[CSDb] - User Forums - Pointless rule-enforcement on CSdb

Welcome to our latest new user Nicron ! (Registered 2024-05-21)

You are not logged in - nap

CSDb User Forums

Forums > CSDb Feedback > Pointless rule-enforcement on CSdb

2010-11-09 12:26

DeeKay

Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 362

Pointless rule-enforcement on CSdb

Okay, you all know how I like CSDb-drama, but usually I don't create any myself, but in this case Groepaz anal-ness about CSDb-rules simply forces me to:

Here's the story: We released the PAL/NTSC version of the NUFLI editor. It pretty much only included the new universal displayer, so we kept everything else the same. However, as I noticed on X while working on Electric's Tiger, it got somehow corrupted, meaning that it would CRASH and DESTROY your picture when you drew with sprites under certain circumstances. I notified Crossbow and he confirmed it and started working on a fixed version, which i tested extensively to make sure it's all A-ok (that's v1.12)

Okay, so I approached Groepaz and asked how to best solve the problem that there's a BROKEN version of our NUFLI editor on CSDb that actually DESTROYS images! I was really willing to play by the rules (=not deleting it and not stealthily replacing it with a fixed version), but whatever I suggested and did (renaming it to "Buggy-ed" so people wouldn't find it, using the "this file is corrupted" feature in the file dialogue), he said it's all not allowed and reversed anything I would try. Now I'm locked out of our own tool and can't edit it, great. Talking about admin power abuse... I dunno what his problem is seriously, sometimes he just loves to piss people off for no reason whatsoever...

Okay, so now there's still the broken v1.11 online which people can happily download. But why the FUCK would anyone want a broken version of a tool that DESTROYS your picture? This is not some 90% party version of a Demo, so what's the fucking point? Okay, so we released it corrupted, our bad. But should we be punished indefinately for it when we FIXED it meanwhile? And why can't I simply use the "this file is corrupted" feature? What's the point being anal about THAT, too? I mean - you CAN still download it and masturbate over a disfunctional c64 tool if that's your sexual preference, but at least you'll know it's br0ken! The *only* hint that it's broken is in the comments, which thank god GroeFaZ didn't delete...

Good v1.12: NUFLI Editor V1.12
Bad v1.11: NUFLI Editor V1.11 [broken]

... 86 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....

2010-11-09 14:11

chatGPZ

Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11147

Quote:

Really, if you can't bend the holy CSDb rules even in cases like that, accept my deepest condolences. This is silly, and if you lost touch to reality that much to not know when to turn a blind eye to something you really should go out and take a walk for a change.

please elaborate how making sure a certain something in the database means exactly what its supposed to mean can be silly. especially in a case like this, where it is about a simple yes/no question.

to make it clear again: "this image is corrupted" is a feature ment for those people who do nothing but look around csdb and add/fix/complete a lot of entries (you know who you are). it is NOT for users to know wether a certain release works or not. and as such, the information "this release is somehow broken, for whatever reason" is completely irrelevant, because the people adding/fixing entries need to know wether another working version of this release may eventually exist. and as a result marking something as corrupted which was simply broken from the start and was never released in working form is misleading and contraproductive.

2010-11-09 14:25

Mr. SID

Registered: Jan 2003
Posts: 423

What about the option of marking a release as "deprecated"?
Meaning: "Hey, it's archived, you can still download it, knock yourself out with it, but you should also know that there's a newer version, which is probably much better...".
Archive saved, Release platform improved, everybody wins, right?

2010-11-09 14:29

chatGPZ

Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11147

ofcourse, that would be an option

2010-11-09 14:40

daison

Registered: May 2005
Posts: 90

but...?

2010-11-09 14:46

chatGPZ

Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11147

same as always, perff is very busy these days (and completely gone for a while due to personal reasons atm) and he is the one who would implement this stuff. and there already is a long list of TODOs aswell :)

2010-11-09 15:25

Oswald

Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5028

Quote: Quote:
Really, if you can't bend the holy CSDb rules even in cases like that, accept my deepest condolences. This is silly, and if you lost touch to reality that much to not know when to turn a blind eye to something you really should go out and take a walk for a change.

please elaborate how making sure a certain something in the database means exactly what its supposed to mean can be silly. especially in a case like this, where it is about a simple yes/no question.

to make it clear again: "this image is corrupted" is a feature ment for those people who do nothing but look around csdb and add/fix/complete a lot of entries (you know who you are). it is NOT for users to know wether a certain release works or not. and as such, the information "this release is somehow broken, for whatever reason" is completely irrelevant, because the people adding/fixing entries need to know wether another working version of this release may eventually exist. and as a result marking something as corrupted which was simply broken from the start and was never released in working form is misleading and contraproductive.

