I too want to be a buddy voter

I've been an ogger for four years now and I have always wondered what the trigger thing is about buddy voting. Is it philosophy? Is it loyalty? is it (rank) vanity? Is it addiction?

Well, addiction's one thing for shure, I can tell, as there are oggers doing it all over again and again.

It must be addictive because it takes a child to realize that buddy voting has a harmful effect on the database, so buddy voting must fullfil something of higher priority than database quality to the buddies.

Loyalty could be it, as I have noticed one particular group of buddies voting on each others subs not only on a regular basis but constantly and quickly. Once one of the buddies have done an edit, instantly within hours or a single day one of the buddies goes to the computer takes on the brotherhood blindfold and starts the C voting.

Take this example:
http://discogs.versitio.com/history?release=4413625#latest
(Please let this unedited for as long as this thread is active)

The day after one of the buddies does an edit, the correct vote is given as usual. Several things can be observed.

First, Righteous Brothers link with no releases would ring a bell to experienced oggers (Perhaps that last editor was less cautious, expecting any edit to be correct due the the many correct votes given to him). And third, if the voter had taken the time to look at the submission history - and not just the name tagged to the last line in it - another alarm should've rung as the submissions history is all about problems with incorrect artist links in the sub. A obvious reason to check the links before voting correct.

But then again, what do I understand about buddy voting.

Therefor I invite the of this particular buddy group to come to this thread and tell us all the benefits and postive sides of buddy voting. What the trigger is too. Since you have done this for so long - and continue regardless of management action - let all of us in on this rite.

Who knows - maybe more of us well understand the joys of corrupting the database. Maybe I too never wanted to be a weatherforecaster, a lumberjack or a database quireboy. Maybe I too want to be a buddy voter.

Maybe your buddies can answer that ;)

I've just added a couple of requests in the History. Please do not count me in on the buddy system.

Maybe one can hire a buddy voter, for a small fee?

Hieronymus2001
Maybe one can hire a buddy voter, for a small fee?

Going by your Avatar we might be 'buddy-related'?
(No prob 2 men loving one another, or voting in unison, it's when bottoms get involved it becomes complex)

ha ha..strangely alike avatars....and even counting in the "blank" for Clogwhistle here you all look like buddys....

Thank you. But a irritating problem this is for sure. Im not very experienced as voter, but often find stuff voted correct -that obviously havent been checked (a lot), and I often suspect a friendly vote in speed have been made.

Who genuinely cares if their work gets voted? Particularly when they are experienced s with an average at a point which means falling into the CIP for anything other than misconduct is very, very unlikely?

Unless there are problems with the votes, then that's not a matter for a public moan, but a private conversation with evidence sent to management.

I see no benefit of such public complaint other than to incite (dare I say 'flame'?) some sort of reaction from those buddys. Anyway, if people have friends, more power to them.

Gundozer
Im not very experienced as voter, but often find stuff voted correct -that obviously havent been checked (a lot)

If in doubt, leave it out & make a comment (or none at all & move on)
TBH, any 'buddies' I may be accused of having are harder taskmasters than ing voting ships in the night.

Eviltoastman
no benefit of such public complaint other than to incite

indeed, beware of the swing of the pendulum!

Eviltoastman
Who genuinely cares if their work gets voted? Particularly when they are experienced s with an average at a point which means falling into the CIP for anything other than misconduct is very, very unlikely?

Exactly. That's why I'm inviting these buddies to come forward and make some sense to why they keep on C-voting incorrect edits by their buddies. I'm curious for real to their reasoning as it makes no sense in other peoples world. Voting doesn't give any rank points. All it does it making the pending submissions number go down. Why is that worth corrupting the database for?

Eviltoastman
Unless there are problems with the votes, then that's not a matter for a public moan

I'm not calling for an explanation on correct votes. The above example is just one of many incorrect votes that I have come across made by this group., like these:
http://discogs.versitio.com/history?label=Best+Of+The+Best#latest
http://discogs.versitio.com/history?release=3065394#latest
(On the latter the C vote by a buddy was eliminted due to later edits, but look at the history)

Eviltoastman
I see no benefit of such public complaint other than to incite (dare I say 'flame'?) some sort of reaction from those buddys

Indeed I'm trying to "flame" a reaction, but a benefitial one. Let us in on what the rite or reasoning is on what you are doing to our database, buddies? Enlighten the rest of us!

Eviltoastman
Unless there are problems with the votes, then that's not a matter for a public moan

There's problems with the votes within the group all the time:
http://discogs.versitio.com/history?release=3375646#latest
Take a look at the images: There's no justification for the label. It's a self-release. Limited Edition tag most likely unjustified.

These examples from thr group keeps popping up. There's 4,5M subs. How come we so frequently come across this group and their many examples on bad votes?

There is absolutely nothing in the above sub you can prove as "bad". The LE tag may be the only questionable thing, but that's hardly a big issue.

Let people vote according to their abilities. If the vote is wrong, balance it with a more accurate vote. If the vote is clearly malicious/against the rules, report it.

Public witch hunts and bitchfests accomplish nothing and are a waste of energy.

