@superboy97 said:

@skirge01 said:

Where are these users who asked for it to be that way? Can you point to the discussion threads where they asked for this and which led to this decision to appease them?

This is the silent majority. Usually only users who have criticisms come to the forums. The others don't come.

If they're silent, how do you know they're the majority? This is doublespeak. The users who are happy about it being this way are the ones who don't come here? So, you assume it's the... millions?... of other TMDB users not on the forums complaining? By that logic, prior to August 13th, when I first posted on this thread, I was happy about it. No, I just hadn't gotten fed up enough to try and figure out what was going on and get it fixed. I was also upset about The Nevers, but I didn't join in on that thread. People rarely ask for raises from their bosses, so that means they're perfectly happy with what they're being paid, right? Point being:

SILENCE ≠ ACCEPTANCE

You also failed to answer my second question. Would you mind addressing that?

@skirge01 said:

@superboy97 said:

@skirge01 said:

Where are these users who asked for it to be that way? Can you point to the discussion threads where they asked for this and which led to this decision to appease them?

This is the silent majority. Usually only users who have criticisms come to the forums. The others don't come.

If they're silent, how do you know they're the majority? This is doublespeak. The users who are happy about it being this way are the ones who don't come here? So, you assume it's the... millions?... of other TMDB users not on the forums complaining? By that logic, prior to August 13th, when I first posted on this thread, I was happy about it. No, I just hadn't gotten fed up enough to try and figure out what was going on and get it fixed. I was also upset about The Nevers, but I didn't join in on that thread. People rarely ask for raises from their bosses, so that means they're perfectly happy with what they're being paid, right? Point being:

SILENCE ≠ ACCEPTANCE

You also failed to answer my second question. Would you mind addressing that?

I am sort of new to the forums, read but not post kinda guy. I could not have said this any better. My thoughts exactly.

I would suggest involving an administrator or a member of the staff team in the conversation.

@superboy97 maybe we should ask @travisbell !

@superboy97 said:

@skirge01 said:

Where are these users who asked for it to be that way? Can you point to the discussion threads where they asked for this and which led to this decision to appease them?

This is the silent majority. Usually only users who have criticisms come to the forums. The others don't come.

Wow. Just... wow. So any criticism or suggestions leveled in this forum will always be a minority, and will be ignored? That seems... REALLY wrong.

Can we have an official word from @travisbell on this statement?

In review:

The brand new (in September of 2023) television series “I Am Groot” — which we stress is in no way related to the five only superficially similar theatrical shorts [which weren’t released theatrically but just ignore that for now] released by the same creative team, studio, and streaming television service just over a year ago (in 2022) that TMDB has only coincidentally grouped together as part of an “I Am Groot Collection” — is currently indexed as consisting of six episodes; except the first one is really only an empty “placeholder” identified as episode (S01E01) … so that TMDB can index the five newly-releases episodes of the first season of the new 2023 series by the wrong season and episode numbers [S01E01 becomes S02E01, S01E02 becomes S02E02, etc.], which obviously makes perfect sense to everyone.

Because the studio says the new shorts are actually episodes of a TV series; and this is actually the second season of that series. Even though they never originally released a first season. But we’ll go ahead and label these first season episodes as if they were second season episodes because that’s what the studio is telling us … even though that means we need to break our own database by inserting a nonsensical “placeholder” to make it happen.

The studio also says last year’s five shorts were actually tv episodes, and those five made up season one of this new series; but we are going to ignore them on this point, because we’ve got rules and integrity and stuff, and we don’t allow take backs! Because without consistently, there will be nothing left but chaos! Human sacrifice! Dogs and cats living together... MASS HYSTERIA!

…

So it is what it is. You’ve gone and created a “placeholder” episode to enable mislabeling obvious season 1 episodes as “season 2” episodes, per the studio’s own reckoning.

Who would it kill to go ahead and create four more placeholders?

Apropos of nothing … why is there even an “I Am Groot” movie collection? Shouldn’t it not even exist? Isn’t it not enough that movies merely star the same characters and take place in the same universe; aren’t the protagonists supposed to evolve and be aware of events that happened in the earlier films? Aren’t collections only intended to group true sequels together? Aren’t collections specifically not intended to be a way of grouping movies of the same universe, person, character or theme? Etc.

@NJskydiver said:

Apropos of nothing … why is there even an “I Am Groot” movie collection? Shouldn’t it not even exist? Isn’t it not enough that movies merely star the same characters and take place in the same universe; aren’t the protagonists supposed to evolve and be aware of events that happened in the earlier films? Aren’t collections only intended to group true sequels together? Aren’t collections specifically not intended to be a way of grouping movies of the same universe, person, character or theme? Etc.

