When bandcamp releases were available but nothing was in the database, I found it quick and simple to copy+paste the track listing into MB and create a new release. Combining it with the TOC I'd already been searching for, I got perfect rips every time without much issue.
Even with a significant amount of time double checking and fixing the metadata, I consider it a good use of time. I was not simply ripping my CDs, I was helping maintain the historical record.
This is the spirit - I've started doing the same for releases that don't appear in MusicBrainz and it feels great knowing that I'm not just doing this for myself.
That was how I felt about it in the earlier days, when I'd actively participate in updating/correcting the databases. I stopped feeling that way years ago, though. Right or wrong, it felt like a losing battle as so many corrections were never actually adopted.
Even accurip was incorrect. I pretty much don't trust any of the online data sources anymore and just manually enter meta.
And don't do what I did... don't just lets beets run unattended. What a pain that was.
this is why it's usually better to be overaggressive with saying "I don't know" rather than crossing your fingers and shitting out an answer and hoping you get away with it.
One of the devs for a company I used to work shocked me when he said "bad data is better than no data" when inquiring about why the input field was limited to a drop down of pre-filled values that were irrelevant with no way of filling in correct data. At that point, I just felt the entire database was suspect
I'm not saying the services are always overly incorrect, just that they're incorrect often enough that the path of least resistance was to stop using them.
Debugging is usually harder than coding, and the amount of data we are talking about is fairly small. Just typing it in could easily be faster.
I still always use MusicBrainz, and enjoy contributing to it, but more like others enjoy contributing to Wikipedia, rather than as an efficiency boost.