 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1... 4 5 6 7 8 ...12  Previous Next
|
 Stephen King's "It" (Locked) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | No, Bob I am playing the game the way i have been forced to play it. My position is ALWAYS the same and does not change to meet circumstances. I personally find it fairly distastefu tp stoop to this level but since no comprehends and all I do is get beaten and talked AT instead of talked to...I don't see that i have any choice at the moment. the high ground means nothing, and I have always maintained the high ground. On the one hand we want to have accurate SRP values and on the other hand we are willing toi settle for sometimes FICTITIOUS title data. I am sorry Bob, i can't buy into the game. I am not saying the credit Block is always wrong, but it is OFTEN wrongh, every bit as wrong as the front cover or the On Screen title and my position on this remains exactly as it was, whichj is consistent with my position on every other data field we play with.
Now if people want to talk TO me about such things instead of adopting the talking AT and the beating to the ground, fine i will try and and explain things as much as i need toi. But the hypocrisy is intolerable.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 844 |
| | Posted: | | | | So your position remains the same even if the rules change to invalidate said position? That is like standing in mid-air over a river after the bridge has been taken away. It can't be done and unless your initials are JC it probably shouldn't be tried. Do you honestly think you will be able to force a change to the rules through your antics? It doesn't make any difference how accurate you may or may not consider the credit blocks to be, The rules call for them to be the first place you check to find out how to handle any possesives that are printed on the cover. The fact that you would hold your own opinion above even the specific example cited in the rules betrays a deep and abiding contempt for those rules, the owners of the program and every of other user. Your stance and behaviour with regards to this has destroyed the last morsel of respect I once had for you. Enjoy your high horse and your faux-martydom. I am done with you. | | | | Last edited: by bob9000 |
| | Registered: May 8, 2007 | | Posts: 823 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
OK let's look at some blatant and outright HYPOCRISY displayed by many here. Why do I say many...because many of you participated in the DO NOT issue. The Rule is clear, but it was twisted and spun to allow for a 4 cent change in SRP, despite the prohibition under the guise of....ACCURACY after all the user had ontained THE SRP from the Distributor. So we MUST have an ACCURATE SRP but NOT an ACCURATE title....sorry peopple it doesn't washand it is hypocritical to pretend otherwise.
Skip  You're constantly blasting people for submitting updates based on their own interpretations of the rules, yet that's blatantly and exactly what you're doing with Christine and It. Then you call everyone else a hypocrite. You are either insane, or are a deliberate longterm troll who has successfully avoided banning for years. Either way, you have long proven to be highly disruptive and destructive to the forums, the community, and ultimately the business. I cannot for the life of me understand why the administrators continue to allow you to continue on as you are. | | | | 99.9% of all cat plans consist only of "Step 1." |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Bob:
And the Rules said DO NOT change the SRP but that didn't stop anybody from violating the Rules now did it.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Grendell:
Your comment is exactly the sort of talking AT to which I referred and is highly insulting and argumentative and in my book bannable. But that's not my call. Nor will I even suggest it.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Bob:
My opinions can be changed but they will not be changed through talking at and insults and particularly with dispolays of hypocrisy and inconsistent data handling.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 3,436 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
And the Rules said DO NOT change the SRP but that didn't stop anybody from violating the Rules now did it. This has nothing to do with Stephen King's "It". Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
My opinions can be changed but they will not be changed through talking at and insults and particularly with dispolays of hypocrisy and inconsistent data handling. Which inconsistency? That we take the Title from the cover (which we can) and don't take the SRP from the cover (which we can't)? The rule is clear. Follow it. Other than that your vote is unlikely to change the outcome of these Title contributions. I am moving on. | | | Achim [諾亞信； Ya-Shin//Nuo], a German in Taiwan.
Registered: May 29, 2000 (at InterVocative) |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Achim:
You completely missed the point, my friend.
Or at least you appear to have missed it.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,436 |
| | Posted: | | | | Frankly, I am not interested in getting your point about the inconsistencies.
Unless there is an inconsistency within the way Titles are entered (which you should have pointed out weeks ago; yet, at the time you also withheld information about some unfortunate wording, which led to unnecessary discussions) then it is not important. Data entry is handled by the Rules. If the Rules tell us to enter data A one way and data B another, then so be it. | | | Achim [諾亞信； Ya-Shin//Nuo], a German in Taiwan.
