed out, not the _new_ entry was misspelled, but yours, so it was easy for the uploader to miss it.
At least for me, yes, it is the obvious way to go to delete the less complete entry, especially if it is locked. |
| |
Seven
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 202 |
Oh, I'm all calm, and regarding uploads of releases... if the overview in my profile is correct, most of the entries I created DO have downloads attached (either because I did so myself or somebody else added them in the meantime when I was too lazy to do so - thanks to those people), the ones that don't are mostly either commercial releases of scene-related groups (mainly X-Ample and Digital Excess, and files to those belong, as far as I understand the concept of the database, into crack entries of those releases) or have been added based on release lists (mostly Hitmen releases) because even Groepaz is still looking for the binaries of those. |
| |
Seven
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 202 |
Quote: 1. It was not me who created the other entry, I merely noticed the doubling by chance.
2. As I pointed out, not the _new_ entry was misspelled, but yours, so it was easy for the uploader to miss it.
At least for me, yes, it is the obvious way to go to delete the less complete entry, especially if it is locked.
I noticed that it wasn't you who created the duplicate entry, so my comment regarding that wasn't aimed at you.
As for the naming... the program was called "G/S-MEGA-KONVERT" on the Magic Disk64 issue it was released on (filename as well as in the Magic Disk64 Magazine section http://magicdisk.untergrund.net/md/MD8910/MD8910-UTILITIES-G+S-..), "GRAPHIC-SPRITE-MEGA-KONVERT" in the intro that came with it. The filename length restriction was obviously one of the factors why the name was cut short, but since it was released on a german disk mag and the "K" spelling was used for that reason, that's why I substituted the 'C' in the full name for the 'K' ... if all else fails, blame Thomas for spelling the name in the program itself wrong ;) |
| |
Seven
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 202 |
Noone's probably going to read this since noone's interested in a lame conversation about a 20 year old sprite converter entry, but I'd still like to pick up on the reasoning of deleting "less complete" entries, since I just though of it...
If a scener locks his scener entry and doesn't have his address added and no photo... shouldn't we create a new entry for the same scener with address and photo and delete his old entry? ;D |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11386 |
just look at the rules:
- if you lock an entry you are responsible for it beeing complete, and a download usually belongs to a complete entry.
- address and photo are considered private info and you shouldnt ever add it for anyone but yourself at all.
has been like that for several years now btw =P
and as for deleting this or that entry - i dont even get how you can get upset about it. what matters is that at the end one correct entry remains - and some entry does not weight more than another because it is older. i usually dont look at the date or at who created the entries at all in similar situations, because it simply doesnt matter. i just pick the one that seems more complete, end of story :)
|
| |
Seven
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 202 |
I have no idea how people get the impression that I'm upset about it, I just commented that I found that way of action rather interesting.
If anything, I see a problem with the way the entry lock functions.
I originally added all of our releases to the database back in 2002 and locked them because I didn't want anyone else to change the information about the release, which - we'll probably agree - is the reason why anyone would lock an entry. Back then CSDb didn't even have an upload feature and all you could do was provide a download link to another place on the web or an FTP server that happened to have the file - at the same time, back then, noone was really interested in hosting every single C64 release and all their different versions. Even if I _had_ tried to upload it to Digital Dungeon, it would've been deleted right in incoming as it was no SCS*TRC release and not the best trained version either.
Long story short: I didn't lock the entry to keep someone from adding a download link, I locked it to keep control over the information about the release. Somehow some of our commercial releases DID end up with a download file attached after all, despite the fact that they were (and still are) locked, and I guess that's just fine. Deleting my locked entry in favor of one that has a download link attached defeats the purpose that I personally saw in "locking" an entry though, and that's all there is to it.
Maybe we can fix the locking mechanism in CSDb V2, so that information and download links can be locked separately ;)
|
... 1 post hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| Previous - 1 | 2 - Next |
