I have already told you why I don't read his or hers no votes, because he or her always vote no. I read everyone else no vote, and when or if I have done an error I check and see if I'm wrong. If I do I fix it.

Edited: To make my post more clear.

Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
But the question is... even if he/she always votes no how do you know that in this particular case whatever reason he voted no for is not a legitimate reason? Just because they vote no every time don't necessarily mean that the reason this time is not a real reason.

If someone voted no to all my contributions... I would still read the reason... just on the off chance the no vote is right. Especially if that is the only vote there is.

That's true, but the attitude some display in their reasoning for a no vote(s) makes them not worth reading IMO.

Quoting Alien Redrum:

Quote:
That's true, but the attitude some display in their reasoning for a no vote(s) makes them not worth reading IMO.

While it's true there are some that look hostile/aggressive/etc... in their no votes, it's not always that they were intended to be. Due to the relatively short field, it's sometimes difficult to get the message across without removing some words, thereby changing the intended tone.

I often send a pm before I vote no. I have, as my grandfather used to say, "verbal diarrhea" and the comment field is inadequate for me to get my point across.

When I receive a "no" vote I always assess my contribution. At times I send a pm for further clarification. I correct it if I have made a clear mistake. If the correct answer is not clear, I leave it for the screeners to decide.

The issue of chronic "no" voters is something else. I too have chronic "no" voter which can be frustrating when most of the time it is not legitimate. Like the boy who called "wolf",  one wants to ignore that voter based on their previous actions.

If those votes are an abuse of voting privileges, which are to be avoided per invelos rules, notification to Ken or Gerri might be the answer.

As people have said, without specific details, it's impossible to say.

However, regarding "No" votes, Ken ruled that if it's a larger contribution where the bulk is correct, then it's more likely to get accepted & then the incorrect part(s) can be corrected afterwards.

If he's contributing a larger range, say cast, crew, SRP, audio, subtitles, etc... and you're only changing two small areas (like one member of cast and subtitles) then it's possible that even though both may have an error one will get accepted and the other declined.

Edit: To clarify, no profiles are automatically accepted or declined. They're all processed by Invelos.

When the screeners consider the votes they also look at the previous hit-rate on your contributions and votes. I have a suspicion that it's because of this that your no votes are ignored and the other guy's aren't.

But without knowing what the last contribution changed and what the no vote said it's only guessing. (I haven't seen any of your lately.)

Quoting Formerly known as...:

Quote:
Quoting pompel9:

Quote:

How can you know that some users don't get automatic acceptance? When a rejection comes, there are never any reason. This is why I'm suscpicios.

At some point Ken or Gerri have said that there are no contributions that are automatically processed.

As for why each contribution doesn't get a reason - Think about how many contributions are submitted a day across the whole database. For a small company like Invelos, it simply isn't possible to send custom entered reasons for each one. They have a few select pre-set reasons they can choose if applicable. If you haven't had one then they didn't apply.

Please give a link to this statement. I have never seen this.