StaticGuru
Public witch hunts and bitchfests accomplish nothing and are a waste of energy.

Yeah, and we seem to be getting more of these hunts lately... they are not always useless (one can learn from them sometimes), but there is usually something personal behind them that leaves one feeling an ulterior agenda is in play.

gboe
Why is that worth corrupting the database for?

I take issue with the logic here a bit. The edits themselves "corrupt" the database (if you want to use that term) and they go live immediately whether they're voted Correct or not. A vote (of any kind) does not make it any easier or any harder to fix any errors. All the DQR does is give one an indication that it was reviewed by someone other than the subber (let's hope!) and their impression of the correctness of the data and its adherence to the guidelines.

swagski
TBH, any 'buddies' I may be accused of having are harder taskmasters than ing voting ships in the night.

This has been exactly my experience as well.

EDIT: Clarified first point a bit.

StaticGuru
There is absolutely nothing in the above sub you can prove as "bad"

Am I wrong here? Aren't subs supposed to be provable good when submitted and proven good when voted C?

StaticGuru
Public witch hunts and bitchfests

ChampionJames
we seem to be getting more of these hunts lately

So when messaging a systematic data corruption problem to the Forum we should focus on the messenger? In witch hunts the witches arent real and the hunters are the real offenders, .

StaticGuru
Let people vote according to their abilities

Not quite. Voting does aquire a certain basic level of abilities as ot is a right you earn once Discogs expects you to have reached minimum level of abilities. Going through your buddys pendings and voting everything correct without checking is below that level

swagski
TBH, any 'buddies' I may be accused of having are harder taskmasters than ing voting ships in the night.

Buddy voting can be high end peer review as well as data corrupting mindlessness. There's a centered group of high rank oggers that votes a lot on each others subs, but I have never spotted one mistaken C vote among those - and they don't have that 0 pendings and instant C vote on everything by the buddies pattern that the Netherlands centered group has. The dutch group is generally very skilled contributors but unfortunately corruptingly biased voters
ing ships or buddies, it's the quality of the votes that it's all about.

I don't think it's witch hunting to say "come to the forum, be open about this and talk to us". I think we all know that management talks to at least some in this group about the problem, even CIP's some, so this is a different approach to a recognized but ongoing problem.

I'm asking this group to explain themselves, to reason for the pattern. Asking to hear their case is not hardly alike a witch hunt

gboe
So when messaging a systematic data corruption problem to the Forum we should focus on the messenger?

Nobody's really focusing on you. I (and it seems like some others) question the utility of bringing this up when none of us can really do anything about it. The websubbers hunt that happened recently suffered from much the same problem... a lot of conjecture and suspicion and nothing that any s can do to improve it. It's for management.

gboe
I think we all know that management talks to at least some in this group about the problem, even CIP's some, so this is a different approach to a recognized but ongoing problem.

What are we going to accomplish here that management can't? If you disagree with the DQR on those subs, then you're free and encouraged to vote your own assessment. If you feel voting privileges are being abused, then about it. Little to be gained by any of us here, as far as I can see.

ChampionJames
If you disagree with the DQR on those subs, then you're free and encouraged to vote your own assessment. If you feel voting privileges are being abused, then about it. Little to be gained by any of us here, as far as I can see.

Fully agree with the above.
Besides, voting doesn't really mean anything these days. What's Correct today needs votes or changes tomorrow. It would have been different if 'Correct' was some kind of end state that really meant no changes would be needed or possible anymore.
There are lots of items in the database that are voted Correct but still need changes. Take for example those legacy labels. I also regularly come across items that are voted Correct recently but still contain errors. This is not something that only happens to "buddy voters".

gboe
Going through your buddys pendings and voting everything correct without checking is below that level

Like I already said, voters like this should be reported.

gboe
Am I wrong here? Aren't subs supposed to be provable good when submitted and proven good when voted C?

Everything is submitted exactly as it appears on those images, with the exception of the LE tag. I don't know what possible other proof there could be.

jweijde
Besides, voting doesn't really mean anything these days. What's Correct today needs votes or changes tomorrow. It would have been different if 'Correct' was some kind of end state that really meant no changes would be needed or possible anymore.

Absolutely. I agree with the sentiment here and with what James and Mystery have said but particularly Jweijde's quote here.

The database is constantly in flux, there'sno fixed point and one can only vote according to the guidelines and forums advice given at that particular point.

My experience of "buddy" votes if you want to call it that (are we really "buddies"?) is that no one questions points in my subs quite like those who are familiar with my subs does. You may want to question why "buddy voting" occurs. Some people attract voters naturally, because their submissions are generally of a high quality, are clear and are easy to work through and through a familiarity can work with the subbers patterns and spot errors more easily. Some are predisposed to take the time to check the work of those who have been agreeable with them on previous occasions - this does not mean these individuals court each others votes or that they are buddies or that there's collusion.

All I'm getting out of this is that age old argument between children:

"Why did you bite Max, Tim?"
"Because Max won't play with me, he plays with Dan"

I'm finding it desperately hard not to think of this thread in these .

Eviltoastman
All I'm getting out of this is that age old argument between children:

"Why did you bite Max, Tim?"
"Because Max won't play with me, he plays with Dan"

I completely agree!

