Invelos Forums->General: Website Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4  Previous Next
|
|
Credit Lookup Tool |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
  | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 8,738 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Giga Wizard: Quote:
But you support NO vote I do, yes, I still stand by that. And you're making me itch...  I feel a "no"-vote is warranted purely on how DVD Profiler handles three-piece names. If A/B/C is presented as A B C, I see no reason to handle four-piece names differently. That would be the - IMHO perfectly valid - reasoning behind my no-vote. The fact that there are already 385 "B. R." entries out there only confirms my suspicions that quite a large number of people feel the same way. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 2,394 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Quoting Giga Wizard:
Quote:
But you support NO vote
I do, yes, I still stand by that. And you're making me itch... I feel a "no"-vote is warranted purely on how DVD Profiler handles three-piece names. If A/B/C is presented as A B C, I see no reason to handle four-piece names differently. That would be the - IMHO perfectly valid - reasoning behind my no-vote. The fact that there are already 385 "B. R." entries out there only confirms my suspicions that quite a large number of people feel the same way. No, that number doesn't confirm anything about how people feel about the parsing of Mr. Woller's name. All that shows is that 385 profiiles were approved. Without examining votes on each contribution to determine if anyone even questioned the cast list, all that can be said is that the reviewers didn't have a problem with it. But if it makes you feel better to believe this proves something, go ahead and enjoy yourself. If a title were presented today, within the current rules, a vote against the CLT-preferred credit would be improper. | | | Another Ken (not Ken Cole)
Badges? We ain't got no badges. We don't need no badges. I don't have to show you any stinking badges.
DVD Profiler user since June 15, 2001 |
| | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,738 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting kdh1949: Quote:
If a title were presented today, within the current rules, a vote against the CLT-preferred credit would be improper. I disagree. Not because of CLT results, but because how DVD Profiler deals with names. Once again, if a three-piece name is presented with spaces between each part, then I can only assume that I do the same for a four-piece name. That's why I'd vote "no", and I'd urge everyone to do the same. | | | | Last edited: by T!M |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 3,830 |
| | Posted: | | | | T!M there is big difference between presentation and what you enter in the fields
you enter:
Mary/Bond/Davis/
and not
Mary /Bond /Davis /
and even if you try this, the program cuts the trailing spaces.
So you don't have to urge everyone to vote NO and vote against the rules. | | | | Sources for one or more of the changes and/or additions were not submitted. Please include the sources for your changes in the contribution notes, especially for cast and crew additions. |
| | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,738 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Giga Wizard: Quote:
So you don't have to urge everyone to vote NO and vote against the rules. Well, I DO urge everyone to vote "no", and I don't feel that is against the rules. Quite the contrary, actually. |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->General: Website Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4 Previous Next
|
|
|