Skip to main content

788 Messages

 • 

23.5K Points

Sat, Sep 28, 2019 7:21 AM

need help with #190928-052229-354000 #190927-172350-666000 #190927-174711-714000

only fixing self-credits so should not have been rejected with "unable to verify". Unable to verify is completely non-nonsensical since all the reviewer had to do was read the imdb guide and the title. Very confusing.

Responses

Employee

 • 

1.2K Messages

 • 

36.1K Points

a year ago

Hi MikeTheWhistle,

Thanks for your post.

I've re-reviewed these now and have approved them to the database on your behalf. 

I have also forwarded this information onto the necessary team for additional training.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Thanks,

Joel 

4 Messages

 • 

222 Points

a year ago

Ed's right. This, Will's reply, is just another example of saying we'll look at this so it doesn't happen again knowing full well that it will. Based on the dates of your post and the contributions, it's obvious these were rejected by IMDB's automated system, but make no mistake, people reject stuff like this all the time. It guarantees job security because it will require another contribution to resolve. The answer is to keep an accuracy rating on reviewers to force them to do the job.
I know how the IMDB system works as my ex is one of them. The fact is they don't care if the data is accurate or not, only that there will be a continuous flow of contributions. Anyone who has contributed for a long time will see that. New items are very easy to get accepted, but changing anything, much less removing, is near impossible because the message to reviewers is the higher the numbers the better.
When I find a more appropriate message I'll give you insight to the system. It will blow your mind.

1.7K Messages

 • 

58.1K Points

New items are very easy to get accepted, but changing anything, much less removing, is near impossible

Not (completely) true: https://getsatisfaction.com/imdb/topics/suggestions-dont-penalize-contributors-when-declinations-are... (scroll all the way to the bottom please because GetSat doesn't seem to be able to link to an individual post)

224 Messages

 • 

11.4K Points

because GetSat doesn't seem to be able to link to an individual post
Marco, the post's time ('15 minutes ago' etc) is a direct link to the individual post, you can get the uri from there.

788 Messages

 • 

23.5K Points

wow. just learned two things today. I'm covered for this week and next week!!!! lol

1.7K Messages

 • 

58.1K Points

Marco, the post's time ('15 minutes ago' etc) is a direct link to the individual post, you can get the uri from there.

Thanks a bunch Phil!
(so here's a better link than my previous one: https://getsatisfaction.com/imdb/topics/suggestions-dont-penalize-contributors-when-declinations-are...)