High rank points, voting average and pending submission queue are factors on which we deem each others experience and ability. High numbers and statistics commands respect, - thus less experienced s will be reluctant to alter edits from such an . Likewise - I think - even experienced s may be reluctant to correct releases with a C - or even a CC vote. That in fact can be counter productive.

I see only one practical reason for voting, - it's the only way to make a new artist profile editable. Which by the way is very annoying.

Small pointless edits are annoying as well. Amending 'Album' without doing other obvious needed edits (Linking un-linked credit roles now being linkable / amending studio mentioned in release notes to the LCCN section / 'Saxophone [Alto]' to 'Alto Saxophone' / 'Other' to 'Mastering SID Code' in BaOI) aren't very productive. Then getting a C-vote from a buddy seems over the top.

I too wonder what the trigger is, and I had hoped for an answer.

Eviltoastman
All I'm getting out of this is that age old argument between children:
"Why did you bite Max, Tim?"
"Because Max won't play with me, he plays with Dan"
I'm finding it desperately hard not to think of this thread in these .

You are free to use whatever personal range of psychological reference material that best enlightens your mind. I'm having a hard time finding out why one has to be desparate not to see that I'm not applying for buddy voters hip.

It's quite obvious I'm not jealous but trying to smoke out this group of buddy voters and nothing else.

But it does seem I have trouble finding people to play "Critizise incorrect buddy C votes" with. That is now - unexpectedly - in my psychological reference material.

gboe
There's problems with the votes within the group all the time:
http://discogs.versitio.com/history?release=3375646#latest
Take a look at the images: There's no justification for the label. It's a self-release. Limited Edition tag most likely unjustified

StaticGuru
There is absolutely nothing in the above sub you can prove as "bad". The LE tag may be the only questionable thing, but that's hardly a big issue.

1. Why is this particular sub brought to attention here, when it has nothing to do with the actual content of this topic?

2. Why wasn't I ed when my sub was apparently brought up here? That way I could have gotten the opportunity to react if I felt that was neccessary. I happen to bump into this now by accident.

3. Please understand that this sub was added by me more than a year ago, when I didn't yet knew what was the best way to add self-released records. I know that now for a long time.

4. The 'Limited Edition' tag is valid IMO.
It's a recording of my own group. This album was recorded during the CD-presentation of our CD, and only the people who attended that could order the CD. The quantity of CD's made was exactly the quantity of the people who ordered it, which makes it quite limited IMO.

5. Apart from the comment on the label (which was questionable) and the comment on the 'Limited Edition' tag (which was incorrect), there was nothing to say about the sub, thus making the CV correct IMO.

6. I am not part of any buddy voting group (which isn't even a bad thing per se). In fact I can't even vote at the moment.

7. Why again this witchhunt?

7 - Exodus 20:17 may offer an answer.

JeroenG8
1. Why is this particular sub brought to attention here, when it has nothing to do with the actual content of this topic?
2. Why wasn't I ed when my sub was apparently brought up here? That way I could have gotten the opportunity to react if I felt that was neccessary. I happen to bump into this now by accident.

It's the quality of the vote that was on the agenda, not the submission apart from the vote.

JeroenG8
3. Please understand that this sub was added by me more than a year ago, when I didn't yet knew what was the best way to add self-released records

That is understandable - but again, the voter should know

JeroenG8
The 'Limited Edition' tag is valid IMO.

Again, how was that justified in the sub so that the voter could vote it correct?

JeroenG8
the comment on the label (which was questionable)

In that case why did you change the label into self-release a short while ago?
http://discogs.versitio.com/history?release=3375646#latest

JeroenG8
Why again this witchhunt?

It's not a witch hunt. Witches aren't real. The problem with incorrect votes among an extremely tight connected group of people on the other hand is very real. The above example shows so.

Eviltoastman
7 - Exodus 20:17 may offer an answer.

I believe that's from the same script that offers a clever answer on why you can't rollerskate on saturdays.

gboe
JeroenG8
the comment on the label (which was questionable)

In that case why did you change the label into self-release a short while ago?
http://discogs.versitio.com/history?release=3375646#latest

I changed it because I learned by now that usually these kind of releases are set to 'Not On Label' and someone pointed me to that in the submission history. But that doesn't mean that the old way is totally incorrect. And since it's 'my sub' (as in: nobody has touched it yet) I am free to change anything I want as long as it's correct.
The 'questionable' tag wasn't given by me, but by someone else in this topic. I wasn't made aware of this topic, so I didn't react until 1 hour ago.

Eviltoastman
Exodus 20:17 may offer an answer.

My 10 yr old son saw that written down for the first time on Sunday & laughed heartily at the - covet thy neighbours ass - bit. LOL

gboe
I believe that's from the same script that offers a clever answer on why you can't rollerskate on saturdays.

Well, I can't rollerskate at all, so that doesn't say anything ;-)

JeroenG8
I am not part of any buddy voting group (which isn't even a bad thing per se). In fact I can't even vote at the moment.

