News

New Participation Interface

2017-02-15 22:23:46 UTC

Thank you Smile

2017-02-16 06:19:04 UTC

In the meanwhile most of the teething troubles should be solved.

If you have any other issue, whether it's discussed already are not, please do so in the proper boards (Feedback for members, Bugs & problems for editors, or a Trac ticket if obvious bug).

Thanks for all the feedback!

2017-02-16 11:21:19 UTC

Those aren't private messages, just a list of topics. You can have a similar list of contributions though. You can bookmark the page if you like.

https://secondhandsongs.com/participate?type=any&status=any&assignment=any&invol…


Not helpful. I have lots of old posts; ~1K open matters, I shouldn't have to search for a needle in a haystack. I liked having a list of recent activity a click away. The process is simply too cumbersome, in my view. I have sorted the current system in all sorts of ways, and it just doesn't serve the same function.

Please tell me what's the difference between the link I gave you and what you requested (except that you need more than one click).


I waited for some activity before responding. There have been three processed posts, a cover submission and 2 error reports. 2 of the 3 show a comment made, one processed sans comment, and I have yet to look at any of them. None of the 3 show when I hit that link, so no, this does not serve the same function as was available before, assuming no user error on my part.


For what it's worth, managing my work on SHS is important to me and the changes have significantly degraded the features that supported those efforts. Unless, things improve from my viewpoint, my posting will drop to a relative trickle (which may be welcomed by the editors Smile ...).


Sorry for the negative feedback, but I assume honesty is the better option.

2017-02-16 11:32:56 UTC

I waited for some activity before responding. There have been three processed posts, a cover submission and 2 error reports. 2 of the 3 show a comment made, one processed sans comment, and I have yet to look at any of them. None of the 3 show when I hit that link, so no, this does not serve the same function as was available before, assuming no user error on my part.


For what it's worth, managing my work on SHS is important to me and the changes have significantly degraded the features that supported those efforts. Unless, things improve from my viewpoint, my posting will drop to a relative trickle (which may be welcomed by the editors Smile ...).


Sorry for the negative feedback, but I assume honesty is the better option.

Can you give me the URL of a contribution that should appear but doesn't? And leave it there until I can have a look? Otherwise I have no idea what's going wrong.

Honesty is good, but your feedback is at times demotivating. I'm doing this for free in my spare time, so if you don't have a positive attitude I just won't care anymore in the end. Other people here are perfectly capable of giving constructive feedback and then I'm happy to help them. Up to you.

2017-02-16 15:21:39 UTC

Please let us all calm down! It is - as always - a matter of getting used to new ways and only then finding out, that the new ways are actually major improvements over the old ones. Mathieu, you are doing great and VirileVagabond, indeed we cannot keep up with all the work you are doing (and thus giving us................).

Lots of love and calmness from The Netherlands, where the sun is shining and Spring Is Coming........... Smile Thom

2017-02-16 15:29:35 UTC

What Thom said (except about the sun and spring).

______
JC

2017-02-16 17:47:41 UTC

Wow, where do I begin?

1) We are all doing this for free in our spare time.


2) It is upsetting to see a manger be abusive to an user. Not cool or professional.


3) I was trying to give positive feedback, but in my opinion, I felt like you were telling me I don't care what you want, this is what you got, deal with it. Maybe something got lost in translations, I don't know. But anyway, I stopped giving my feedback. To be frank, maybe people using it for the first time will get it. Speaking for myself, what was simple and easy to use, now looks clunky and confusing. I will work around it.


Two long time users were giving you feedback but:

a) Rereading VirileVagabond's posts, I believe he was giving constructive feedback on how he used the system and what he needed to easily use it. I really didn't read anything demotivating. I believe his feedback was being treated like an attack. Just too much to go into.


b) The other user that responded (maryhelen) didn't get her question answered (at least I didn't see it). Bastien and baggish also questioned it. " What is "generic" going to mean?" and also "Could you also add in that column, a choice for "Add new song or artist" for when I/someone wants to do just that-- add a song or an artist that is not n the SHS database? "


But the real eye opener was the two things she said:

a) "Finally, I am happy with the present system, but this new one is just fine and I am guessing it is more for ease and simplification for the editors-- Yes? "

b) "While thinking of ease for editors keep your users in mind and make it "user friendly" logical and avoid their/our confusion."


YES....Keep your users in mind....USER FRIENDLY!!!! Not editor friendly because there are only about 20 of us, but there are thousands of regular users.


4) NO ONE is questioning your programming skills, attacking you or your devotion to this website. It has been up and running for what?? 14 years now.?? We are all thankful for what you have been doing to maintain this website.

Just please try to understand our concerns and needs, don't treat them like attacks.

