Subjective public collections

[MmzHrrdb]

I'm not trying to push anyone's buttons or come off as even more irritatingly controversial on here but even though most of you discreetly/publically find me annoying please allow me to make this suggestion.

I think that allowing users to create subjective public collections is a bad idea. I think public collections should be reserved for unbiased facts and things that can be physically proven rather than ideas of certain people which could potentially offend others; I have personally been offended by some collections which my favourite films have been placed into. I think it's unfair to those of us who want to keep things civil and politically correct. I think that people still have the right to make these collections, but either (a) under Private Collections, (b) so that somehow a line is clearly drawn between those that are subjective in nature and those pertaining to fact, or (c) users should have the option to hide or block these from film pages, which would also solve the issues we were having with spoiler/descriptive collections a while back.

I would be interested to hear your views (unless it's "lol", or something).

[Pickpocket]

You are "offended" by what someone added to a fucking criticker collection? Jesus Christ.

[djross]

x

[MmzHrrdb]

(as I discovered with a similar issue that bothered me, that is, collections describing specific content and hence inherently spoiling the films it contains, e.g., "Removed extremities").

On a different note, I'm also starting to wish these collections weren't there anymore, not because it's a bad idea at all but solely because it does actually spoil the experience for the viewer as I've discovered more clearly recently while looking through the collection tab in numerous movie pages. I'd like to think we weren't the only two experiencing this dilemma but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[MmzHrrdb]

It seems as though the trend is away from having these collections as public anyway, glancing at the recent history. Some people may respond to having this issue pointed out, but there may be others that do not, in which case that is pretty much the end of the matter (as I discovered with a similar issue that bothered me, that is, collections describing specific content and hence inherently spoiling the films they contain, e.g., "Removed extremities").

Your entire argument basically comes down to "It bothers me, and so LordofDance should do what I ask." I went into great detail explaining my side of the issue. There are many shades of what a "spoiler" can de defined as. You gave no real evidence to support your "inherent spoiler" assertion. In fact you used the words "certainly" "inherent" and "spoiler". "Certainly" means "without doubt" or even "100% true". You have already started out with a word that you cannot justify using. It is not "certain" that my collections are "100% guaranteed to spoil!" under all possible circumstances.

Let's look at "inherent". You're saying that spoilers are in fact the essence of the collections, that it is an essential characteristic that cannot be removed. Again, this implies a "100% guarantee to spoil!" under all possible circumstances. You cannot prove this, nor did you even really try. You just picked a rock solid word to use to make your argument sound strong without earning the right to use it through fair reasoning.

Without your "100%!" words, all you're left with is "spoiler". I already explained that one man's spoiler is not another's, and some people even at least partially agreed. This all means that your argument is far from being a sure winner or anywhere close to 100% defendable. Your whole tactic appears to be (1) Send the person a faux-polite message asking them to do what you want (I got two of these from you over two different issues) and (2) Act smug, rigid and bitchy if you don't get what you want.

I will state again: I already agreed with one of your concerns in the past and removed an offending collection. In the case of the "inherent spoilers" (the wording of which is inherent bullshit) collections, I removed several of the most specific ones that had a greater potential for spoiler status. Yet you are still bitching without offering any new argument.

Why don't we just set up an anonymous poll to decide this (using fair and accurate wording)?

[MmzHrrdb]

On a different note, I'm also starting to wish these collections weren't there anymore, not because it's a bad idea at all but solely because it does actually spoil the experience for the viewer as I've discovered more clearly recently while looking through the collection tab in numerous movie pages. I'd like to think we weren't the only two experiencing this dilemma but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

You better remove your new "Incest" collection, HorrorMaster. djross already asked me to remove mine (which I did). I'm surprised he hasn't sent you a message yet.

[MmzHrrdb]

You better remove your new "Incest" collection, HorrorMaster. djross already asked me to remove mine (which I did). I'm surprised he hasn't sent you a message yet.

He's sent me a message and I've changed the description of the collection to "Collection solely for movies in which incest is a prominent theme", which is fair so that it just contains movies that have in some way advertised the fact that they contain incestuous themes and aren't likely to spoil it for anyone. Of course some people aren't likely to read this description when they search for it via a film page so in any case I will administer heavier moderation on the collection.