You shure do relate a lot to the group. I took a random pick from your contributions.
http://discogs.versitio.com/releases_contributed?=JeroenG8

First random pick::
http://discogs.versitio.com/history?release=3369358#latest
two of the alliance , one as a voter, + you.
Sub seems fine, vote too.

Second random pick. Same voter as previous sub and as on the sub brought up earlier:
http://discogs.versitio.com/history?release=4289202#latest
Instantly after your edit it was voted correct - although a voter should have noticed that a release tagged BIEM/Stemra could indicate Netherlands rather than Europe. If the voter had taken a look at the master release:
http://discogs.versitio.com/Ace-Of-Base-All-That-She-Wants/master/33334
it's quite clear that this release came in UK, Scandinavian, German and a lot of other nation specific versions making Stemra=Europe very unlikely - at least unlikely enough to not vote it correct on the available info. My instinct as a voter made me check the draft to see if the country tag was a draft left over: Ace Of Base - All That She Wants. There you go. Indeed looks more well tagged for Europe. It took seconds and two clicks to find out what should've been a comment or a question rather than a C vote - which your sub got.

I'm pretty shure I will find the pattern if I took a 3rd, 4th or whatever pick.

It took one random pick to find you related to the buddies and two picks to find a bad vote from one of the buddies. You might not have been officially invited but you shure are at the party.

The point is - as this is happening again and again within the group, this appears not to be a slip of judgement but a blind automatization of C votes within the group.

And - to eliminate that attack: I didn't start this thread to eliminate a wrong country tag. It's the system that generated this bad C vote and once again contributed to the corruption of data that is on the agenda.

gboe
t's the system that generated this bad C vote and once again contributed to the corruption of data that is on the agenda.

And again, the data is corrupted by editors, not by voters...

ChampionJames
the data is corrupted by editors, not by voters...

We should expect more from controllers than suppliers

I seem to begin to have comments from the voting buddies. Unfortunately not here in the threads. You can follow the debate here:
http://discogs.versitio.com/history?release=4168138#latest
http://discogs.versitio.com/history?release=1811821#latest
and
http://discogs.versitio.com/history?release=4393789#latest

Who cares about votes these days?
You add or edit something and then simply move on.

It was much more annoying when discogs still had the moderation system, when you actually needed votes in order to submit/change something else.
Only to find out that many s where constantly voting eachother's submissions while the "ordinary folks" were just waiting in the queues.
The only way to avoid that was to become a yourself. Ha! The irony.

I'm really bothered to read these issues every day, someone started and now continue other, but you do not have anything to do?
I spend 10-15 hours a day to create new entries, they do here, do not argue every day of the year on these votes buddys, I seem to be in kindergarten, maybe because I'm too old?
Topic public, but also SR to report a wrong vote, all to lose the privilege of voting to many voters, in a climate like the Gestapo, this is ridiculous.
Put new releases instead of going to seek the votes wrong.

ChampionJames
And again, the data is corrupted by editors, not by voters...

that might be right in some ways.
but the votes are for the quality of data & when some not correct data is voted correct that can in some cases lead to more mistakes (duplicates. or maybe in some cases wrong data left untouched by people...).
in some cases it might not make a big long term difference, & most people will make some mistakes & occassionally be too careless, also when voting. but the full data & (especially most recent) sub-history should as a rule be checked as the system is now.

i do seeing some cases where i have wondered about some correct or c&c votes. including 1 where i had written a comment about a mistake on a correct voted sub which had then been overlooked in a following edit. then the sub was voted correct again by same voter, still with the mistake in the data i had pointed out.
(when i then commented on that mistake again, it was fixed)
i don't which sub or which submitter or voter it was, but it was some who made a lot of submissions & votes. it's possible they are sometimes a bit too quick (if doing a lot of edits & votes in a period it might be easier to go over some too quick!)

is it this time of the year again?

syke
is it this time of the year again?

What's next? Someone moaning about the caps rule? *snort*

gboe
I seem to begin to have comments from the voting buddies. Unfortunately not here in the threads. You can follow the debate here:
http://discogs.versitio.com/history?release=4168138#latest

Surely Mr...... is overstepping the line here? If this kind of petty behaviour, spamming the edit history, isn't against the rules, it should be!

gboe
It took seconds and two clicks to find out what should've been a comment or a question rather than a C vote - which your sub got.

gboe
Same voter as previous sub and as on the sub brought up earlier:
http://discogs.versitio.com/history?release=4289202#latest
Instantly after your edit it was voted correct - although a voter should have noticed that a release tagged BIEM/Stemra could indicate Netherlands rather than Europe

Given that it has the logo of a Swedish label and an (originally) German label that was owned by Polygram, a record company with head office in the Netherlands. The disc was made in and has German and English copyright texts.
How likely is it really that this is a Dutch release?
Compare it to Ace Of Base - Happy Nation. This has BIEM/STEMRA too, but has a French distribution code and is marketed by a French company. There's also a 'French' distribution code. Yet the release was available in the Netherlands too.
I have listed it as a French release but I'm tempted to change it.

gboe
It took seconds and two clicks to find out what should've been a comment or a question rather than a C vote - which your sub got.

