Alephs
03/16/15 07:07 PM
|
Hello.
I have a few things to say that I think we need to sort out.
It has been some time now since I have started using the Suggest Changes feature. I think I started soon after it was introduced. Shortly after I started suggesting map updates, I got into hot water. Many of the changes I suggested were rejected. It was never said who rejected them (which moderator decided), but some reasons were given. One of the most hilarious and frustrating ones was: “X Y doesn't like his maps to be changed.”
The first question that comes to mind with a reasoning like this is: Is this for real?! Note both the question and the exclamation mark.
First of all, people who submit maps here, I thought, surely must know that the point of a map is not to be frozen in time, but to reflect the present. I presume that no one suggests a change out of spite, or because he or she wants to wreck someone's map. I thought it was normal to expect that at a point in time, when something happens that could be reflected in a change to the map, that your map will be changed, and that there was nothing evil about that.
One of the people whose maps I started changing were, quite by accident, the maps of tlp333. He happened to have submitted a lot of maps in the Beverly Park area of Los Angeles (Beverly Park is in Los Angeles, even though many maps, wrongly, say it is in Beverly Hills, an annoying and inaccurate information, which one can't change) and some had wrong owners, or the owners listed weren't the owners anymore. So I was informed by a moderator that tlp333 doesn't like his maps to be changed. Here is what tlp333 told me:
Quote:
"But isn't the point for them to be up to date?" For one, I don't know if that is the point or not. If that would be deemed to be true, I think there is more than one way to accomplish keeping posts up to date. As I said before, I think the comments are a good way to keep the post up to date, with weblinks to information of who the home might change hands to over the course of time. The way I like to handle it, is to edit the title of the post to "former", and then like I said, continue on with updates over time in the comments section. So in short, I like to keep the integrity of the original post as much as possible. I also like to keep my posts in a certain format. If you look at my posts, there is somewhat of a consistency on how I report on a celebrity home. I like to note the beds, bath, square footage and a purchase price/sale and date. I'm noticing people are editing my posts in a different way than I would have, and to tell you the truth, it pisses me off and I don't like it. "If you've "given them to the world", isn't it natural and quite all right to improve upon them?" Again, i think there is more than one way to handle what you are proposing. I don't have a problem if the owner I originally noted sells, to edit the post to "former", but I prefer noting updates of new ownership in the comments, and not change my original post every time the celebrity moves. "They've added that update button for a reason, haven't they?" I think updating celebrity home posts is only one reason why they might have added a change button, but not the ONLY reason. As a former moderator at VGT, I can tell you the main reason they added it, is so they don't have to make all the changes themselves. Moderators are volunteers and have other things going on in their lives. They created the "change" button so the community makes the edits, and then the moderators only have 1-click to approve it. Obviously, they didn't just create it to keep celebrity homes up to date, because they are not making the changes you want to do without asking me first.
Surely I'm not the only one who thinks that “the main reason they added it, is so they don't have to make all the changes themselves” and the last two sentences are downright confusing and contradictory. The moderators want you to update the map only to deny you the update?! What?!
Why are comments better than a map description? I'm sure that we can leave the square footage and the number of bedrooms and still make a nice map out of it. (Though there are problems even there, especially with renovations and additions, which change the area of a house and aren't promptly updated on various Web sites.)
I was informed that BermudaBreeze is another member who doesn't like his maps to be changed.
On the other side of the spectrum was gordonhigh, who cannot be thanked enough for all the contributions he made in submitting maps or commenting on innumerable ones with downright wrong ownership information or information that changed but was correct at the time of submission. He said:
Quote:
btw, if it's you who has been updating all the maps with current owners, thank you so much! I was going to do that today but I see most of them have already been fixed.
A man after my own heart. He thanked me once again after this.
Now onto thumbnails.
Let me list a few bizarre cases I've had over the past few weeks: I submitted the latest Bing image of Tom Cruise's house only to be told, by ml1cus, "Stop trying to make the house appear smaller!" Baffling. I would be glad to let you see the image in question for you to decide if I intently tried to make the house appear tiny.
If you check the thumbnails I submit, you will see, similarly to tlp333's preferences, that, whereas he likes to write a description a certain way, I like to frame a house a certain way: The Knoll isn't framed to appear tiny, but, on the contrary, to show the vastness of the estate.
There are a few other cases.
I had to submit a new thumbnail of Arletta Tornstein's house at least twice. Same happened with Mario Kassar's house. One wonders why that was refused and who would care if those two incredibly popular maps got new thumbnails.
When I submitted the Gigi D'Alessio and Anna Tatangelo's house, I used the new Google Maps image, only for someone to change it to the satellite view of the house, and now if you check the imagery in Google, you will see that the one in classic Google Maps is the same one I submitted. Oh, the irony.
