Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Someone needs to PM Ken on this.  I would do it but I am on my way to Best Buy...it opens in about 10 minutes and it is Tuesday. 

I PMd Gerri about it yesterday.

She read the PM....but no response. 

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Quoting pauls42:

Quote:
Quoting T!M:

Quote:

Apparently even the screeners believe that the rules say: take the "title" from the front cover, and the "original title" from the back cover ("credits block").

thats because that is the rules (assuming you mis spelt the phrase 'copyright notice' and spelt this as 'Credits block').

Taking the 'Mission: Impossible III' example - if the rules really prohibit us from tracking the full title as shown in the actual film credits, then I think the rules are wrong, and should be changed ASAP! Of course I know I can do things locally as I want - trust me, I have! - but apart from basic things like running time I'd have thought that titles was one of the few things we could quite easily all agree on. Again: I want to track the title from the cover ('M:i:III') and I want to track the title from the actual credits ('Mission: Impossible III'). Here we have two fields, one called 'Title' (or 'DVD Title' even, depending on where you look), and one called 'Original Title'... I never imagined it would be so hard for some people - including the screeners - to figure out what goes where. Apart from helping to determine when a possessive is part of the title, I see no use whatsoever for the credits block/copyright notice/whatever the rules call it.

I never said I thought it was a great rule - and for my local db I wouldn't follow this.

But I was saying why the screeners (who have no doubt been told to follow the rules absolutely) have done as they did.

Chaniging the rule is something which can be requested.. and should be.

Although I thoroughly enjoyed my crow dinner, there has been a reversal on this issue and the contribution of "Mission: Impossible III" as the Original Title has been approved.

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Although I thoroughly enjoyed my crow dinner, there has been a reversal on this issue and the contribution of "Mission: Impossible III" as the Original Title has been approved.

Order has been restored and all is now right with the DVD world. 

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Although I thoroughly enjoyed my crow dinner, there has been a reversal on this issue and the contribution of "Mission: Impossible III" as the Original Title has been approved.

You can keep the dinner.      I'm glad to hear of the reversal.

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
I re spectfully suggest that your comment further demonstrates a failure to comprehend what I am saying. my guess is my fault in not making it clear enough, although I will confess that I am at a loss how to make it any clearer. I have done just about everything other than talk to you(generic) like you were 4 years old. But this particular thread and some of the other thread on this and related topics that have cropped up the last few weeks absolutely prove my point.<sigh>

Skip

This proves my point.

Unicus:

How can you say that when since the majority opinion was adopted we have had nothing but turmoli and people who can't figure out what to Contribute. All things which I said would happen, I understood your position, but I don't understand when after it has been proven wrong (along with the majority) you continue to defend it.

My position remains the same ONE source for the data and ONE source ONLY and whatever that source says it what it says. Unfortunately this whole thing revolves around SOME users who for NO rational reason that I can figure out simply do not like some types of data and will go to any lengths, even unnecessarily complicating and making them unusable to exclude such data that they define. Yes, James this includes you.

Skip

Quoting m.cellophane:

Quote:
This proves my point.

This proves my point. 

Not likely, James.

Great we are real;ly going to get somewhere now, we are reduced to talking AT each other.

You should stick to your accounting, which I know you are very good at. That is not a dig.

Skip