I don't really see why this can't be Correct. Afterall, determining the exact country is quite difficult for these releases and Netherlands is still in Europe.
The "country = intended market" is just very fuzzy.

gboe
It took one random pick to find you related to the buddies and two picks to find a bad vote from one of the buddies. You might not have been officially invited but you shure are at the party.

You're just looking for reasons and see things as examples of 'incorrect buddy voting' while there may be nothing wrong with those votes at all. To me, the above example atleast is not an example of bad voting. You may be uncomfortable with that Correct vote but that doesn't mean it's incorrect.

Vinyl.Score
Surely Mr...... is overstepping the line here?

Overstepping what line? I see nothing wrong with a little on-topic discussion in a release history as long as it doesn't drag on.

syke
is it this time of the year again?

I need some guidence I see. At what exactl time of year then is a group of people systematically corrupting data for so far still opaque reasons a releavnt topic in the Forum?

StaticGuru
What's next? Someone moaning about the caps rule? *snort*

More than slightly different. Violating caps rules isn't gonna get you banned from Discogs like two of this voting alliance got.

Given the issues generally found worthy in this forum I'm quite puzzled that so many experienced rather than getting into the debate tries to kill it by belittleling it.

This thread certainly is up for the award of the most belittled thread opener of the year. I'm beginning not to wonder why.

You stun me

gboe
At what exactl time of year then is a group of people systematically corrupting data for so far still opaque reasons a releavnt topic in the Forum?

Again, this seems an overstatement. The data is not corrupted by voting; in order to be voted on, the data has to be in place first. Correct votes do absolutely nothing to alter the state of data except in the case of being able to edit new profile entries, but those can be corrected again like anything else. The way you've phrased this, with "systematically" also makes it seem like this so-called "corruption" is being done with malicious intent, which is a strong allegation, basically an accusation of vandalism.

gboe
Violating caps rules isn't gonna get you banned from Discogs like two of this voting alliance got.

Again once again, banning and other forms of discipline/regulation are for management to ister. What on earth do you wish for any of us here in the forums to do? Or is it just that you want a public burning and humiliation of a group of s and you're frustrated they won't walk themselves in here onto the scaffold for you?

gboe
Given the issues generally found worthy in this forum I'm quite puzzled that so many experienced rather than getting into the debate tries to kill it by belittleling it.

Most of us seem to realize that nothing productive can come out of such a thread. None of us have the power to regulate the voting behavior of others. It's for management.

gboe
This thread certainly is up for the award of the most belittled thread opener of the year. I'm beginning not to wonder why.

You stun me

I have no involvement with any of the s you've pointed to as part of this "voting group," if that's the allegation. I'm simply of the opinion that this hunt, like the websubber hunt, is fruitless for the forums. It's for management. For management.

ChampionJames
The data is not corrupted by voting

A vote is data itself. A vote is a classification of the data it's a vote on. Thereby a misplaced vote is incorrect data and inflicting the data it relates to. Votes are the most powerful data as it can destroy not the data itself but the valuation of it.

ChampionJames
is it just that you want a public burning and humiliation of a group of s

These s are top 100 contributors. They can speak for themselves. I do believe that such a systematical disregard for the quality of the database is a Forum matter even though management has all the instruments. And I do believe that open critique is poison ton misbehaving and silence is a fertilizer

ChampionJames
None of us have the power to regulate the voting behavior of others. It's for management.

Critique is also a regulating power though not as direct as that of management.

ChampionJames
It's for management. For management.

I respect that opinion. But as a journalist I know it's a proven concept that putting things out in the open makes it harder to do what thrives in the dark

My vote is on gboe ....ok thanks. Now you know.

Well, carry on then, it's obvious you're not to be persuaded by appeals to put this into perspective. Good luck with the wild rhetoric about destroying the database and the shaming campaign and the rest of it.

would it be buddy voting if I'd simply EI everything Eviltoastman edits?

ChampionJames
Correct votes do absolutely nothing to alter the state of data

That is rubbish ...

gboe
A vote is a classification of the data it's a vote on. Thereby a misplaced vote is incorrect data and inflicting the data it relates to.

This is the essence ...

syke
would it be buddy voting if I'd simply EI everything eviltoastman edits?

That very hypothetical question actually works quite well as an eyeopener to the reality of this problem. You just nailed the characteristics of this group of buddy voters, buddy, simply and everything.

simply
If you go through the submissions from this group you will find that a lot of the have no evidence ing the vote. No images e.g. Yet they have no pending submissions. How can very active have every single submission voted C - even all those missing documentation? By not checking but simply voting.

everything
Ask yourself as a voter. If you pick a fairly good submitter - would you be able to as a voter find documentation for not many, not most but all of their submissions?
These have the very rare chracteristic that everything they edit is voted correct practically the minute they edit.

buddy
This is achived by blindfolded voting C judged not on the data but on the name of the editor. That's a buddy

The key word is simply. These guys simply votes C - and that's why the quality of the votes are low

gboe
That very hypothetical question actually works quite well as an eyeopener to the reality of this problem.

With your bizarre logic, perhaps.

gboe
If you go through the submissions from this group you will find that a lot of the have no evidence ing the vote. No images e.g. Yet they have no pending submissions. How can very active have every single submission voted C - even all those missing documentation?

