Site Announcements

View the results of the New Wave Outpost 20th Anniversary Top Songs Poll here:

Coming Soon: Top Albums Poll. Stay tuned!

Welcome to the new forum!
If you are a previously registered user, you must do the following:

1) Click on 'I forgot my password' at the login prompt
2) Enter your username and email you registered with and submit
3) You will receive an email with an activation link. Please click it and then log in using the random password provided
4) Go to your User Control Panel and click on the Profile tab
5) Click on 'Edit Account Settings' and enter your new password twice followed by the random password provided earlier. Click Submit.
6) That's're back in! You may have to log in again with your new password.

If you forgot your email address, please email me (MikeP) at:

Note: you must now use bb code buttons in the Post form for embedded images, YouTube videos, etc.
For example, to post embedded YouTube videos: paste in the link (e.g.,, highlight it and then click the YouTube button.

Discogs BS

Discogs BS

Postby Rubellan » Fri Oct 05, 2018 5:56 am

Does anyone know where Discogs originates or if there's a phone number? Some assh*le with the username Momento in France kept modifying my Visage release and I would change it back but he kept reverting the changes. It went back and forth and he said he was going to report me. I got a notice that I'm now blocked from adding or modifying their database. So this moron is able to get me blocked from adding or contributing? I've already opened a case with Discogs but this seems way extreme, especially with how many sales they've gotten from me.
Scott @ Rubellan Remasters
Room at the Top
Posts: 1061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 10:59 am

Re: Discogs BS

Postby discoginfo » Fri Oct 05, 2018 6:29 am

Nope, but I hope it will work out. With a seller and buyer rate of 100% and "Joined on November 26, 2009" I guess they trust him. What is he changing?
The Jet Set
Posts: 876
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 5:03 am
Location: Sweden

Re: Discogs BS

Postby Rubellan » Fri Oct 05, 2018 6:42 am

discoginfo wrote:Nope, but I hope it will work out. With a seller and buyer rate of 100% and "Joined on November 26, 2009" I guess they trust him. What is he changing?

He kept adding what I considered repeated or redundant info, and kept voting my changes as "completely incorrect", which first resulted in me being put on some sort of limited database access program (Discogs rehab?). I opened a support ticket about it, and then today got the "completely blocked" from the database message from Discogs. I opened another support ticket and emailed a member of the staff that I believe was involved, but it's a bit extreme. I pulled all of my inventory from Discogs. Way over the top on their part.
Scott @ Rubellan Remasters
Room at the Top
Posts: 1061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 10:59 am

Re: Discogs BS

Postby ZippY » Fri Oct 05, 2018 8:06 am is owned by Zink Media, Inc., and is located in Portland, Oregon, US.

The person who ownes the site is Kevin Lewandowski, but it's not clear if there's any emailadres
or any other form to contact.

Hopefully this will be solved.
Take On Me
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:05 am

Re: Discogs BS

Postby Surly » Fri Oct 05, 2018 9:03 am

I went there a couple months ago and noticed that the Fixx compilation I did for Hip-O was missing the 1999 release year, so I submitted a change. Another user immediately reversed it, told me I had no right to do so, and no proof of release. I didn't even bother trying to go back.

Same thing happened on Wikipedia a couple of years ago - I added a promo-only CD single from The Mighty Lemon Drops to their discography, only to have another user remove it and berate me, stating it didn't actually exist.
Last edited by Surly on Fri Oct 05, 2018 10:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Words like conviction can turn into a sentence"
The Jet Set
Posts: 845
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 6:48 am
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Discogs BS

Postby eighties » Fri Oct 05, 2018 9:40 am

Sorry to hear about this, although I wouldn't write them off as an avenue to sell your CDs.

I've had plenty of my entries altered over the years, but you have to remember Discogs is a user made database just like Wikipedia.
They have their own set of cataloging rules and security steps to prevent misuse of the database.

My 2 cents, brush it off. Keep that selling avenue open and don't take it personally.
That's the only way I survive the strangeness that is Discogs.

Here I am on Discogs:
All the best,
Personal Jesus
Posts: 420
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:18 am

Re: Discogs BS

Postby Jolo0924 » Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:01 am

I've also fallen foul of the Discogs Spanish Inquisition. Seriously, no matter how meticulously you list a release on the site, there's gonna be someone who will pick it apart. At the other end of the scale, I've seen some real shoddy listings that don't deserve to be on there, lack of detail, blurred image etc., yet manage to get through. Don't let it put you off.
User avatar
Switchin' to Glide
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 7:09 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Discogs BS

Postby humanracer » Sat Oct 06, 2018 7:22 am

I don't think it is anything personal but they are very strict about submissions. When it comes to year of release for instance, you need to have proof in the form of a picture or a contemporary advert etc. It is not enough to say it logically must be this year or that you remember when it came out. This unfortunately leads to many "unknown" releases and makes the database look untidy.