When I submitted the Marcy Carsey's house in Malibu, I intentionally used the satellite view, in order to show that the most recent view of a house, which was renovated and doesn't look at all like the one visible in the old Google Maps 45-degree view, only for the map to appear with that old thumbnail. A few days after that, Google updated the 45-degree imagery, now showing the one from new Google Maps in old Google Maps, so I submitted the latest view.
There are a few other maps, some of which I forget now, which are stubbornly refused to be shown with new thumbnails. For example, the Vince McMahon's house map, Dmitry Ryblovlev's house, which has an ugly and outdated thumbnail, Joshua Friedman's house, a ton of them!
What on Earth is going on?!
Another thing I wanted to write about are these most-viewed maps. There is one, Joseph Sleiman's house, where tlp333 explains what is wrong with it. Why not pull a gordonhigh on a map? gordonhigh recently deleted the map of Stuart Liner's house, who sold the house, and submitted a new map with the latest information on ownership.
Now we have to decide:
1. Do we want the maps to have the most recent Google or Bing imagery thumbnails?
2. Do we want them to have monstrously large and hysterical titles, like the title of the Bill Gross's house, or do we want to have only the most recent owner listed?
What is the point of a map adding "formerly" when the description says who owned it before, and when if you type, for example, "Jennifer Aniston", you will be shown all of the houses she owned or was connected to? It just clutters the website and looks inelegant.
I also wanted to point out is how strange it was to see, and this is something I wanted to see if it would happen, is when I submitted a change of thumbnails, on a few maps, the moderator did nothing else to change them even though the map had wrong information or was in desperate need of an update, from the title, like that wrong Beyoncé and Jay-Z rental house, to the category (which are a mess in a lot of cases).
Sometimes one expects the moderator to jump in when the update submitter forgot, in a hurry, to add a tiny change, like, for example, when a map such as the Sean Parker house map desperately needs a blank line below the sentence describing when the house was built.
mlc1us tells me, that is how I understood it, that a thumbnail should include the whole house, something, for example, I never saw in the site's policy and something that many maps don't respect (Vince Isoldi's house). Where is the policy that says that one shouldn't change other people's maps? Where does it say I have to ask the person who submitted the map should I change it? What is the point of the button Suggest Change then? What is the point when some of the early submitters left the site?
mlc tells me:
Quote:
Several users have asked us to reverse the changes you and others have made by using the Suggest Changes feature. I can not access those records now, so I can't show them to you.
What can I say to this, except that they should have no say because people don't change maps on a whim or to deteriorate their quality.
mlc1us also had another remark against my changes:
Quote:
You recently changed Frank & Jamie McCourt's House (former) to Neman Family's House (now changed back). This would lead most people to believe that the Neman Family lives there. Not so fast. In fact it is an investment property owned by Pickford Investment Group LLC, a property management company. David and Ramin Neman are officers of the company. The current tenant, which is probably leasing the house, is a mental health facility. So your change was also not accurate. Did you ever think of that?
To which I simply stated: TENANT, not owner. To be frank, I changed the map to what gordonhigh said in the comments. He is probably pretty much always right. Why would it lead people to believe that they live there when one could simply state in the description that they don't and that a mental-health facility is renting the house?
All this makes me thinks that mlc simply detests me and seeks to outmaneuver, obstruct, inhibit, thwart, foil me at every turn. It cannot be that the Web site has one, unique policy, but that mlc1us is acting one way and gordonhigh the other. Gordon and I must be, then, barking mad.
To be honest, she did apologize twice and said that she wouldn't like me to leave.
If people disagree with me, I will request my account be deleted. Let it be understood that mlc1us, perhaps with a little help from kjfitz, I think, drove me away from this Web site. No hard feelings, just the truth. I cannot contribute under these circumstances and with these random, ad-hoc, subjective, selective, bizarre, out-of-nowhere rules you apply. Especially when I mean no ill will.
I suggest also that people re-read the thread “Everyone can now suggest map edits and re-submit rejected maps” and “Celebrity Maps” in Site Suggestions.
Edited by Alephs (03/16/15 07:12 PM)
|
jbottero
03/17/15 10:38 PM
|
I update both descriptions, More Info links, and thumbs all the time. No issues...Quote:
If people disagree with me, I will request my account be deleted.
So, you will only stick around if you get your way after stomping your feet? This isn't my web site, but I'm guessing that's not how it works.
I've been told to "shape up" a number of times, and you know, I usually take it and move on...
Edited by jbottero (03/17/15 10:46 PM)
|
Alephs
03/18/15 04:21 AM
|
Quote:
So, you will only stick around if you get your way after stomping your feet?
Yes.
Why? I think I've explained the "inconsistency".
