Luká? Lalinský wrote: > >> Peoples homemade discids are cruft and I applaud anyone who takes >> the time to clean up cruft even when the cruft is not causing much >> damage. Some more practically inclined will think that it's a waste >> of time, but why vote no? > > Because it's reducing the usefulness of the database. There is no good > way to prove that a discid is homebrew (ie clasify what is 'cruft' and > what is not). There is the usual +2 seconds method, which I personally > consider questionable, but a simple script can check this much more > effectively than a bunch of editors. >
Don't forget that it's not just the +2 seconds issue. I've seen a lot of homebrew disc id's of discs which contain plain wrong tracks and thus linking completely different track lengths to tracks. Personally I see a disc id as just another bit of information. We automatically take over track lengths from disc id's when e.g. adding a new release. By not allowing homebrew disc id's to be added, we would only reduce the chance of wrong information. When we don't allow homebrew disc id's, it should also be allowed to remove homebrew disc id's. Granted, it's hard to identify homebrew disc id's with 100% accuracy all the time but so is identifying wrong information in the rest of the db in a lot of cases. In these situations, information often gets removed based on likeliness as well. Since MB is all about factual information, with the exception of tags, homebrew disc id's do not belong in the database imho. They are not a representation of the facts. It would be just like allowing people to add all their personal compilations as releases. Yours, Age _______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