Lengthy strawman. Steppe has lead.

2010-11-09 15:40

Frantic

Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1629

Lamers!

2010-11-09 15:47

DeeKay

Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 362

Quoting Groepaz

and because there are still ways to bend the rules and get away with it, we should completely remove them! ofcourse.

Oh my, the good old Lunatic Fringe nonsense...

LUNATIC FRINGE:
If a person is making an imaginative or novel point, the approach here is to push the idea to a radical extreme generally agreed to be bad.

Now, where exactly did I say "completely remove them" or *anything* even *hinting* in that direction?

CSDb-admins should be humans, not act like programs...

Quote:

no, infact what you say are the reasons why we add local copies of every file if we stumble about external-link only entries. and its the reason why links to binaries are beeing logged and binaries are never deleted for real. you can obviously always be sneaky - but dont complain if someone notices.

Yeah, "notice", LOL, right... I was stupid enough to think that asking you for help was the better approach, which implanted the buggy NUFLI editor firmly onto your Gestapo-Radar! <:-) Sorry, won't happen again!...

2010-11-09 16:25

Rough
Account closed

Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1829

Problem is that CSDb in fact has become the main release site for C64 stuff although that is not its original and real purpose, a database. Databases store everything, even bugged releases, but that has been said above.

I'd say: add info on the file being buggy into the entry title as everyone will see that; unlike reading comments.

2010-11-09 16:56

chatGPZ

Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11147

<Post edited by chatGPZ on 9/11-2010 18:40>

Quote:

Yeah, "notice", LOL, right... I was stupid enough to think that asking you for help was the better approach, which implanted the buggy NUFLI editor firmly onto your Gestapo-Radar! <:-)

sorry to disappoint you, but recently edited and/or deleted entries are beeing presented to every moderator in a regular list, and everyone eventually goes through it and checks stuff randomly.

and yes sure, asking what to do, and then when you get told that what you want to do doesnt comply with the rules you ignore that and do what you want anyway, and that repeatedly even after beeing told to stop - thats stupid enough. its also a good way to ensure that future edits/deletions will get checked more likely than before, btw =P

Quote:

Problem is that CSDb in fact has become the main release site for C64 stuff although that is not its original and real purpose, a database.

yep, indeed. and as for that, i still like the idea of not adding anything to csdb that wasnt released elsewhere :)

Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 - Next

Refresh

Subscribe to this thread:

You need to be logged in to post in the forum.

Search the forum:
Search for in
All times are CET.

Search CSDb

Advanced

Users Online

Moloch/TRIAD
Guests online: 63

Top Demos

1 Next Level  (9.8)
2 13:37  (9.7)
3 Mojo  (9.7)
4 Coma Light 13  (9.7)
5 Edge of Disgrace  (9.6)
6 No Bounds  (9.6)
7 Comaland 100%  (9.6)
8 Uncensored  (9.6)
9 Bromance  (9.5)
10 Lunatico  (9.5)

Top onefile Demos

1 Layers  (9.6)
2 It's More Fun to Com..  (9.6)
3 Cubic Dream  (9.6)
4 Party Elk 2  (9.6)
5 Copper Booze  (9.6)
6 TRSAC, Gabber & Pebe..  (9.5)
7 Rainbow Connection  (9.5)
8 Dawnfall V1.1  (9.5)
9 Quadrants  (9.5)
10 Daah, Those Acid Pil..  (9.5)

Top Groups

1 Oxyron  (9.3)
2 Booze Design  (9.3)
3 Censor Design  (9.3)
4 Crest  (9.3)
5 Performers  (9.3)

Top Original Suppliers

1 Black Beard  (9.7)
2 Derbyshire Ram  (9.5)
3 hedning  (9.2)
4 Baracuda  (9.1)
5 Jazzcat  (8.6)

Page generated in: 0.224 sec.