You say yourself:
Quote:
No issues...
whereas I seem to have them and they are silly and seem to be petty.
|
jbottero
03/20/15 11:15 PM
|
Sounds pretty childish, but have a nice day... You are missing out on a great community of mappers, not just Google, but others. I do sat maps, USGS maps, Metsker Maps, old maps and new maps, AAA Navajo Country maps... I'm a map nut, got thousands of them.
But if you want to be a Prima Donna with a bad attitude, you probably don't fit in here anyway. With only 125 maps of celebrity houses, you don't rate high on my list of people with the qualifications to bitch. User: "jdubble07" I might give consideration to, he's got almost 7000 maps (to my puny 1800)...
I suspect that "kjfitz" with 18,317 maps, and "adrbr" with 20,649 maps will not be entertaining your temporary insanity. Seriously, cast off the dark side and come back to the light, submit great maps and enjoy the lime-light of being a contributer to such a great web site.
- Thanks, Jake
Edited by jbottero (03/20/15 11:45 PM)
|
BermudaBreeze
03/21/15 10:34 AM
|
Hi Alephs,
As you have mentioned me specifically in your post as someone "Who doesn't like his maps to be changed"
I feel I should respond.
The majority of my maps are Celebrity homes and this is the key point, the significance of the map is that they are Celebrity owned or formerly owned. I disagree with you that the map should always be up-to date with the latest owner, especially if they are not a celebrity. So yes, to use your phrase I am happy for my maps to be "frozen in time"
The Celebrity category's on VGT generate the most views this likely because people are interested in celebrity's.
It is somewhat presumptuous of you to assume that your change proposals are in some way an improvement on the original and therefore should not be rejected. Certainly where my maps were concerned your proposed changes detracted from and undermined the original intent.
Also bear in mind that these are NOT your maps and despite the fact that VGT provides a functionality to change them, as the map originator I feel I have every right to reject a proposed change, and I am thankful that the moderators take into account the map originators opinion.
Weather you delete your account or not is up to you, to be honest it makes no difference to me personally.
|
Alephs
03/21/15 05:56 PM
|
You two have either completely or somewhat misunderstood me.
This wasn't a post in the style of "If my view is not supported, I will leave". It wasn't threatening. It meant that I just wanted to see what you think and if you disagree, I would like to know so that I can leave. I just wanted to be informed.
It is sad that jbottero feels the need to veiledly insult, "puny 125" maps. LOL. Is this a competition? Do you really think I am in this game to accumulate as many maps as I can? You have so completely misunderstood, either intentionally or out of ignorance, what I had to say that it makes it extremely painful to try to reply, when all it will do is create more mess and misunderstanding.
Bermuda, this is something that must be settled. For example, if an unknown John Does buys a house previously owned by Jennifer Lopez, then I wouldn't change that. But if Bill Gross buys Jennifer Aniston's house, then I would.
Which map of yours that I wanted to change "undermined the original intent"?
I'm waiting for nic to reply, but he's weirdly not here.
|
jbottero
03/21/15 07:17 PM
|
Alephs, I did not use the word "puny", perhaps that's the chip on your shoulder talking. But I do think I made it clear that I think your position and attitude about this is non-valid and weak, and your argument a bit childish and whiny. You may indeed now take me to task for calling out on being "whiny".
Breeze, you make a very good point. I don't do celeb houses, just don't find them interesting. However, as an example, a "map" of - say - recently deceased Robin Williams will have very little interest at all when re-named "Mansion on the Water owned by Steve Smith". The interest is that Robin Williams used to own / live there.
Edited by jbottero (03/21/15 11:29 PM)
|
Alephs
03/23/15 03:09 PM
|
I was looking at which changes I made to BermudaBreeze's maps, and I found out that it was this map
virtualglobetrotting.com/map/somerset-maughams-house/
that I wanted to change to William Somerset Maugham's house. Was that so wrong?
|
Alephs
03/23/15 03:12 PM
|
Quote:
Alephs, I did not use the word "puny", perhaps that's the chip on your shoulder talking. But I do think I made it clear that I think your position and attitude about this is non-valid and weak, and your argument a bit childish and whiny. You may indeed now take me to task for calling out on being "whiny".
But I disagree, and I know it is not weak.
So far, it is you two against gordonhigh and me.
Quote:
Breeze, you make a very good point. I don't do celeb houses, just don't find them interesting. However, as an example, a "map" of - say - recently deceased Robin Williams will have very little interest at all when re-named "Mansion on the Water owned by Steve Smith". The interest is that Robin Williams used to own / live there.
Just what I was saying.
|
Xeba73
03/24/15 07:37 PM
|
Since none of the other mods are trying to explain the situation I’m gonna try my best to give you a good answer.
Actually, it was me who rejected SOME of your submitted thumbnails. Why? Because at that time you submitted approximately 15-20 random thumbnails every day – but in no way did they all improve the quality of the maps. What is the main point of a thumbnail? To identify the actual house. And that’s exactly what the “older” thumbnails did/do, they made/make clear what house we’re talking about. Just because Google/Bing updated the imagery doesn’t mean the home is not identifiable by the old thumbnail, or that the house would be more attractive because of the new thumbnail. HOWEVER, whenever the new image actually improved this process your thumbnail was NOT rejected.