Last edit: 2017-02-17 04:16:30 UTC by DashBoardDJ856

______
“Let me be clear about this: I don’t have a drug problem, I have a police problem.”― Keith Richards

2017-02-16 18:25:49 UTC

It is - as always - a matter of getting used to new ways and only then finding out, that the new ways are actually major improvements over the old ones. Mathieu, you are doing great and VirileVagabond, indeed we cannot keep up with all the work you are doing (and thus giving us................).

Thom

I'd also like to thank Mathieu for all his very hard work to provide us with a fab update for the site and to VV for his very active use of the site Smile

2017-02-16 18:49:22 UTC

DashBoardDJ856 Thanks for acknowledging my response, previously ignored. I have been following the discussions amongst all-- both of these show just what I said, changes were made for the editors.


And again, I've used the new system a couple of times and it is fine and I do like the various menu options, except the main one: Contribution type. Its redundancy defeats the purpose of the choices. I could check any whether I am submitting and errro, a cover r "generic" (not knowing what this is) and I could check either cover or generic or generic. My point is, I can choose any one of these no matter what submission I am making.


The purpose of such a list is to "force" (for lack of a better term) the user to identity specifically (not any for any and any) only oe of the choices beneath the label, here "contribution type." Other than cover, error, and add ne song or add new artist, what type ot contributions are there?


Contribution Type

any

cover submission

generic submission

cover or generic submission

error report

2017-02-16 19:08:29 UTC

______
“Let me be clear about this: I don’t have a drug problem, I have a police problem.”― Keith Richards

2017-02-16 19:09:21 UTC

I waited for some activity before responding. There have been three processed posts, a cover submission and 2 error reports. 2 of the 3 show a comment made, one processed sans comment, and I have yet to look at any of them. None of the 3 show when I hit that link, so no, this does not serve the same function as was available before, assuming no user error on my part.


For what it's worth, managing my work on SHS is important to me and the changes have significantly degraded the features that supported those efforts. Unless, things improve from my viewpoint, my posting will drop to a relative trickle (which may be welcomed by the editors Smile ...).


Sorry for the negative feedback, but I assume honesty is the better option.

Can you give me the URL of a contribution that should appear but doesn't? And leave it there until I can have a look? Otherwise I have no idea what's going wrong.

Honesty is good, but your feedback is at times demotivating. I'm doing this for free in my spare time, so if you don't have a positive attitude I just won't care anymore in the end. Other people here are perfectly capable of giving constructive feedback and then I'm happy to help them. Up to you.


Others have addressed the bonus commentary, so I will attempt to provide some examples as requested. There have been at least four additional "Processings": 2 cover submissions; 2 error reports, all with comment. I have yet to look at any of them for your testing, so no guarantees that all are "safe for work" (we are talkin' tsk and bastien here... Smile ...).


https://secondhandsongs.com/case/27390


https://secondhandsongs.com/case/29374


https://secondhandsongs.com/case/65665


https://secondhandsongs.com/case/65668

Last edit: 2017-02-16 22:20:32 UTC by VirileVagabond

2017-02-17 03:13:00 UTC

Not that useful. In my view, all of this should be readily available from the Artist's page. This would go for works, performances, releases, etc.@

There is actually some trth in this.

I'm coming from the experience of a long-term heavy user, and recently I've run into a fair number of instances where editors add songs when a submission already exists. The more places relevant posts are listed the better for everyone.

It happens all the time that editors add versions already suggested, mainly if finding them themselves or when processing other submissions and recognize such versions. As they subsequently may or may not spot those in the version lists, a warning message a la 'There is already a submission for this version' (with a link) might be helpful - if possible.

Btw., if I spot an earlier submission for a version I added, I assign it to the submitting user. As the system - thankfully! - is very advanced, I'm not sure all editors are aware of how to do so, though.

Last edit: 2017-02-17 03:21:15 UTC by camembert electrique

2017-02-17 03:26:09 UTC

Perhaps this is why/explains that I quite often see a 'submission by... not verified" yet THAT submission is on the list of covers already listed 'processed." I thought it was just an omission of changing the "not verified" to the actual listing of the cover. Actually, I see this many many times.

2017-02-17 03:33:29 UTC

Wow, where do I begin?

1) We are all doing this for free in our spare time.

2) It is upsetting to see a manger be abusive to an user. Not cool or professional.

...

I have to admit that I was a bit stunned, too, when reading that unusually harsh answer to VV's comment - and, also considering his honest feedback constructive criticeism, would indeded like to file that answrer under lost in translation.

And I'm afraid, I have to agrre to most of the other points, too.

2017-02-17 09:46:32 UTC

Btw., if I spot an earlier submission for a version I added, I assign it to the submitting user. As the system - thankfully! - is very advanced, I'm not sure all editors are aware of how to do so, though.


Like to know that trick, Erik.

