Quote:
Quoting ateo357:

Quote:
What I think concerning IMDB is if they are listed at the end of the cast, they are cast and if they are listed elsewhere in the crew credits they are other crew no matter how they are credited on screen.

I might agree with you except for the fact that, as an example, Billy Jackson and Katie Jackson, who are credited amongst the crew, are included in their LotRs cast list.

Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:

It's snide remarks like this that give me the impression you were being insulting.  If you want to discuss, I will discuss.  If you want to be snide, don't bother as I won't be playing that game.

Yupp,
I'm pointing out the flaws in your argument and you call that "snide remarks". Sure, I could have said it somewhat nicer, but it all runs up to IMDb is in no way a trustworthy source for any kind of information.
So your point that IMDb lists ADR as Crew is somewhat moot.

Come to that you still haven't answered my question: Since when does Crew get casted?

To go back to Ken's statement, probably it's best to tear it into it's pieces and show you why I interpret it like I do.
If you find any flaws in it feel free to correct me.

Quoting Ken Cole:

Quote:
On the latest topic, there is no exclusion for Additional Voices - if they're in the credits, they should be included.

Here we have the introduction, which explains why Ken felt inclined to respond ("On the latest topic") in addition we have a first ruling explicitly for "Additional Voices". If the statement would have stopped here I would probably be on your side of the fence.

Quote:
We include similar non-specific live-action credits, such as an actor credited as "Various roles".We also include specific voice actors,

Here we find Ken's reasons for his ruling, which basically runs in the lines of "Consistency".

Quote:
so I don't see a compelling reason to exclude non-specific voice credits.

Here's the interesting part (bolded by me). In his second ruling within this post Ken is even widening his first ruling (Additional Voice) to all "Non-Specific Voice credits".
Why should he have done that if it wasn't for including all?
He easily could have kept the term from the first sentence, or completely omit the last half-sentence and thereby would have kept his ruling limited to "Additional Voices".
I assume (and here's probably the flaw in my interpretation) that he did this on purpose. But until Ken states otherwise the contrary is too only an assumption.
And, as I learned in Law-school, when you have two colliding interpretations: Remain with the exact words. These are, as I already said, quite clear.

To go back to your remark about "cherry picking" (which, of course, wasn't snide at all!): I sometimes ask myself who might be the cherry picker? The one who only reads the first sentence of a statement, or the one who reads it to the end and puts it into it's context?

Quote:
Quoting ateo357:

Quote:
Yeah I can't Figure it out. Frank Welker, probably the most famous voice actor. They have him listed in actor, Misc. Crew, Sound Dept. And Music Dept. Go figure. Don't know what their standards are but they seem all over the place.

That's because Frank does different kinds of work. Sometimes he's doing animal sounds, which is essentially sound effects work. Sometimes, he's playing a character, like on Futurama or Scooby Doo.

Quote:
I agree. That is how I read it. And until he states otherwise, I consider ADR & Loop a legit voice credit. And I hope they don't write the contribution rules like the do a law, 20 pages of text when 1 distinct sentence would do.

Quote:
Quoting ateo357:

Quote:
I agree. That is how I read it. And until he states otherwise, I consider ADR & Loop a legit voice credit. And I hope they don't write the contribution rules like the do a law, 20 pages of text when 1 distinct sentence would do.

I disagree.  That is not how I read it and, until he states otherwise, I will consider ADR & Loop Group to be crew and, looking at the poll...which has grown a bit since I last commented on it...I am not alone in this view.  So what now? 

Quote:
Learn something about SOURCES, a source is where the data originates. IMDb is a database that publishes and interprets collected data, but it's not the source of the information.

Quote:
Regarding the trustworthiness: I guess we've all seen enough mistakes from IMDb (aside of the already quoted Joseph McCarthy incident) to be able to judge this.

Quote:
And as long as they don't publish the source of their information they will never be entirely trustworthy.

Quote:
Mind you, that doesn't necessarily mean that the data is incorrect. But without deeper research you'll never know.

Quote:
You don't mean this seriously, do you?
Now if this isn't a contradiction in itself.

Quote:

EDIT:
But to sum it up a bit:
My interpretation is supported by the exact words of Ken's statement.
Your interpretation is supported by your belief that he meant something different than he wrote.