Interestingly, you were never really concerned with the actual map, for example when the Bing update automatically changed the view from BEV to Bing aerial. Why would you even update the thumbnail when you don’t update the URL? Users can’t see it either way, you need to update the URL. You’re talking about the great update function, but you NEVER really used it the way it is the most useful. It was me who updated at least 30-40 URLs after you submitted new thumbnails!
And last but not least: It’s funny that you say “If an unknown John Does buys a house previously owned by Jennifer Lopez, then I wouldn't change that” – wasn’t it you who wanted “Liz Taylor‘s House” (30,000+ views) to be changed to “Rocky Malhotra's house”? Well, you got your wish. But let me ask you this one question: Who the hell is Rocky Malhotra?
Your hypocrisy is a bit puzzling, to say the least.
In sum: a) Personally, I always accepted thumbnails when they actually improved the QUALITY of the map, b) a new URL is usually way more helpful than a new thumbnail, c) the “Current vs Former Owner” debate is still not entirely settled in the mod forum.
|
Alephs
03/26/15 08:41 AM
|
Let's correct some misinformation here.
First, the thumbnails weren't "random". If you take a look, and not even a careful one, you will see that they were always connected in a circle around a house; it was always a part of the neighbourhood that got updated each time.
When the map wasn't a part of a neighbourhood, and when it may have seen random, it was probably from one of the top ten most viewed houses in a category. Some of those showed ten-year old images of houses, images you wouldn't see when you clicked on a link in the map. Furthermore, the quality of the new images was always higher, it had higher resolution, it never had a pool as its center, as some might suggest, but it was always the house that was featured.
Let us also remind ourselves that nowhere does it say that a thumbnail was to be rejected for the reasons you list. If it were so, I wouldn't even submit them. This how it seems random and petty.
Users could always see a house the way I made it appear in the screenshot because there is always a rotate feature in both Google Maps and Bing Maps. A simple click shows you a house from every cardinal direction. I know that someone mentioned that a map thumbnail should reflect a link, ie. it should show a view from a direction the link has in it, but when I saw that many of the original posters didn't respect that, I didn't either. Furthermore, some of the maps didn't even show the houses they were referring to. They were posted unchecked, and some moderator approved it.
So I am appalled by the hypocrisy charge when it just isn't true and when I have said multiple times that I acted in the best faith, and I was quickly stepped on and my improvement was for baffling reasons denied.
The same goes for Rocky Malhotra. If there is no rule which states otherwise, Rocky Malhotra is just as valid as Liz Taylor. That map will always appear when someone types in Liz Taylor's name in the search box, so it is unfounded to say that her name in the title would improve a map. Quite on the contrary, with a new name, it would be current, and with the description unchanged, it would also honour the history of a particular house.
Edited by Alephs (03/26/15 08:49 AM)
|
Alephs
03/26/15 08:44 AM
|
Things cannot be based on someone's autocracy, arbitrariness, whim and caprice.
That is why it is so good that I started this whole discussion.
In order for people to act in good faith and helpful manner and to avoid any kind of arbitrariness, some things need to be settled.
|
Alephs
03/26/15 08:47 AM
|
I find it hilarious that there are putdowns about what I, allegedly, did wrong, but no word of why no one, as I talked about above, corrected this wildly inaccurate map, to name one example:
http://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/beyonce-jay-zs-house/
As I suggested, someone needs to pull a gordonhigh on it.
|
Alephs
03/27/15 10:30 AM
|
Another few silly bits from this silly symphony:
'Please don't change my maps. Do it in a comment.'
For example. Let's say someone said that.
What does it matter if I said it in a comment or if I submitted a change? Both ways, the change would probably be accepted. If I had a huge ego, as some purport I have, then I would want to stamp my seal onto every map in a comment, so that people can see that I suggested a change. But who cares about that? That's not why I suggest changes.
Why do people feel so strongly about they themselves changing the maps they submitted? Can someone explain? Is there anywhere that it says that a map is a property of the one who submitted it?
|
jbottero
03/28/15 08:25 PM
|
Give it up Alephs, this is supposed to be fun and you are taking it way too seriously. Drink less coffee, or more. But kindly stop bitching. No one want's to hear it.
Edited by jbottero (03/28/15 08:29 PM)
|
|
|
Extra information
|
0 registered and 28 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: TexasAndroid, kjfitz, AlbinoFlea, Hinkkanen, Pdunn, Parabellum, dda, mlc1us, milwhcky, gordonhigh, Xeba73, tallturtle82, Fab, Matheus_
Print Topic
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Topic views: 4814
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
