Alveryn wrote:
But the most convincing and real proof is the fact that I got the backside (you can even Barcode-scan it) and as I suspected IT HAS CV! Which disproves all your false accusations of "being on the cover means it's the official way to write" as we can see it's corrected here in the BACKSIDE
.
None of the songs here is the exact same song as 大好きなんだ? They are some other songs.Alveryn wrote:
If you think retail site such as Amazon is "not official" why not use my other 3490312471941 sources I linked? For example, the Backside and Barcode?? Why are you mentioning only Amazon as if it's my only reference?
You are trying very hard to make my post as invalid as possible by ignoring all the important parts. And the fact that you are awaiting IamKwan who's just as much in denial as you, he will obviously say no, you guys don't care about the facts you just want me to be wrong.
I have pretty much repeated many times that we have to stick with the exact alias for this exact song. I am also not against you on this matter but judging everything based on facts and rules.
Amazon and other retail stores are not treated as official reference for a while because they have already given us so many incorrect metadata examples in recent years. When there are direct materials released from the official, why do we bother to follow those unofficial third party information outside? If you need examples, I can grab some for you.
First, The backside barcode image does not indicate any songs namely 大好きなんだ. Second, you can't prove neither the official frontside image being incorrect nor using "cv" as a stylistic choice. Thus, I don't agree discussion is over. Please do not pop in and end our discussion suddenly. Please.Ephemeral wrote:
"CV" is the correct metadata given from Alveryn's assertions and associated proof via the backside barcode image. Though the front side denotes "cv", acronym use is traditionally purely in uppercase (ie: CV) and the official frontside image is either incorrect or uses "cv" as a stylistic choice.
In respect to the common nomenclature and official metadata, "CV" is plainly the right choice for this particular case and needs no further discussion from either party, though I would encourage both of you to be more civil in your discussions in the future, even if such things can be rather frustrating at times.
I refrain from allowing more lenient metadata because doing so simply complicates stuff. The regime is being moved away from a yes or no solely based on official source to one which adds personal preference, opinion, widespread practice of other songs or even Wikipedia. If you change the metadata framework from a pretty much objective one to one which involves subjective judgement, I'd say we are not moving the system forward but backward.
Last but not least, let me repeat. My approach is always no flexibility is granted only when the official endows such flexibility, for example, they have multiple references stating different metadata. So, my treatment here is only usage of cv is allowed.
That's what I want to say. Let's see what some other metadata dudes say.