Images are not required to be able to vote something 'Correct'.

gboe
Ask yourself as a voter. If you pick a fairly good submitter - would you be able to as a voter find documentation for not many, not most but all of their submissions?

The documentation is the release data and the links embedded in it. If the data is entered correctly (as in 'in accordance with the guidelines') and the links lead to the correct entry, then there's nothing incorrect about a 'Correct' vote.
Since voters are human, it is possible that sometimes a voter votes something 'Correct' that isn't that. If that happens, and there are still other errors, simply fix them or place an additional Needs Changes vote.

gboe
These have the very rare chracteristic that everything they edit is voted correct practically the minute they edit.

I agree this is rare, but we do have a 'Friends Submission' list which makes it easy to keep up with friends' pendings as long as you start early.

I tried buddy voting someone last night. Someone who doesn't like buddy voting. I found that of three subs, one was NmaC and the other two NmiC. My "Hug-A-Buddy-Hater" program came to an abrupt end.

(But hey -that's acctually a good thing, since the point is the buddies/some buddies would have voted those Correct...right?)

Eviltoastman
My "Hug-A-Buddy-Hater" program came to an abrupt end.

As nobody's buddy, - you're my pal.

Gundozer
(But hey -that's acctually a good thing, since the point is the buddies/some buddies would have voted those Correct...right?)

No. As the person who votes the majority of my releases is also a fantastic quality checker. No one picks up my mistakes like this individual. Swagski and James have had similar experiences with so called "buddy voters". The term "buddy voters" implies collusion. I;ve never ask an individual vote my edits en masse and I've never been asked favours in exchange for the service of doing it. The term is little more than side swipe at a community which has apparently ed them by.

Not that I am the most approachable person in the world and not that I am in anyway a good spokesperson for general conduct, but my advice is to improve quality and be more helpful. For those rare occasions where you see quickfire voting, unless the data is incorrect then as advised you have the option to render the correct vote and give your evidence by way of a request to management and something can then be done about it. This isn't the WWE and calling people out is about as unintelligible as one of The Ultimate Warrior's monologues.

jweijde
Images are not required to be able to vote something 'Correct'.

You seem to wish for the monocular to be put to the blind eye. It may not be required but on what justification do you then vote if there is no images and you don't have the item yourself. You can't google the exact data from the complete pending list of a buddy. You seem to be looking for that little mousehole that could explain why these buddies not simply votes on one thing, the name of the last editor. Cmon, You know they do.

jweijde
If the data is entered correctly (as in 'in accordance with the guidelines') and the links lead to the correct entry, then there's nothing incorrect about a 'Correct' vote.

And for that you need documentation. As Discogs have more release variation than any other database you can't Google and find your info. The more comprehensive this database get's it's inherited that Picture justification is the only way to check those minor differences

Eviltoastman
I tried buddy voting someone last night. Someone who doesn't like buddy voting. I found that of three subs, one was NmaC and the other two NmiC. My "Hug-A-Buddy-Hater" program came to an abrupt end.

You must have the wrong buddies. These guys never makes mistakes. Never ever. According to their buddies they are the only contributors in Discogs that never makes mistakes or miss something out. They have 0 pendings. They are the best and most correct subbers Discogs have, by statistics far better than Diognes_The_Fox.

Or - they simply vote everything correct that their buddies touches.

Eviltoastman
No one picks up my mistakes like this individual.

You know I stated earlier that buddies also could be highly qualified peer review. This buddy of your is in a whole different category than the ones object of this thread. The buddies I'm talking about never picks up mistakes. Never. They have 0 pendings. Everything is correct. Almost everything voted by buddies.

Then gather your evidence and present it to management. This thread has no discernible point. You just look bad.

I don't think I ever want to hear the word "buddy" again.

gboe
That very hypothetical question actually works quite well as an eyeopener to the reality of this problem. You just nailed the characteristics of this group of buddy voters, buddy, simply and everything.

http://pandodaily.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/always-be-closing.jpg

Somebody should compile a Beatles Voting buddy compilation, they got some great buddy voting songs:

All My Voting
Eight Votes A Week
You've Got To Hide Your Vote Away
Votes (That's What I want)
Vote Together
You Never Give Me Your Votes
Here Comes The Vote
Everybody's Got Something To Hide Except Me And My Voting Buddy
Buddy Voting Is A Warm Gun

Buddy Holly & The Voters

anssisal
All My Voting
Eight Votes A Week
You've Got To Hide Your Vote Away
Votes (That's What I want)
Vote Together
You Never Give Me Your Votes
Here Comes The Vote
Everybody's Got Something To Hide Except Me And My Voting Buddy
Buddy Voting Is A Warm Gun

Would get a C from me anytime, - anyhow

gboe
Maybe I too want to be a buddy voter.

