Quoting Lopek:

Quote:
Quoting gardibolt:

Quote:
I'd just as soon go back to the old possessives rule myself, where they were stripped off.

I completely disagree, it would lead to the removal of correct possessives like that "Frank Miller's Sin City" giving incorrect film titles. As I recall that is exactly why it was removed in the first place.

I see no need to go back either as there seems to be pretty overwhelming understanding and concensus of the current rule. Just look at the contributions that are correcting possessives at the moment and they are almost unchallenged in the votes... 90+% positive.

And don't let combined threads of 20+ pages of "discussion" trick you into believing there is a great disagreement - block 2 users and you get 20 pages of agreement.

And maybe there are just two users who really get it, and who won't roll over for the likes of you and your ilk.

As far as the voting goes, a large percentage of the people who vote fit the category of yes men.  To paraphrase the old saw about grand juries, they'd vote for a ham sandwich if somebody contributed one.

Quoting kdh1949:

Quote:
Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
As far as the voting goes, a large percentage of the people who vote fit the category of yes men.  To paraphrase the old saw about grand juries, they'd vote for a ham sandwich if somebody contributed one.

This statement would hold true if the people voting agreed with your side, too, don't forget.

Just because someone, even the majority, of people disagree with you doesn't mean that their opinion is incorrect and yours is correct.  To think otherwise is nothing more than arrogance.

What I trying to say, perhaps in too subtle a manner, was that most of the people who vote don't have a clue, and if you really watch close who votes on what, you can easily point them out on any given set of votes.  If the voting was that accurate, Ken wouldn't override it as often as he does.

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
So you like the Whim of the Week. Well start saying good bye to contributors because there are many who will not play that stupid game.

I know you weren't speaking to me.  And I can't speak for others.  But I'm personally in favor of saying goodbye to anyone who contributes bad data.  I'd rather have contributors who have to think about getting good data than those who blindly follow a rule that needs an overhaul (for those few who keep finding these stupid loopholes).

I find it ironic that those who complain the loudest about how bad IMDB is for accuracy are the same users who propose filling our database with garbage because they don't trust others to figure out what a "title" is.  This topic has been discussed over and over and over and over and over.  I say it's time to let the voters decide what is right and what is wrong.  They seem to be doing an excellent job so far.

Quoting Mark Harrison:

Quote:
Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
To paraphrase the old saw about grand juries, they'd vote for a ham sandwich if somebody contributed one.

Can someone PM me if this ham sandwich thing goes though?  I've been busy with other things lately and don't want to miss out on some hammy goodness.

It might depend on whether or not it is contributed as Rifter's Ham Sandwich or just Ham Sandwich. We cant have possessory credits getting approved now can we.

The King and I (50th Anniv) and Oklahoma! (50th Anniv) have had the removal of their possessives approved. I would expect that you'll find the updates under K and O, respectively, in tonight's update.