2017-02-17 10:29:30 UTC

Btw., if I spot an earlier submission for a version I added, I assign it to the submitting user. As the system - thankfully! - is very advanced, I'm not sure all editors are aware of how to do so, though.

Like to know that trick, Erik.

Like Erik, I also find it useful to have the option of registering a performance to a user where I spot that an editor has added a cover independently of the original submission. I do this whenever I come across such cases. It's a nice way to tidy up the list of covers too.

2017-02-17 10:33:18 UTC

Yesterday I enjoyed a concert of Brad Mehldau Trio together with Bastien, so lets try to address the issues raised here with a fresh breath!


I do appreciate feedback, also when it's honest negative feedback. There have already been long exchanges with some of the more critical people here and I tried to understand their issues and tried to propose solutions or alternatives and continue to do so. It is however hard to continue doing that when some are insinuating that they will stop contributing because they don't like the new system and some others giving plain negative remarks.


I'm a bit surprised that my response is considered abusive. According to the dictionary "extremely offensive and insulting". Do I really have offended or insulted someone, in an extreme way? I'm not a native English speaker so maybe I didn't express myself correctly?


I may not have addressed every issue of every single person here. I'm sorry for that, but this topic has become too large for me to keep an overview of all issues. That's why I asked to create new topics for any issue that has not been addressed yet. As for maryhelen, I do have renamed the "Add generic submission" to "Add original" as Bastien suggested based on maryhelen's remark. Of course, there's still more to it. Please create a new topic for this.


As for user friendliness for the members. I agree this is very important. The changes have been proposed in the editor forum where I receive feedback, but the changes have not been proposed to the members. Maybe that should have been done. However, my experience is that people often don't care about changes until they are really confronted with them. But that's no excuse.


Why these changes? In order to improve participation and our data quality, there was the suggestion of allowing members to submit additional artist information where missing. This would be a new kind of submission. Technically, error reports and cover submissions used to be to very different things. Introducing artist info submission would mean creating a third system for user participation. It would also mean a third interface for editors to manage these submissions. It would mean that every change to user participation would need to be implemented three times. To avoid that, I first merged error reports and cover submission into "contributions". Afterwards we can add new contribution types like artist info (this should answer maryhelen's question) and new features for the interaction. An additional problem with the old system was that it was hybrid monster with the forum: e.g. you could lock a topic but not process it. You could process it but not lock it. This is history now.


So in summary: I have cleaned up the technical mess of cover submissions and error reports and we're ready for the future now. As with any big change like this, there are teething problems and I'm very happy to address them! And please report these issues in separate topics Smile

2017-02-17 21:00:19 UTC

Mathieu. Thank you for all your work on this-- as a contributor for a few years, I think the changes will be good for us and hopefully will not create problems for the editors (despite all that I am reading.) For instance, you mention artist info, which I always had to add using the "report error" button and as I mentioned before, even though I do it once in awhile, "Add new song or new artist will be easier to do (can we add a new song to an artist already in SHS-- how?).


I have to put in my 2cents in here on the, "extremely offensive and insulting". I was reading many of the posts, then just scanned them as they became too many and too long. When I saw those words, ("extremely offensive and insulting") well, it bothered me-- I know what they mean. So I went back and read every single message very carefully and found NO such entry. No one said anything that was, "extremely offensive and insulting". Me thinks, perhaps, someone was exaggerating -- more than a bit, especially since the exaggeration was directed at someone, whihc then sounds too much likje an accusation. .


In sum, Mathieu, you were NOT "extremely offensive and insulting" in any entry that I read.


Maryhelen

2017-02-17 22:05:17 UTC

Wow... I for one never expected this change would spark so many emotions. I think already a lot has been said, so I'm not going to repeat all of that. I just wanted to conclude with this last thought: We are very emotional about what we value a lot, so if there is anything to be learnt from the past days is that for users, editors and managers the SHS project has become more than just a hobby, in fact a passion and a significant part of our life.

I wish everyone lots of joy working on the project in 2017: The database is growing, the audience is growing, and the features are ever-evolving.... the future's bright!

2017-02-18 02:16:04 UTC

Others have addressed the bonus commentary, so I will attempt to provide some examples as requested. There have been at least four additional "Processings": 2 cover submissions; 2 error reports, all with comment. I have yet to look at any of them for your testing, so no guarantees that all are "safe for work" (we are talkin' tsk and bastien here... Smile ...).


https://secondhandsongs.com/case/27390


https://secondhandsongs.com/case/29374


https://secondhandsongs.com/case/65665


https://secondhandsongs.com/case/65668


Alrighty.... No response, but it's been ~24 hours or more since I provided the requested examples, so I'll go ahead a view them, assuming you have seen this and are looking at what (if anything) needs to be done.,