Registered: May 29, 2000 (at InterVocative) | | | | Last edited: by nuoyaxin |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | It is NOT an inconsistency in the Rule, in fact the Rule, while it could have been better and without the if then is consistent. Where the inconsistency comes is in the interpretation of users, interpreting a Rule that says DO NOT to allow for accuracy, while the SAME users who said that and voted for it are saying NO to ACCURACY in the title which is far more important than SRP. Therein lies the hypocrisy and the inconsistency. IF you are going to say ACCURACY for SRP but not for Title.....  I have always recognized and said so publicly, that whatever we choose is going to result in inaccuracy and some users being unhappy. See AH's The Birds. If accuracy is the objective and based on the SRP issue Accuracy is the issue, then we have to go to the source for the OFFICIALLY registered title, which is nowhere to be found on the Cover or On Screen. Personally speaking I do not favor this approach as I believe it is unneccesarily complex. I also do not favor the current system which calls for an if then approach. I favor ONE answer and ONE answer only and whatever "inaccuracies" arise from that single answer are dealt with locally. Now as to your comment "yet, at the time you also withheld information about some unfortunate wording, which led to unnecessary discussions" First you have to be willing to listen to what I might say and talk TO me, instead of the typical Talk AT me and insult me, all that is going to do everytime is show me trhat someone doesn't get it, doesn't want to or is being deliberately argumentative and disagreeable and make me dig in my heels. I believe you have seen that precise behavior numerous times. If I think you understand what I am saying and are really to trying to discuss it then we will discuss. Or if I think you aren't understanding me and are trying to discuss, I will keep trying to explain to the point of frustration and exasperation. Both of which you have also seen many times.. It's all up to you and the others, none of whom I have on block, though sometimes......  Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,436 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
It is NOT an inconsistency in the Rule, in fact the Rule, while it could have been better and without the if then is consistent. Where the inconsistency comes is in the interpretation of users, interpreting a Rule that says DO NOT to allow for accuracy, while the SAME users who said that and voted for it are saying NO to ACCURACY in the title which is far more important than SRP. Therein lies the hypocrisy and the inconsistency. IF you are going to say ACCURACY for SRP but not for Title..... Exactly the answer I expected. The rule does have the if and everybody goes with it. All is well. You keep dragging in the SRP, which is off-topic. However, in the incident you refer to the SRP change was part of a wider contribution and even you acknowledged at the time that the change was actually indeed correct.  Quote:
First you have to be willing to listen to what I might say and talk TO me, instead of the typical Talk AT me and insult me You know better than that. I have always tried to understand what you are trying to say, often taking the discussion to PM in order to sort those things out. | | | Achim [諾亞信； Ya-Shin//Nuo], a German in Taiwan.
Registered: May 29, 2000 (at InterVocative) |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Irrelevant whether the chhange was correct or even part of a wider Contribution, the Rule says DO NOT.
Further it is hypocritical to take a position relative to ACCURACY in one field while ignoring it in another, that is why I say my positions ae consistent, they take into account the handling of each and every piece of data and how it is dealt with and where that leads, if applicable. It is all interrelated, Achim
As to your second comment, you are correct, i should have made it generic you.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
No, Bob I am playing the game the way i have been forced to play it. Sorry, but that is a cop out. You are doing exactly what you have chosen to do. At least be a man and admit it. Quote:
Now if people want to talk TO me about such things instead of adopting the talking AT and the beating to the ground, fine i will try and and explain things as much as i need toi. But the hypocrisy is intolerable. I have talked to you in quite a few posts on this subject. I have asked you to explain how your position is the correct one. You have yet to do that, so please, stop pretending that you are willing to discuss this. You aren't fooling anyone. | | | 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 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | I believe, Unicus, i have made myself totally clear. IF accuracy is the issue, which based on the SRP issue it is, then we must go to the legally registered title.
There are four possibilities which can be implemented WITHOUT any IF THENS, which unneccessarily complicates the problem.
1) On Screen Title
2) Front Cover Title
3) Credit Block Title in quotes
4) Legal title
As I noited the fourth option, to me, is unneccessarily complex, but it was not brought up by me, either. But if accuracy is the issue then that is the answer.
The other three all will generate variations of inaccuracy which have to be dealt with locally, but I don't see that as the problem that everyone seems to, no matter which of the three were used. I am not unreasonable, I did not make accuracy the issue, someone else did. The only thing that I absolutely abhor from a data entry point of view is if then statements, the simplest answer is always a SINGLE answer. But i have explained all of this before Unicus, not in this fashion, granted, but it has all been discussed by me.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
I believe, Unicus, i have made myself totally clear. IF accuracy is the issue, which based on the SRP issue it is, then we must go to the legally registered title. This misdirection might work on some people...it won't work on me. The rule is badly worded and has nothing to do with the issue at hand. Quote:
There are four possibilities which can be implemented WITHOUT any IF THENS, which unneccessarily complicates the problem.
1) On Screen Title
2) Front Cover Title
3) Credit Block Title in quotes
4) Legal title
As I noited the fourth option, to me, is unneccessarily complex, but it was not brought up by me, either. But if accuracy is the issue then that is the answer.
The other three all will generate variations of inaccuracy which have to be dealt with locally, but I don't see that as the problem that everyone seems to, no matter which of the three were used. I am not unreasonable, I did not make accuracy the issue, someone else did. The only thing that I absolutely abhor from a data entry point of view is if then statements, the simplest answer is always a SINGLE answer. But i have explained all of this before Unicus, not in this fashion, granted, but it has all been discussed by me.
Skip All quite interesting but 100% irrelevant to the issue at hand and not what I asked you to explain...but I suspect you already knew that. The rule has already been written and released. That rule is option 2, unless there is a possessive on the cover. If there is a possesive on the cover, then it is option 3. What I have asked you to explain is how you come to the conclusion that the rule is option 4. If you can explain that...logically...then I am willing to discuss it with you. If you can't, then there is no point in continuing. | | | 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 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | I have explained that as well, it is based upon ACCURACY which was determined by others in other circumstances. The ACCURATE title is the title that is legally registered with US Copyright Office or similar entity in other countries, if there is such a thing. Had the SRP issue not arisen, I would still be complaining about the IF THEN (which makes me absolutely nuts) but the accuracy question would not be part of the discussion. But to say that we want the SRP to be ACCURATE, while the single most important piece of does not have to accurate and we are willing to accept COMPROMISES is simply illogical.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1... 4 5 6 7 8 ...12 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |