I'll agree, kathy. With the exception that the rules are very clear and do not provide for the kind of interpretations that are being thrown around. I have a problem with people who seem to like to repeatedly state their opinion as if it were fact, when they don't have any background to make such a claim (scott0 and particularly when the FACTS of the rules do correspond with such opinions, even IF there are a lot of users who agree.

The Martian himself created an way to deal with this particular type of credit and that is to include the stunts since the filmmaker, in this case, appears to include them in the cast, assuming that Jenna is cast. I have always supported this idea, even though I am not crazy about it. By the same token, I am even less crazy about those users who believe, in spite of the rules, that they can DISCERN what is or is not cast.  Cast can appear anywhere in the credits, they believe, and if that is true, then EVERYBODY is Cast and that is simply stupid. (I think we can all agree on that) The rules say that Cast are listed TOGETHER in a SINGLE SECTION, not all over the place, not separated. the sad part is that people are violating the Rules all the time in this regard, including Additional Voices, but they are not being HONEST in their notes by failing describe that many times the Additional Voices are not factually part of the CAST list, but are instead following their own discernment or preference for what they BELIEVE to be Cast, despite what the rules call for.

I give a detailed explanation backed up with quotes from the rules. And the response is not based in any sort of FACT but based upon opinion and the opinion is not even supported, unless someone selectively quotes the Rule to create a false impression. Then when those facts cannot be countered, we get users who begin to insult, attack, denigrate and demean. We get other users who step uo and make inane comments like "that is your opinion and your opion yad ya da yad." But again while present detailed facts backed up by the rules, even those user present no argument other that their yada yada yada, which is also insulting.

It is impossible or nearly so, all to often, to engage in sort of factual discussion because users don't discuss facts, they cite their preference or that they divine this or that. When the Rules simply do not support their claims. Then we get users who start inciting other users. it has ll become very predictable, and just as I always the one defending the Rules, the ones who want to ignore the Rules, issue their "factual" opinions, engage in dismissive behavior and incitement are ALL the same users.

Skip

The voice role here is in the same section of the credits as the other cast. The fact that there are other stunt roles in the same section doesn't change that.

Quoting m.cellophane:

Quote:
The voice role here is in the same section of the credits as the other cast. The fact that there are other stunt roles in the same section doesn't change that.

It does if you are trying to exclude the Stunts, james. because that then means that is is sepaerated from the cast and not together in a single section.

Skip

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
The rules in this case are not unclear, Ace.

Then why can't we agree on the correct course of action? Is it because we (meaning everyone who disgrees with you)'re bad people who want to wreck the DB for our amusement? That is what you seem to be implying with some of your posts.

Ace:

As I said the rules are what they are, and whether i think they should be improved or not is not relevant at this point, the Rules ARE. They are what we follow, we don't follow popular opinion, especially when it flies in the face of those Rules. If and when Ken decides to modify them then we will have something else to discuss, but for now there is nothing to discusws and popuklar opinion is completely irrelevant. Just follow the rules.

@James:

I repeat if you are saying exclude stunts then according to the rules you are wrong plain and simple as i have detailed. Now, yes, a partial contribution is allowed, but then if someone comes along adds the stunts to that partial contribution, that is per the Rules and you would be wrong to vote no per those Rules. I don't really care what you think you can divine. The Rule clearly defines the cast list as being together in a single section, so if you are suggesting that Jenna can be cast while being separated (not including Stunts) then that can ONLY be viewed as a partial contribution a complete contribution per the Rules HAS to include the Stunts.

I think you probably remember my personal feelings about stunts generally. But be that as it may, we also know that in a very small percentage of profiles we run into this exact issue and in version 2 we came up with an answer, not completely satisfactory but it would prevent these sort of discussions, along with the accompanying venom and bad feelings.

Now for rick

You claimed that Gunnar did not attack me, you are wrong on that. But then you aren't here. Gunnar used his yada, yad, yada comment he did not attempt to discuss the facts of the Rules, just yada, yad, yada, Iviewed that as both an attack and dismissive.

Re your comment on virus or anyone else again, there was no attempt to discuss the facts of the rules which were quoted and detailed analysis provided, all Virus did was what everyone doing, ignoring the facts and giving an unsupported opinion. While not an attack, it is highly annoying and says to ME "This is what I think and I don't care what the Rules say". Thus my comment. Martian brought up the valid point re: partial Contributions, but his argument relative to spirit of the rules fell flat in the face of the actual words of the Rules

The began the attacks on myself, simply because no one could argue the facts of what the rules say. By yourself and others, rick and as i have said many times I'll not tolerate it. Your incitement is absolutely inexcusable and unforgivable. I have called upon Ken to remove your offending post, of all the posts and attacks in this thread yours was the most grievous.

I think we have seen in recent weeks that we can have amenable discussions. But then we have one like this and all too sadly, it followed a very predictable and very well established routine, the same one that is followed by the same suspects each and every time debate becomes passionate, it seems that there are some who simply will not control themselves, the debate up to the point of the usual suspects interjecting was passionate, at least on my part, and as i have said no one ever attempted to actually try and argue the facts of the rules or what they say, they just kept posting unsupported opinions, save for the Martiam and i have addressed that. I wish the usual suspects would learn to control themselves, i don't care what popular opinion is, I don't care about unsupported opinion. I care about what the RULES really say, and the Rules do not support the popular opinion, and let me repeat something else. For all any of you know i might completely agree with popular opinion, but that doesn't change the FACT that the Rules do not allow for that opinion and i don;'t care how many of you say it. I have quoted the rules and given a detailed analysis of them and they simply don't support the popular opinion at this time, whether i like it or not. Only Ken can make a change to the Rule, not i, I only deal with what is. Not what ifs, not what might be tomorrow nor anything else. This specific problem was dealt with in Version 2 of the rules and Ken for his reasons chose not to publish Version 2, which would have corrected many ills. Which means we are left with a Rule, which in this case, might be unsatisfactory, but it is certainly not unclear nor is open to interpretation or spin city.

Skip

Skip

Skip