We are in this case "Series of stand-alone films and mixed series marketed as proper sequels are also allowed as collections." of collection.

All users in this topic are invited to read the following content report.

@superboy97 said:

@Kinqdos said:

Can someone even explain whats the advantage of the rule? Who wants outdated information? Disney thinks it was a mistake to release them as shorts. So whats the point of keeping a mistake in the database. If Disney had a typo in the name for the first few days of the release, would you keep a typo in your database just because it was originally a typo? NO! So just add them as season 1.

For every elements, we need a fixed reference to describe them. As per our rules, this reference is the original broadcast in the country of origin. This original broadcast is the only thing that will not change once the first broadcast took place.

• There are multiple networks that have an history of multiple seasons reorganisation over time. Keeping the initial organisation is the simple way to manage this.
• There are multiple series that are cut differently when they are broadcasted in other countries. Keeping the initial organisation is also the simple way to manage this.
• There are separate movies that are later grouped in a series. For the same reason, we keep the initial organisation. A recent French example is "La Doc et le Véto" were the first 2 parts were released in 2020 and 2021 as 2 separate movies and which is now considered by the network as a series of 4 episodes with the addition of 2 new parts in 2023. "I Am Groot" is also a case of this situation.

In each of these cases, keeping the initial organisation, let the existing users who already have the elements in their database, to keep them as they are, and to avoid for them the need to do changes every time a network decide to do changes.

I understand, but management overhead as reason not to update this sounds a bit weird. I dont understand whats the goal of keeping outdated information to a database and I cant imagine that users who already have the elements in their database, wants to keep a version that is no longer up to date and simple contains wrong information. I mean the creator (in this case Disney) decides what he have created. So whats the point of making it the other way around as anyone else? (Disney, IMDB TheMovieDB, Wikipedia). Is there a chance to get this as season 1 AND as the origninal shorts?

Edit: Didnt read previous post before commenting. But my opinion adresses the problem in genereal and not only for this show.

@Kinqdos said:

wants to keep a version that is no longer up to date and simple contains wrong information.

This is not wrong informations, but informations about the original broadcast.

Is there a chance to get this as season 1 AND as the origninal shorts?

Did you read the message that was posted 12 hours before your question ?

@superboy97 said:

@Kinqdos said:

wants to keep a version that is no longer up to date and simple contains wrong information.

This is not wrong informations, but informations about the original broadcast.

Is there a chance to get this as season 1 AND as the origninal shorts?

Did you read the message that was posted 12 hours before your question ?

Edited my post the second after I posted it. But still strange point of view. With this logic you can say x-rays doesn't harm the human, just because it was originally announced like that.

Common sense and persistence has managed to pay off and has granted us a small victory. As it appears he's the one with the power to make such decisions, may I ask how this was brought to the attention of @travisbell? I'd hope that, next time, we don't have to waste everyone's time arguing back and forth when nothing seems to be happening. Can this process be streamlined and/or formalized?

@skirge01 said:

As it appears he's the one with the power to make such decisions, may I ask how this was brought to the attention of @travisbell?

The subject was put on the table by @travisbell himself one month ago, but the internal discussions have only ended last night.

@superboy97 said:

@skirge01 said:

As it appears he's the one with the power to make such decisions, may I ask how this was brought to the attention of @travisbell?

The subject was put on the table by @travisbell himself one month ago, but the internal discussions have only ended last night.

If that's the case, then the internal discussion was happening when this thread BEGAN. Why wasn't that information shared here and why was the only response from TMDB that the "original release" rule would govern this situation? A reply that, "Travis Bell is aware of the situation and internal discussions are currently happening to decide how to handle this situation. We'll report back when that decision has been reached." would have gone a LONG way in easing the tension and efforts of all involved in this thread. Was anything mentioned in this thread used during those discussions or was this all for nothing?

Again, what can we do to make this situation easier for all involved next time?

@skirge01 said:

@superboy97 said:

@skirge01 said:

As it appears he's the one with the power to make such decisions, may I ask how this was brought to the attention of @travisbell?

The subject was put on the table by @travisbell himself one month ago, but the internal discussions have only ended last night.

If that's the case, then the internal discussion was happening when this thread BEGAN. Why wasn't that information shared here and why was the only response from TMDB that the "original release" rule would govern this situation? A reply that, "Travis Bell is aware of the situation and internal discussions are currently happening to decide how to handle this situation. We'll report back when that decision has been reached." would have gone a LONG way in easing the tension and efforts of all involved in this thread. Was anything mentioned in this thread used during those discussions or was this all for nothing?

As long as no decision in another way has been definitively taken internally, the situation here remain govern by the standard original broadcast rule.

Again, what can we do to make this situation easier for all involved next time?

Nothing.