Of course it does not, the crew role follows the rules and the company divider says whatever it wants to. The role is what makes it valid. There 2 polar opposites in consecutive posts.

That's unusual.

Quoting iPatsa:

Quote:
Quoting CharlieM:

Quote:
The whole basis for this thread..

Does the word "Additional" when used in a company header such as "Additional Visual Effects by XXXX",  apply to the crew that is listed below it?

Of course it does. Why do you even bother to enter company headers at all if you don't think they apply to the crew below it? I know this is the funny farm but you are taking the absurdity to another level.

I'm sorry, but that is not how the rules read.  We only enter company headers if the crew below it are valid crew entries.

If a header reads "Visual Effects by KNB," and only has a list of names below it, do you enter all those names?  I don't because none of them have a valid crew credit assigned to them.

Per the rule quoted earlier in this thread, you only use a header if there is valid crew under it.  There is nothing that says you use the header to determine whether or not the crew is valid.

Quoting CharlieM:

Quote:
Quoting iPatsa:

Quote:
Quoting CharlieM:

Quote:
The whole basis for this thread..

Does the word "Additional" when used in a company header such as "Additional Visual Effects by XXXX",  apply to the crew that is listed below it?

Of course it does.  I know this is the funny farm but you are taking the absurdity to another level.

Wow.  The discussion with Lewis, while we disagree with each  other, is at least civil.

You have to bring in the insult, which adds nothing to the discussion...

Nice way of avoiding the question. So I repeat it: Why do you even bother to enter company headers at all if you don't think they apply to the crew below it? Do you think the word additional means anything in context to the crew listed directly below it? If not, why do you enter it, or do you remove the word additional and pretend that it never existed?

Quoting iPatsa:

Quote:
Nice way of avoiding the question.

He didn't avoid the question, he simply chose not to engage in a conversation with someone who already decided that he was, and I quote, "taking the absurdity to another level."

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Quoting Lewis_Prothero:

Quote:
Another fact is:
If you don't like the logical consequences of your position, maybe it's time to re-think the position.

Sorry, but that is not a fact, it is an opinion...that opinion being based on an assumption that the logic isn't flawed.

Correct

But then again:
Where exactly in the rules can it be found that "Additional Anything" is not allowed?
The positions taken in this thread will weaken the so-called "agreement" (of which I haven't found anything yet, except for the continous repitition that it exists).

Please come to my thread about "Additional MakeUp" and try to explain me why it is disallowed.
Be aware that I'm not afraid to use any argument from this thread to strengthen my proposal.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Quoting iPatsa:

Quote:
I doubt that you are sorry. And your reasoning just shows that you don't really care what the header says which makes the data pointless.

You're right, I don't really care what the header says, but that doesn't make the data pointless.  Well, in my opinion, most crew data is pointless, but that has nothing to do with what the header says.  A Re-recording Mixer is still a Re-recording Mixer regardless of the header.

Quote:
It's better to ignore all headers then and just list the crew without headers if they don't mean anything.

I do ignore all headers.  If someone is credited with a valid role, one listed in the crew chart, I enter them, period.  I include the header because some users, the ones that wanted the headers, feel it gives the credit context.

Well, company headers is a feature I personally never wanted to see in the program. And look where it brought us. I think the song title groups were a very creative interpretation of the rules, but I doubt it was the intention behind it. But since we now have the headers, I think we should pay attention to them, not just enter them mechanically like they don't mean anything. I'm sure they do or there would be no purpose for using the word "additional" in some and not in others if they are all the same.

Quoting scotthm:

Quote:
Quoting iPatsa:

Quote:
I think the song title groups were a very creative interpretation of the rules, but I doubt it was the intention behind it.

If everyone interpreted the rules that creatively we'd have total chaos.

We have, actually.