| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 14, 2007 |  Posts: 1,777 |
| | Posted: | | | | Hey, I'm all for a programmatic solution. If there was any chance of that I'd be happy to shut up immediately. Unfortunately, Ken hasn't given us any indication that this might be in the offing. Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
North:
I have yet to see arational, not a personal preference reason for doing so. The REASON for not doing so is that this ignores both the Rules and the results of the alias tool which people lobbied for so many years for ken to create, and now you want to ignore that and pre-determine the answer. What's next a dartboard for all names, should we use a blindfold as well.
Skip We already have a dartboard for names, it's called the CLT. As to the blindfold, what's the difference when we're already playing name roulette with the CLT? My favorite part will be when the first common name shifts and we get to do this all over again. That should be a hoot. | | | | Last edited: by mdnitoil |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Go wash your moth out, midnit  Istill stand by the BEST answer is SIMPLE ASSOCIATION. Skip  | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 1,777 |
| | Posted: | | | | Heheh.
It certainly is the best answer. Unfortunately, it's not one of our options, hence these discussions.
On a side note, I keep getting tempted to join the rules forum. Then I remember that I don't actually see any rule changes. What the heck goes on in there? | | | | Last edited: by mdnitoil |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 3,480 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting mdnitoil: Quote:
On a side note, I keep getting tempted to join the rules forum. Then I remember that I don't actually see any rule changes. What the heck goes on in there? Not much anymore. There hasn't been a post there since July 18th.  | | | ...James
"People fake a lot of human interactions, but I feel like I fake them all, and I fake them very well. That’s my burden, I guess." ~ Dexter Morgan |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 1,777 |
| | Posted: | | | | Ahhh, okay. So it's not like change is coming, or anything. That's great. |
|
| Registered: March 19, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 6,018 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting m.cellophane: Quote:
Quoting mdnitoil:
Quote:
On a side note, I keep getting tempted to join the rules forum. Then I remember that I don't actually see any rule changes. What the heck goes on in there?
Not much anymore. There hasn't been a post there since July 18th. They're not even discussing the rules changes beta release 3.5 calls for in there (e.g. distribution studio, custom genres)? How bizarre! |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | That surprises me too.
With all the arguing that goes on in this forum because of vague or conflicting rules, and the new beta, I thought that section would be as busy as this one! |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 3,830 |
| | Posted: | | | | I have a posting in the rules forum and as for now, the only response is: Rule is fine as it is for that particulary item, the rules committee is tired? | | | | 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. | | | | Last edited: by ? |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting northbloke: Quote:
That surprises me too.
With all the arguing that goes on in this forum because of vague or conflicting rules, and the new beta, I thought that section would be as busy as this one! Perhaps that's because few if any updates to the Rules have resulted from anything posted there.  | | | | Hal |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 3,830 |
| | Posted: | | | | If this is the case: It should be dissolved as it has no function. | | | | 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. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Giga Wizard: Quote:
If this is the case: It should be dissolved as it has no function. It has the same function as any other forum on this site...to discuss things. Just because things are discussed, doesn't mean changes will be made. | | | 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 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | very true... no matter what gets discussed there... Ken still has to agree to it. And if I remember right... the last decent sized rules update that was made (when we went from Credits title to Cover title) there was several things that came from the discussions there. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 3,830 |
| | Posted: | | | | It should be more than a discussion. | | | | 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. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | The way it always worked was we...
1. Discuss if a change should be made
2. Discuss and create the best possible wording for a rule
3. Bring it to Ken's Attention
From there it is always up to Ken to use to the new rule and it's wording or not. Ken always has final say... as I believe he should. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | So you're saying that all the bad rules have been re-written, just not implemented yet? |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 3,830 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote:
The way it always worked was we...
1. Discuss if a change should be made
2. Discuss and create the best possible wording for a rule
3. Bring it to Ken's Attention
From there it is always up to Ken to use to the new rule and it's wording or not. Ken always has final say... as I believe he should. Looks like now there is even no more discussion: point one should be If there is a problem with ruling bring it to the attention of the Contribution Rules CommitteeNow members don't even want to see there is a problem. Most only vote: Rule is fine as it is. Those members are not there to solve problems. Looks like they are there to protect their hard obtained 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. | | | | Last edited: by ? |
|