I can offer you one of these three services, for the unbeatable price of just 100 bucks a day:

a) you get 100 C&C votes per day, for as long as you pay me
b) you get 250 C votes per day plus as an uncharged bonus you get also 5 C&C votes per day
c) You get nothing, but still pay me royalties for reading that useless thread

Choose wisely. Only one of those options will lead to paradise!

syke
c) You get nothing, but still pay me royalties for reading that useless thread

ah ah ha!

wat een gezeik zeg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONqYuqWY8iM

zipjezopje
http://youtu.be/fTeDqe-kw_Y

LMAO!

And syke after keep royalties go to Maldive:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTsVJ1PsnMs

Finally, this topic is getting the kind of it deserves.

Yes it does, BUDDY

Well then. then let me sum it up.

Practically no one found it relevant to hear why the Dutch/German group of buddy voters keeps on voting blindly C on each others subs

No one wanted to dig into this and co investigate.

C voting was reduced to being OK as long as there is no evidence against a C vote

There was no critique of the voting alliance but a lot of critique of raising the topic.

Finally the thread was used to establish a positive, overbaring and humorous atmosphere surrounding the phenomena of buddy voting.

Well done, guys. Well done

Like I said, all you've done is make yourself look bad. If you have evidence, give it to nik, otherwise stop digging or I'll ask nik to kindly remove the spade from you.

gboe
Practically no one found it relevant to hear why the Dutch/German group of buddy voters keeps on voting blindly C on each others subs

this is not really true. I was basically making fun of that thread. That had nothing to do with that group. It had more to do with the fact that those very people have shown up with the same things before. multiple times actually. You should know this. You should also know that witch hunts, as fun as they can be, are not overly constructive. You collect that evidence and send it in to nik. if he decides nothing should be done, then you collect more evidence and send it in again. and again. and again. At some point they will lose their voting rights. But until nik does anything, nothing will happen and no good will be done with that topic. A shitstorm (which you hoped for) is of no use to anybody. We've had enough of that crap lately with a certain going on a hunt for websubbers.

Besides all of that, I doubt that there is anybody, who has been on this site long enough to care, who doesn't know exactly who you are talking about and what they are doing.

Eviltoastman
If you have evidence, give it to nik

I have, several times

Eviltoastman
stop digging or I'll ask nik to kindly remove the spade from you

I should have the ability to research on the site taken away? You often threaten people on the forum with using nik if they cross your way. I don't think he signed up to be your hammer.

syke
those very people have shown up with the same things before. multiple times actually. You should know this

Actually I do not. All I know is that I have reported some incidents to management and that this groups is still active. Searching "Buddy" in the forum doesn't really produce any findings. And I haven't seen this group discusssed here.

syke
You should also know that witch hunts, as fun as they can be, are not overly constructive

To me it's not a witchhunt. I find myself right now in a strong headwind in this thread. If I did this "misdemeanour" again and again I would expect people to ask me why. You people here are actually asking me the same thing that I am asking them: Why do you do this useless but harmfull thing. Asking me why is OK. I will answer. I expected them to reason for their behavior as well.

syke
A shitstorm (which you hoped for).

I honestly didn't. I asked for a discussion with the buddies. If asking that is a re-run, then please bare with me.

gboe
I asked for a discussion with the buddies.

This topic should be locked, I think. It's been utterly without point for some time now and has begun to reach the point of recriminations. Obviously the voters you are attempting to shame are not interested in playing punching bag for you and posting here, so your only stated reason for this thread is surely moot.

ChampionJames
This topic should be locked, I think

No need. This is my final post

gboe
I don't think he signed up to be your hammer.

Nor do I expect him to be. However when people deliberately try to pursue an agenda contrary to the benefit of the community, with what many here perceive as malice, then it's natural to expect there to be repercussions, particularly when we've politely asked you to desist.

Whilst no one as asked Nik to stop your stirring and whilst we have shown restraint, Nik's role in this would be clear:
1 - "Serve the public trust"
2 - "Protect the innocent"
3 - "Uphold the law"
4 - (Classified)

He is not and will not be my "hammer".

PS. I love hammers.

I do hope there won't be any buddy voting tonight during the ESC:(
*cough*east-europe*cough
Please vote for the best song. Vote for Anouk!

The only issue with this is that the database is still locked for updates on "new" artists and labels (i.e. stuff that has been entered years ago and nobody voted on it, there are countless examples). Why not finally open the flood gates for everything? There's hardly any votes being casted anyway and the data goes live immediately.

I am looking for a Buddy!!!!! LOL...Or someone to even look at my submissions

HM-2
Why not finally open the flood gates for everything?

+1

Yes, if voting is not a check on the quality of the entries anymore, it defeats it´s reason of being. So why keep it?

IbLeo
Yes, if voting is not a check on the quality of the entries anymore,

Let's not overreact to this issue and throw the baby out with the bathwater. Voting is a check on the quality of the data and is not in itself an issue. Whilst there may be blind voting between some friends/groups here, demanding they come to a thread to jump on the author's sword is demonstrates more than a degree of naive optimism.

As repeated - if you see this practice occurring, gather the evidence and it to management. ive aggressive threads like this breed ill will and achieve nothing other than betray a lack of judgment of the authors and ers.

HM-2
The only issue with this is that the database is still locked for updates on "new" artists and labels (i.e. stuff that has been entered years ago and nobody voted on it, there are countless examples).

