| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TheDarkKnight: Quote:
No, this is just the can of worm that this opens. In your opinion, it opened up no such can for me. There are titles that are mixed case, and titles that are all caps, by design. It seems that Ken, for whatever reason, believes this is the latter, and said as much to end the debate. I have no problem with that. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
|
| Registered: May 20, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,934 |
| | Posted: | | | | He already responded to that question Quoting Ken Cole Quote:
I've investigated this and concluded that all caps for TRON is appropriate in this case. Evaluators have been notified. and Quote:
To clarify, this decision was reached based on the merits of this particular case, based on the conclusion that the actual title is TRON. This does not set some sort of precedent that titles should be all caps if they are all caps on the front cover. (emphasis by me) He made a decision about this Title, based upon his investigation, then clarified that it was for this case and is not a precedent. By my interpretation, we will still follow the rules in place for any other title. Unless Ken makes another decision. I don't understand any other interpretation  Charlie |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TheDarkKnight: Quote:
I am not new and you know that, so that sarcastic remark isn't needed. It was not meant as sarcasm, it was meant to show that your question wasn't needed in the first place as my opinion of the rules is well known. Quote:
I was told to ask if I don't understand something and that's all I am doing here. Nobody said you couldn't ask, I know I didn't. All I was doing was defending my right not to care. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 762 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting CharlieM: Quote:
By my interpretation, we will still follow the rules in place for any other title. Unless Ken makes another decision.I don't understand any other interpretation
Charlie I understand it the same way you do but others don't as seen in this thread already. Quoting TheMadMartian: Quote:
All I was doing was defending my right not to care. There is nothing else I can add here. I wish everybody a good night and good luck....................... |
|
| Registered: March 20, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,851 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TheMadMartian: Quote:
I believe your problem is with scotthm, not me, as he is the one who said they were flexible. I can come to no other conclusion after observing the contribution/voting/approval process for a while. --------------- |
|
| Registered: May 20, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,934 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting scotthm: Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:
Quote:
I believe your problem is with scotthm, not me, as he is the one who said they were flexible.
I can come to no other conclusion after observing the contribution/voting/approval process for a while.
--------------- This I agree with. What is good for 1 profile is not good for another profile of the same title. There isn't any consistency and appears to be more of a popularity contest. The bar is not stable. color me Charlie |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,917 |
| | Posted: | | | | Agree to disagree.
Unless you guys are trying to best the record for the number of needless pages added after a ruling. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting scotthm: Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:
Quote:
I believe your problem is with scotthm, not me, as he is the one who said they were flexible.
I can come to no other conclusion after observing the contribution/voting/approval process for a while. I only made that statement because TheDarkKnigh quoted you, not liking the fact that you think they are flexible, then addressed me. I was, in no way, attempting attacking your opinion. I apologize if you took it that way. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar | | | | Last edited: by TheMadMartian |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting CharlieM: Quote:
He already responded to that question
Quoting Ken Cole
Quote:
I've investigated this and concluded that all caps for TRON is appropriate in this case. Evaluators have been notified.
and
Quote:
To clarify, this decision was reached based on the merits of this particular case, based on the conclusion that the actual title is TRON. This does not set some sort of precedent that titles should be all caps if they are all caps on the front cover.
(emphasis by me)
He made a decision about this Title, based upon his investigation, then clarified that it was for this case and is not a precedent.
By my interpretation, we will still follow the rules in place for any other title. Unless Ken makes another decision.
I don't understand any other interpretation
Charlie What I still do not undestand are the reasons of Ken's decision. He wrote about "appropriate in this case" and "merits of this particular case", but said nothing about his criteria. We may suppose that another similar title with same criteria (in Ken's mind) would be treated in same manner. Explaining those criteria would help for the future. Or Ken chose to decide something odd on a random title, and will do that again (or not) when he wants, just to confuse us. Well... are we speaking of support in this thread ???  | | | | Images from movies |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,917 |
| | Posted: | | | | Or maybe he thought "I wonder how many pages I can get them to bicker after I've made a ruling?" |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr. Killpatient: Quote:
Or maybe he thought "I wonder how many pages I can get them to bicker after I've made a ruling?" Clear rules would have avoided thousands of pages. I do not discuss the decision (I don't care), I just consider that a decision without any guidance is not good for a user-built database. One again, this ruling doesn't allow to know what to do with similar cases (S1mOne/S1MONE for example) | | | | Images from movies |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,917 |
| | Posted: | | | | My point is that every argument that could be made from this has been made multiple times. If Ken responds - GREAT! But if he doesn't, well, that's the par for this course.
Best course of action is to simply wait to see if Ken does respond, otherwise simply pretend it didn't happen and move on. |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 6,730 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr. Killpatient: Quote:
Or maybe he thought "I wonder how many pages I can get them to bicker after I've made a ruling?" That is funny (and extremely sad at the same time)! | | | It all seems so stupid, it makes me want to give up!
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid?
Registrant since 05/22/2003 |
|
| Registered: September 18, 2008 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 2,650 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr. Killpatient: Quote:
Or maybe he thought "I wonder how many pages I can get them to bicker after I've made a ruling?" Especially in a thread where the ruling wasn't made. |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,917 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting samuelrichardscott: Quote:
Quoting Dr. Killpatient:
Quote:
Or maybe he thought "I wonder how many pages I can get them to bicker after I've made a ruling?"
Especially in a thread where the ruling wasn't made. D'oh! I jumped threads! |
|
| Registered: April 7, 2007 | | Posts: 357 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TheDarkKnight: Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:
Quote:
Quoting TheDarkKnight:
Quote:
Is it important to you that the rules are followed when contributions are made?
First, as I explained in the TRON thread, I don't think Ken's ruling is against the rules, so your question is based on a false assumption. Second, why is it so important to you that I don't want to know why he made the call the way he did?
Since Tron, TRON, TRon, TROn, TrON, TroN, TrOn & TRoN are all treated exactly the same, by the program, why do I care how it is entered or how? If you need an explanation from Ken, fine, but it really isn't that big a deal to me.
Thanks for not answering the question I asked. I think the users who don't agree with this ruling should know what it was based on, otherwise we can't expect contributions to be correct. I don't believe that I can follow rules if I don't understand them and in this case I don't. The rule has never said use standard capitilisation (As it does elsewhere) it says CHECK capitilisation. The majority have preffered to use that to mean standard but I've always thought they do not mean the same thing. |
|