Author |
Message |
Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 1,819 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote: So if you if you are going to try and add SP data, up front or surreptitiously, I will vote NO!!!! And i suspect i will not be alone. Please see my post in the other SP thread. I actually don't give a flying.... whether it gets entered or not - I just wish you people would stop changing your damn minds! |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 21,610 |
| Posted: | | | | Neill:
I haven't changed my mind, this is the same position I have had from Day ONE. The only thing that SP and the others have in common is the word Supervising, the concept of the word however is entirely different, and also according to PGA has TWO different meanings (or non-meaning) depending on whether it is film or television. I have said MAYBE to Television, I am still looking at that, but Film is a definitive NO; according to the PGA SP is not even recognized despite the fact that it is used. However, people that i know in the business have advised me of its of its use in film. Frankly i was a bit surprised that film goes one way and TV goes another (and not happy about it either).
The polls also, both of them one started back at IVS by Tim, also say NO to SP
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!! CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it. Outta here
Billy Video |
|
Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 1,819 |
| Posted: | | | | And here is the problem....I don't always catch the 'polls' and subsequently rely on people keeping me up to date. To clarify: I've NEVER, NEVER, NEVER seen a Supervising Producer credit on a MOVIE. ONLY on TV shows - and, it is ONLY on TV shows that I have been entering it. Also (as I stated in the other thread) what possible reason would I have to be entering incorrect crew members unless I had been told they were acceptable entries? What do I gain? I only add what I've been told to add or what's in the rules. So, to be on the safe side - has the opinion changed for other 'forum consensus' entries? I'd like to know now before I continue to add incorrect entries. Hope that clarifies some issues. | | | Last edited: by Pantheon |
|
| T!M | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 8,736 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Pantheon: Quote: To clarify: I've NEVER, NEVER, NEVER seen a Supervising Producer credit on a MOVIE. Then we're back to the one that started this all: 'Short Circuit'. |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 6,635 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
The polls also, both of them one started back at IVS by Tim, also say NO to SP
Skip I do not consider a 28-20 vote to be a "consensus" of any kind! | | | Hal |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 4,596 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote: Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
The polls also, both of them one started back at IVS by Tim, also say NO to SP
Skip
I do not consider a 28-20 vote to be a "consensus" of any kind! Neither do I. Although, as I stated earlier, that I agree with crediting SP as Producer, I have never done so. I don't think I've come across any that I can recall. We can all go back and forth on this until the cows come home but ultimately the word must come from Ken. And just as with Theme By and Profiles vs Titles (CLT), Ken chooses to remain mute on these hot-button issues . | | | My WebGenDVD online Collection |
|
| T!M | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 8,736 |
| Posted: | | | | Me neither. In fact, I'm very pleased with the results so far. Of course we're going to have the usual batch of sourpusses voting against anything that makes any kind of sense - what else is new? - but it's pretty clear that it's not the slam dunk they hoped for. Especially since I'm convinced - based on what I'm seeing in the database - that the "silent majority", those that hardly ever visit the forums, let alone engage in these silly debates, perfectly knows how to handle any "supervising" credit, no matter whether it's one for a producer, an editor or a re-recording mixer. And quite rightly so, of course: these are all important and valid credits, and it makes absolutely no sense to leave them out of our database. |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 906 |
| Posted: | | | | I just note that I fell it's strange that you're pleased with a result that goes against what you have claimed to be a consensus. And definitely far from the slam dunk you have claimed was the result in the past | | | The colour of her eyes, were the colour of insanity | | | Last edited: by reybr |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 465 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote: In fact, I'm very pleased with the results so far. Of course we're going to have the usual batch of sourpusses voting against anything that makes any kind of sense - what else is new? Thanks, T!M, for showing us your understanding of democracy. Of course, all the users with a different opinion than you simply are silly morons. Great posting, you made my day. | | | Michael |
|
| T!M | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 8,736 |
| |
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 21,610 |
| Posted: | | | | What a typical and and not att all surprising comment from Tim....very sad as well.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!! CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it. Outta here
Billy Video |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 1,414 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote: Quoting gardibolt:
Quote:
I'm not Skip, but looking at the PGA rules, she could have moved from Produer to Supervising Producer simply by acting as a producer on the show for two years:
Quote: Having received the credit of Producer or "Produced By" for no less than two full seasons of this or other series episodes that have been nationally telecast
She may or may not actually supervise or produce anything presently; she just gets the credit for time served.
So it's a "retired in place" position. You get paid big bucks for doing nothing.
Where do I sign up? Actually, that's part of the definition for "Executive Producer." | | | "This movie has warped my fragile little mind." |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 21,610 |
| Posted: | | | | As reybr commented Tim, let's remember that YOU claimed there was a consensus supporting your position, There has never been any such thing. Now i won't go where some users would go with this. But I wish you would not invent fictional results and claim things which are factually incorrect.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!! CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it. Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| T!M | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 8,736 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote: let's remember that YOU claimed there was a consensus supporting your position Let's remember that there are other users, like Pantheon, who confirm that there was indeed such a consensus / agreement. I can't help it that you changed your mind. |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 21,610 |
| Posted: | | | | Tim:
I never changed my mind and i commented that Pantheon was mistaken in that. There was NEVER a consensus to support SP entry. But you are dfelcting the fact that you stated there was consensus and it can be proved not was there not the consensus that you claimed, the majority, just as with this poll, went exactly the opposite direction yet you claim to be entering data in contradiction of those polls. Allow me to remind you, as well that the poll at IVS that has been cross-referenced was started by YOU 21 months ago.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!! CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it. Outta here
Billy Video |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 3,480 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Pantheon: Quote: I'm sure I remember the rules committee making a statement to the fact that the rules should have mentioned Supervisiing Producer in the same way that Supervising Art Producer is mentioned and that is was an error on the part of Invelos that resulted in this being omitted in the rules. The rules chart is what came from Rules Committee #1. I searched Rules Committee #2 (results of which were not implemented) and it was not discussed there. I searched the Unofficial Rules Review Forum and it was not discussed there. I searched the Rules Committee forum here at Invelos and it was not discussed there either. I'm at a loss. Quoting Pantheon: Quote: So, to be on the safe side - has the opinion changed for other 'forum consensus' entries? I can't find a forum consensus on Supervising Producer. The only threads I've found either here or at IVS that mention Supervising Producer are these 2: Quoting m.cellophane: Quote: Intevocative threads:
Poll: Do we enter 'Supervising Producer'? by T!M. Results: Yes = 6; No = 16
Thread which asked the same question and no one said 'yes'.
EDIT: I recreated the poll here so we don't have to search Intervocative next time. Quoting T!M: Quote: Quoting skipnet50:
Quote: let's remember that YOU claimed there was a consensus supporting your position Let's remember that there are other users, like Pantheon, who confirm that there was indeed such a consensus / agreement. I can't help it that you changed your mind. Can you provide a link to the consensus because I have searched and can't find it, with the exception of the 2 links above which don't support the supposed consensus. | | | ...James
"People fake a lot of human interactions, but I feel like I fake them all, and I fake them very well. That’s my burden, I guess." ~ Dexter Morgan |
|