Where you see an example, you can help by checking a release for one of those artists and if correct, vote it so. If not, make the required changes or request the changes are made. This particular "problem" is often easy to resolve and certainly does not mitigate the removal of the vote.

Voting is still a useful tool as explained above by Mr. James.

I think I've (finally) found (at least 2 of) the s in question.
Not going to name and shame anyone, just check out these random recent submissions:

[Links removed after protests]

They vote on each others sub's within minutes of posting. Not a big deal I suppose but, do they ever vote on anyone else's submissions I wonder?

CykoMF
They vote on each others sub's within minutes of posting. Not a big deal I suppose but, do they ever vote on anyone else's submissions I wonder?

Again ? What is it the problem?

IFF it is generally and actually considered a problem, perhaps a block could be effective?

1) You cannot vote on a release from the same more than once per week, UNLESS you vote on X other s' releases in between.
2) A whose release you've voted on cannot vote on one of your releases sooner than after one week UNLESS that first votes on Y other s' releases in between.

Not advocating, just suggesting.

CykoMF
I think I've (finally) found (at least 2 of) the s in question.

Not the people this thread was intended to shame.

CykoMF
Not going to name and shame anyone

But yet you did, by posting links. I'm not going to say you contradicted yourself, but you contradicted yourself.

CykoMF
They vote on each others sub's within minutes of posting.

Good for them. Not against the rules, by any means. Is there anything wrong with the votes?

CykoMF
Not a big deal I suppose but, do they ever vote on anyone else's submissions I wonder?

Yes, absolutely they do. Both have given me votes, and one in particular has given me quite a few, for which I'm very thankful.

I'd also be thankful if you edited away those links you've dropped in order to try to shame these s.

This McCarthyite thread is really disgusting.

I have been put on the CIP apparently to help me do things right, yet I have 106 pending submissions & only one vote so far within a month, I wish some voting buddies would visit my subs

Be careful what you wish for in the wrong place.
http://discogs.versitio.com/help/forums/topic/172073?page=57

Plosnat
I have been put on the CIP apparently to help me do things right

It is maybe a good idea not to ask for votes on your subs when you still need to do quite a bit of fixing on them. You may want to have another good read through the guidelines.

nvm

[quote=Willow.the.Wisp] Plosnat
do you want a instant vote to this one? [/quote]
ouch!

heidelbaer
ouch!

ChampionJames
This McCarthyite thread is really disgusting.

Well, secrecy and ignorance often results in witch hunts.
You can see a list of contributions I made, -
You can see my pending submissions as well, -
why can't You see a list of votes I cast ?

ladrodipolli
Again ? What is it the problem?

the problem is no checking appears to be done. just blind voting.

As long as I have been doing this I make plenty of mistakes and these get picked up when good checkers find them.

I haven't read all that's transpired... but if someone is legit and has 2 (or more) active s that got used enough to receive voting rights... ??

maldoror
the problem is no checking appears to be done. just blind voting.

Is there something wrong with these votes? Are there errors?

I'm really bored by these narratives are months that you are getting tired of a lot of people, I get votes from dozens of different voters, sometimes a few, sometimes more, each vote when he wants, what he wants, you're mocking people who are among the best and voter Discogs, and I guarantee that the two above me I have never voted anything
The important thing is that they are correct and just!

blach
why can't You see a list of votes I cast ?

Take it up with the site developers, if you think it's a needed feature. I'm told the voting system is currently under review, so maybe you'll get somewhere.

No reason to smear and disparage the reputation of excellent voters/submitters in the meantime, no reason to post links here to subs with absolutely nothing amiss with them in order to insinuate the voters have done something wrong. If anyone has an accusation to level, take it up with management.

Good grief, enough already.

maldoror
the problem is no checking appears to be done. just blind voting.

Would you mind backing up that statement with some facts? Just throwing that out there is not acceptable.

CykoMF
I think I've (finally) found (at least 2 of) the s in question.
Not going to name and shame anyone, just check out these random recent submissions:

http://discogs.versitio.com/history?release=2572877#latest
&
http://discogs.versitio.com/history?release=4599355#latest

They vote on each others sub's within minutes of posting. Not a big deal I suppose but, do they ever vote on anyone else's submissions I wonder?

Stassen used to vote on mine pretty quickly after me submitting them. Very rarely were his votes incorrect. He seemed to check the releases and would comment when he saw things that needed changing. If there are examples of incorrect voting, take them to management.

Someone said recently that there needs to be sanctions against those who make accusations against others with no evidence. I'm warming to this idea. if people have evidence, take it to management.

CykoMF

Not going to name and shame anyone

That's exactly what your're doin.

YEP - I'm constantly checking and voting the submissions of my friends & buddies and also leave hundreds of comments every week! What's wrong with it?

ChampionJames
... no reason to post links here ... in order to insinuate the voters have done something wrong

On that part I totally agree.

maldoror
the problem is no checking appears to be done. just blind voting.

'Appears' is a well-chosen word here. One could occasionally get that idea.
Not meant as an accusation, - just as a notion.
It takes a lot of time and enegy to investigate thoroughly when getting this notion.