Who do you recommend inputs the data then? I see people complaining about the information being incorrect but if they spent the same amount of time complaining with fixing, there's be at least one less error in the database. I fix errors when I can. Others do the same. I have no tears for sellers who can't be bothered to spend time listing their record under the right listing. They benefit from the access to a base of buyers. If you don't spend the time and make an error and someone complains it's their own fault. But they'll probably get a pass in most cases as buyers won't know the difference unless they are the sort of buyers that exist on this site, who are looking for a very particular pressing other than just "an original pressing". The reality is, sellers in some cases aren't even spending more than a minute on checking if they listed their record correctly even when there's only a few variations. So the number of variations isn't the real problem IMO. Discogs does not exist to sell stuff. It allows people to sell via it's site and takes a commission but it's primary purpose is to catalogue releases. If it existed to sell stuff then there would really be no need to have so many variations. It could easily operate like musicstack.com. There's no bias to inflate the number of listings and no one is pretending that all variations are equally significant. It matters little to the people who run Discogs what people consider significant in terms of releases only that they are catalogued. To be fair there are things they should be doing to improve the database and it's by no means perfect, but we're better off with it than without it.