Although I think his edit isn't too bad. The back of the sleeve shows the label is Republic and Universal so maybe he just wants to list all that info? I am not familar with Discogs rules so no idea if that is they how they do things
Thirtysomething New Wave fan. I've got that Golden Feeling.
Personal Jesus
Posts: 454
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 7:19 am
Location: Fife, Scotland

Re: Discogs BS

Postby negative1 » Sat Oct 06, 2018 9:11 pm

I've added many entries to discogs, some were questioned, some weren't.

I try to just copy other peoples drafts that are good, and alter them.

Once, I added some USB sticks, and didn't have a template, another user messaged me, and then fixed the entries.

I don't always agree with the changes, and rules, but its theirs to make.


Either put up with their rules, or in your case forget it, delete your information and ignore them.

If you get into an argument, you will lose, so avoid the aggravation, or just let them have their own way.

Life's too short to let these things bother you.

Room at the Top
Posts: 1188
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2013 3:51 pm
Location: USA

Re: Discogs BS

Postby LPCDMP3 » Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:09 am

Don't feel badly. I went back and forth and back and forth over this release for YEARS...

Whoever entered it listed the track times wrong. They had "Sometimes" at almost ten minutes and "Weight" at about eight minutes,
so I spent the stupid money, bought the 12" and realized the track time of "Sometimes" was EXACTLY the same as on the "Who Needs Love '92" CD single.
So I corrected it. Someone reversed it. I corrected it again. Someone reversed it again.
I'm like, I HAVE THIS EFFING RECORD, I HAVE THIS EFFING CD SINGLE, I compared them and I think I know what I'm posting, THANKS.

I let it go for a couple of years then I corrected it again. Finally, some moderator agreed with me.
His reasoning? "Maybe they recorded the 45rpm record at 33rpm and got a wrong track time." (FACEPALM)
I swear sometimes people just do this to be annoying.
Take On Me
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 2:36 pm

Re: Discogs BS

Postby obs » Wed Oct 10, 2018 3:10 am

Yeah, Discogs is love/hate :-D .

A lot of times, their rules don't make sense, but it's to avoid arguments. It pains me that they want every single word of song titles capitalized, when in English, that's just wrong.

They want us to get it right, but then they have a format called CDr, when it's actually CD-R, but they can't take the few minutes to correct it.

They think "Maxi-Single" is some kind of specialized marketing term, when they don't realize that not every country on Earth uses the outdated Imperial units (these aren't the records you're looking for), so don't use "12inch Single".

It's a shame that many people treat that site as gospel, when it's all just unofficial information.

discoginfo wrote:With a seller and buyer rate of 100% and "Joined on November 26, 2009" I guess they trust him.

It's his 19000+ Rank Points. I don't know what happened, but people are not supposed to be quick on the trigger to give the "Entirely Incorrect" vote, or they can find themselves losing voting privileges.
Room at the Top
Posts: 1831
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 3:59 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Discogs BS

Postby dlgladwin » Thu Oct 11, 2018 2:30 am

obs wrote:It pains me that they want every single word of song titles capitalized, when in English, that's just wrong.

Read what I'm writing?
Switchin' to Glide
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 5:38 pm

Re: Discogs BS

Postby midnighttoneon » Fri Oct 12, 2018 2:15 pm

I run a record label, and 'contributors' constantly make stuff up - assigning wrong catalogue numbers, referring to Greek or Japanese pressings which do not exist, all sorts of things. It's a waste of time to try, really.
Running Up That Hill
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 3:47 pm

Re: Discogs BS

Postby obs » Sun Oct 14, 2018 3:23 am

That's what happens when you get dealers contributing to the site.

On the other hand, you've got artist/label disciples who insist they're right, just because they're self-annointed gods on the artist/label in question.
Last edited by obs on Thu Nov 22, 2018 4:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
Room at the Top
Posts: 1831
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 3:59 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Discogs BS

Postby PKPN » Tue Nov 20, 2018 8:49 am

It's amazing how grown adults can get this far in life and think their poop doesn't stink. The release histories tell a different story than the tales of oppression spoken here.

