Smee:

No, you don't have to follow the Rules, but you should not get ANY yes votes to acept your data if you choose not to. And if you do it often enough I would personally take up the issue with Ken and Gerri and and suggest that your Contribution PRIVILEGE be terminated. What a dumb coimment to make. Remember the ability to Contribiute is not a right it is a privilege and if you abuse it it can be revoked.

Skip

Quoting tlevel:

Quote:
You must have forgot about the group of people who would then start the arguement that until they are stated in the rules, what Ken says in the forum doesn't count.

(I'm not saying they right, btw) So your point about keeping them as rules doesn't solve anything.

I didn't forget them, I simply ignore them.  For the vast majority here, a clarification by Ken or Gerri is enough to settle the question.  I know it is for me and I am a fairly staunch supporter of the letter of the rule...Line break hyphen anyone? 

Quoting smeehrrr:

Quote:
Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
As I said in my post above, Ken or Gerri can step in an clarify the rule...which Ken did in the case you just mentioned.  When you clarify a rule, it is still a rule.  Guidelines, as some people will tell you, are not rules and don't have to be followed...clarified or not.

The rules don't have to be followed either.  Should I provide examples of submissions that ahve been accepted that clearly violate the rules as written?

Completely agree, there is no penalty for not following the rules, other than being flamed, or your contribution rejected. The only rule that does specify a penalty is "Vote Stuffing". You might as well call them for what they really are.

Quoting smeehrrr:

Quote:

I don't believe the cases I'm thinking of are errors on the part of the screeners.  I think they are artifacts of the rules not completely expressing the will of the screeners.

Here's an example:

Quote:

Enter birth years only when necessary to differentate between two actors with the same name.

According to this rule, there should be no crew with birth years attached.

I believe Ken and Gerri clarified this, if not directly at least indirectly.

Ken here, where he talks about cast and crew BYs.

And Gerri here, where she talks about BYs for cast/crew with the same name.

That, added to the fact that this rule is in the CREW section of the rules, tells me that they are allowed for crew as well as cast.  This doesn't mean the rule shouldn't be updated to reflect this, but it does mean crew BYs are allowed per Ken and Gerri's reading of the rules...and that is all that matters to me.

Smee:

What don't you comprehend about partial contributions which are OK. As stated by Gerri herself. Do i take a correct dataset and make it incorrect, because of my preference, NO. I do not. You just have an urge to argue about something?

Skip

Quoting smeehrrr:

Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
No, you don't have to follow the Rules, but you should not get ANY yes votes to acept your data if you choose not to.

Skip, hasn't it been documented that you yourself make overview submissions that violate the rules? Have you gotten any yes votes on those? Have any of them been accepted?

Fortunately, or unfortunately depending on your point of view, Gerri addressed this issue.  In fact, it was that clarification that spawned this thread.  Based on that clarification, those of us who claimed Skip's overview submissions violated the rules, were wrong.

Quoting smeehrrr:

Quote:
Regardless, if you are following the letter of the rule as you claim to, you don't have a leg to stand on here.  What you call an "indirect clarification" is simply an intent to divine the spirit of the rule based on comments from Ken and Gerri.

Are you new or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing? 

I have said many, MANY, times that the only intent that is important is that of Ken and Gerri.  Until they weigh in on an issue I go by the letter of the rule.  Why?  Because until they do so, I do not know what their intent is.

When Ken or Gerri talk about BYs for cast AND crew, I now know their intent and I will follow it.  I am not so arrogant that I would dismiss what they say.  This is their program and what they say goes.  Absent them saying anything, I go by the letter of the rule...period.  This has been my stand from day one and it has never changed...much to the displeasure of people like Skip. 

Quote:

Quote:

That, added to the fact that this rule is in the CREW section of the rules, tells me that they are allowed for crew as well as cast. 

That would be true if it were in the crew section, which it is not.

You are correct, my mistake.  It is in the cast and crew section.  Do notice, however, that it is in the cast and crew section and not just the cast section.  My point still stands.

Quoting smeehrrr:

Quote:
I don't believe that submitting without the single quotes qualifies as a partial submission the way they've been discussed here, unless I can also submit an overview with words missing from the middle of a sentence and have that qualify.

Indeed, I just went back and read all of Gerri's posts in this thread, and omitting the single quotes would not qualify.  Stopping the overview in the middle of a sentence would, however.  Bizarre.