Quoting pauls42:

Quote:
Quoting Rifter:

Quote:

The difference is, I never said I wanted to prevent anybody from having linking.  NOT ONCE.  I just said *I* don't want it, rather don't need it.  ...

Quoting Rifter:

Quote:

I can read what people post as well as you can.

we can do that as well..

Quoting Rifter:

Quote:

want the ability to turn off linking completely.  I don't need it, and don't want to have to deal with it--at all!  By that I mean, that with such a switch turned ON, no common name data is downloaded to me when I do weekly updates, and no common name data is uploaded BY me when I make a contribution.

If you did what you want then you are removing data from the database. i.e. common name information is being stripped from that profile if you download (stripping off common name) and then upload (ignoring common name).

so if a single profile had a commonn name entry (which you wouldn't see anyway since you don't bother with name linking) then after you have downloaded/uploaded any changes everybody else has lost this.

Another one that can't read.  All that needs to be done is that any line that contains a common name gets skipped, and it moves on to the next line.  All changes other than common name get picked up. Downloads work the same, except in reverse.  If the downloaded line contains a common name entry, it skips to the next item in line if I have the checkbox set.  In the database world, we used to call that "updating by exception" and it is a very common way to do it.

Indeed updating by exception would be a workable solution. Perhaps a little clunky. But eminently workable within what Ken has already done.

Skip

Quoting pdf256:

Quote:
Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
...
And you don't know what the hell you're talking about.  I never said I don't use linking, and I do use headshots, and have never said any different. 

John, you have said that you know who is in your films and you did not need the program to tell you. You also said that the rest of us must be stupid if we needed the program to tell us who was in the cast.

So if I understand you, you are saying that you would like to keep 'Robin Wright" and "Robin Wright Penn" apart in the listings, but the part I don't get is how it hurts you if she gets listed as the same person in all of her films?

Quote:
...
Are you too bloody stupid to understand plain english?

Are you too bloody stupid to understand that English starts with a 'E' and not a 'e'

Quote:

What I want is a checkbox or flag of some sort that tells the downloaded profiles to just not add common names to the local files, and by the same token, it skips over any entry on an update without dumping the rest of the update.  Nobody loses.

And once again, how does the 'common name' hurt you? The program displays the 'credited as' name which should be the same as the old version 2.4/2.5 entry (if the old profile was 'as credited').

pdf

In the first place, I want to see what is credited in the film, no more, no less.  Not what some bloke wants to plug in there that may or may not be accurate as far as the name goes.  There is not enough valid documentation out there for the majority of it to be messing with it. 

Second of all, I'll turn it right back on you.  What does it hurt if there is a mechanism that turns it off for those who want that?  But it does hurt ME, because I can't contribute updates of cast if I don't have common name entries because it might break YOUR local database.  That could easily prevent other perfectly valid update material from getting into the online.

And third, its a two way street.  You want this junk, I don't.  If Ken can program so that we both get what we want, why are you bitching about it?  Now, I know it can be done, because I used to do "exception updating" back I was programming databases.  Whether Ken wants to or not is another matter.

Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
Quoting pauls42:

Quote:



Quoting Rifter:

Quote:

want the ability to turn off linking completely.  I don't need it, and don't want to have to deal with it--at all!  By that I mean, that with such a switch turned ON, no common name data is downloaded to me when I do weekly updates, and no common name data is uploaded BY me when I make a contribution.

If you did what you want then you are removing data from the database. i.e. common name information is being stripped from that profile if you download (stripping off common name) and then upload (ignoring common name).

so if a single profile had a commonn name entry (which you wouldn't see anyway since you don't bother with name linking) then after you have downloaded/uploaded any changes everybody else has lost this.

Another one that can't read.  All that needs to be done is that any line that contains a common name gets skipped, and it moves on to the next line.  All changes other than common name get picked up. Downloads work the same, except in reverse.  If the downloaded line contains a common name entry, it skips to the next item in line if I have the checkbox set.  In the database world, we used to call that "updating by exception" and it is a very common way to do it.

You accuse me of not reading when I have just quoted you. So which bit of the quotes don't you like?

Please detail exactly (date/time) when you previously suggested downloading only parts of the cast list? You said you weren't downloading common name data - you didn't say you were only downloading odd cast members.

I'm also keen to see these common names displayed all the time in the cast list which are apparently over whelming you and causing you to become 'emotional'. Please detail the exact steps you take so that these names are displayed in the cast list instead of the 'credited as' list. I can't find that option anywhere - I'm still stuck with only the credited as showing.

(yes I do know that if you display all the data for a member of the cast you see the credited as and the  common name - I'm talking about the cast list.)

I hope you can read this properly.

Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
In this particular forum, whether they agree or disagree isn't the point.  Its a case of saying "hey, I'd like that too" or "I wouldn't use that feature" but instead, I make a suggestion and get a bunch of people telling me I can't have that, or worse still, claiming I've said something that I never said, and then using that to shoot down the idea as stupid or a waste of time, etc.

Nobody bothered to ask how it could be implemented, and it could be done.  It would have virtually no impact on those who want to use those features -- none.  Yet, I get hammered for even suggesting it.  Nice discussion technique, no?

Again you keep making these blanket statements.  Go back to my original post.  Not only did I say it might work, I suggested a way in which it could.  You got so caught up in blasting the second half of my post that you seem to have completely ignored the first. 

I wasn't talking about you in particular.  Generally, I don't have problems with your opinions.  You are usually honest and up front even when you disagree.  You can say I'm paranoid if you want to, but even paranoids may have reason to be that way.

Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
In this particular forum, whether they agree or disagree isn't the point.  Its a case of saying "hey, I'd like that too" or "I wouldn't use that feature" but instead, I make a suggestion and get a bunch of people telling me I can't have that, or worse still, claiming I've said something that I never said, and then using that to shoot down the idea as stupid or a waste of time, etc.

Nobody bothered to ask how it could be implemented, and it could be done.  It would have virtually no impact on those who want to use those features -- none.  Yet, I get hammered for even suggesting it.  Nice discussion technique, no?

Again you keep making these blanket statements.  Go back to my original post.  Not only did I say it might work, I suggested a way in which it could.  You got so caught up in blasting the second half of my post that you seem to have completely ignored the first. 

I wasn't talking about you in particular.  Generally, I don't have problems with your opinions.  You are usually honest and up front even when you disagree.  You can say I'm paranoid if you want to, but even paranoids may have reason to be that way.

I can accept that.  As you know, I am a fairly literal person.  The word 'nobody' leaves very little room for interpretation so I just wanted to be clear that I believe there may be a workable solution IF Ken can find a way for people to only d/l and u/l the 'credited as' name.

Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
All that needs to be done is that any line that contains a common name gets skipped, and it moves on to the next line.  All changes other than common name get picked up. Downloads work the same, except in reverse.  If the downloaded line contains a common name entry, it skips to the next item in line if I have the checkbox set.  In the database world, we used to call that "updating by exception" and it is a very common way to do it.

I finally waded through all the carping in this thread and found the meat of your suggestion, John.  Stripped of all invective and derision, your proposal is sound and would provide a solution that should be acceptable to all.

You're welcome.  I believe if people could (please, please) stick to the topic and not get involved in trying to one-up each other, maybe we could all get close to the way we want things to work.

In the words of the renowned African American philosopher Rodney King, "Can't we all... just... get along?"