Folks, it's not that hard. Be tolerant of other people's mistakes, and be gracious and contrite when people fix your mistakes or give you the opportunity to fix them yourself, even if they aren't super polite about it. If you have a disagreement or don't understand why the rules are the way they are, politely take it to the site's forums, and be prepared for any outcome, good or bad.

If you contribute to Discogs a lot, and make lots of good edits, you will get lots of good votes which will help you weather an occasional bad/unfair vote or two. But if, from Day One, your nerves are so frayed that you throw up your hands and storm off in a rage because of one moment of unfairness, then it's probably for the best that you just interact with the site as a passive observer, because you have no business in public forums, and your are just going to find that things go even worse when you are the one making mistakes.

Regarding the Erasure 12": Someone made a mistake and immediately questioned the correction that was made, but there was no reply. Two years later, another user did not do their due diligence in evaluating the situation, and they made a mistake and voted Entirely Incorrect, which undid the edit. They are human. They messed up. They should have noticed that the user said they timed their own rip themselves, and should have given the user the benefit of the doubt...or at worst, someone should have PM'd the user to double-check. But the harsh vote was cast and the result was unfair. Yet if you look, you see it eventually got resolved with an apology by the original submitter, and it did not require very much discussion or editing at all. Yes it did take a little bit of time, but was it ever really that urgent? Is this really worth giving up on the site or holding such a grudge over?

Regarding the Fixx CD: Similar situation. There are two pressings in the database. Neither is the original 1999 pressing; both are later pressings, but we don't know exact dates, only that they are post 1999 due to the manufacturers. An attempt was made to enter the date as 1999, and this was undone via an Entirely Incorrect vote. Again this was way too harsh a vote for a wrong edit made in good faith, but some users dish out EI votes out of impatience and frustration at the ineffectiveness of leaving comments or lighter votes or fixing other people's mistakes for them. Notably, another user pointed out how the vote was too harsh. Nevertheless, the attitude of the person who wanted to make the change should be "oh, sorry, I didn't realize there were multiple pressings and that the release date is for the exact pressing shown. ya learn something new every day!" ...not (paraphrasing:) "Someone denies my expertise in this matter? Well, I'm leaving and never coming back!"

Regarding the the OP's complaint, this is a bit different. Mistakes were not made by other users. In fact, no one made any mistakes until the OP decided to start undoing other people's additions and corrections. It was OK to not initially enter copyright data. It was OK for someone else to come along and enter it anyway, since it is on the physical item. It was not OK to remove this correct information, even if it seems superfluous.

The other users could have explained better, although they did say what needed to be said. It would not have done much good, though, because they were up against someone who seems to feel (and this is a common attitude among artists and label owners) that he is entitled to more deference, privilege and authority than anyone else, and that he does not need to collaborate with anyone. He seems to think the site's rules do not apply to him so he doesn't need to read or heed them. He violates some of the most basic code of conduct required of users on any website. He becomes obstinate when challenged, digs in his heels, engages in back-and-forth edit wars, offers childish and unprofessional responses (e.g. "who are you, Discogs police? get a life", "moron", and, to paraphrase: "I'm taking my toys and going home" and "tell me your name so I can ban you from my store"), tries to go over everyone's heads, and gripes in other forums. All this over 4 lines of copyright data and some images!

Despite having a marketplace and forum bolted on, Discogs is first and foremost a space for collaboratively creating a database of artist, label and company discographies. This naturally requires some rules for data entry, as you will find in any database. There are some restrictions imposed by the data entry system itself, as well as a boatload of rules which everyone must follow. Following rules is hard sometimes. Collaborating is even harder. I get it.

The rules ("submission guidelines") and challenges of collaboration ultimately frustrate everyone sooner or later, but it mostly works out. The rules exist sometimes to simply ensure good data is entered, so that releases are sufficiently distinguished and the discographies are fleshed out properly. Some guidelines, like the rules for capitalization, are more just to put an end to arguments and keep the site tidy. The good news is that the barrier to entry is low: when submitting a release, you can enter a minimal amount of info and someone else will help out sooner or later by adding more info and images. Everyone benefits from everyone else's work. Mistakes are made, and mistakes are fixed. Sometimes things don't go your way, and you move on and work on other parts of the site. None of it is worth having a heart attack over.

Just trying to add a little perspective here. Chill out, everybody.
Last edited by PKPN on Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
Take On Me
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:42 pm
Location: USA


Return to News, Reissues & Compilations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests