Quote:
By the way, I think giving negative feedback on a post simply because you don't agree with it violates the spirit of the system.

Quote:
Although we encourage users to reward helpful posts, positive feedback can be used for any reason. You can spend all your positive feedback on one person or spread it out among many.

Negative feedback should only be used when warranted. Although this can be subjective, here are some general guidelines:
Posts with name-calling, belittling, or other rude or insensitive comments can be given negative feedback.
Any post that violates the stated forum rules can be given negative feedback.
However, it's not necessary for a post to violate stated forum rules for negative feedback to be considered warranted.
Disagreeing with a user's opinion is not reason to rate their posts negatively.

If you find yourself about to rate a post negative based solely on the poster's identity, take a moment to consider whether the content of the post is detrimental to the community.

Administrators will monitor feedback and will take action where needed. In questionable cases, the feedback may be removed. In cases of gross misuse of the rating system, the rater's reputation may be lowered by the administrator. In repeated cases of gross misuse, the rater's privilege to rate posts may be revoked. Before taking any action against your account, administrators will contact the user via PM, and will give warnings first whenever possible.

Quote:
I agree. But why encourage it? And at least if they are given the name of 'rules' then these can be given as a reason for rejecting a submission. If you leave them as guidelines then you could end up with finger pointing from both sides with neither accepting the 'opinion' of the other.

Quote:
I agree. But why encourage it? And at least if they are given the name of 'rules' then these can be given as a reason for rejecting a submission. If you leave them as guidelines then you could end up with finger pointing from both sides with neither accepting the 'opinion' of the other.

Quote:
Quoting Bodi:

Quote:
Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
I know this is a little late, but how do you contribute cast lists that are in order of appearance or alphabetical order?

You do it the same way as any other method. As credited in the film and per Invelos rules.

Maybe my question wasn't as clear as I had hoped as I do not understand your answer.  You say you only contribute 'principal actors'.  In a film that has the credits in alphabetical order, the principal actors...lets say there are 5...may be the 5th, 10th, 11th, 14th & 22nd in the list.

Do you skip everyone else and only enter those 5?  I know nothing I say will change the way you are doing it, I am just curious.

Quote:
Yeah...that is how I would do it...I would only enter those actors I am interested in...the stars/principal actors etc. The Joe Blow's with bit parts I am not interested in. So if there was 5 out of 25 names and there was nothing in the database I would enter just those 5 names in alphabetical order of course.

Quote:
Quoting smeehrrr:

Quote:
No one is obligated to provide any reason for rejecting a submission.

Quote:

The primary reason I proposed a terminology change (which isn't even close to "scrapping" anything) was not to change behavior in submissions but rather to change behavior on the forum. Take a quick look around and see how many threads ultimately devolve into "the rules say so, therefore it must be correct", and how many threads consist solely of bickering over the particular wording of a particular rule. 

In reality, those threads don't matter, and the specific wording of any rule doesn't matter - what matters is whether or not your submission gets accepted, and that isn't necessarily predicated on following any given rule to the letter. Which is why I suggested either changing the name or adding a preamble to the rules that speaks to intent.

Here's the deal: We will never have a set of rules that covers every scenario, and, to take it even farther, we will never have a set of rules that perfectly expresses the will and desires of the screeners.  I am in favor of making changes that will help people recognize this, and recognize the futility of the kind of discussions that are so prevalent here.