Quoting northbloke:

Quote:
if the end credits have already failed the standard credits test.

There is no test, only a user(s) interpretation of standard credits!

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
The fact that she does not appear "on-screen" does not mean that she was not involved.

As I said to Giga Wizard, yes - if she does not appear (or is heard), she is not involved!
How do you interpret the word "involved"?
She is there - she's involved.
She isn't there - she's not involved.

@Giga Wizard,
"test" was a bad word to use, but doesn't negate the fact that we have a definition for standard credits, and we don't look at the non-standard rules if this defintion is met.

Quoting northbloke:

Quote:
How do you interpret the word "involved"?
She is there - she's involved.
She isn't there - she's not involved.

Definition: Involved I think the above is to narrow as an explanation

Quoting northbloke:

Quote:
Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Except that this  ignores this part of the Rules:

"If a film has actors listed in the opening credits, which are not listed in the end credits, add these to the list in DVD Profiler before those taken from the end credits."

Since this falls under the "non-standard" credits section, and clearly applies in this case,, I would strongly argue that the credits are NOT standard.

No, you're reading the rules the wrong way round - we only list actors from the opening credits if the end credits have already failed the standard credits test.
As these credits don't, we don't even need to look at the non-standard credits rules.

Exactly.

@hal, sorry didn't see your response to that part

@tracer, I only re-emphasized asking that because I felt its an important point. Its similar to just listing the end credits and not the opening credits, but it would nullify the argument that it double/triples the work because someone has to redo it. A future contributor would then only need to do the credits for the episodes that weren't done and not theoretically check for missing (though the double\triple work argument can be, and has been, countered other ways), but by the rules it's still incomplete so would be 'wrong' by the if incomplete then incorrect argument so I wanted to see what people would do in that situation that held that stance.

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting northbloke:

Quote:
Quoting Giga Wizard:

Quote:
Well I'm not god  , The Fact that she got a big credit has to mean something.

Yeah, it means the production company were too cheap to make different opening titles for the episodes when she wasn't involved...   

Non of us are God, but as Northbloke said, it could simply mean the production company was too cheap to make alternate opening credits. By the rules though they are standard credits, and in that case the rules say to take the credits from the end credits only, so it doesn't matter why she is credited in the opening.

Quote:
Or maybe they felt she deserved credit even if she did not appear in every episode!

We can't include her just because the producers 'maybe felt' she deserved a credit, as Skip would say (hopefully that doesn't hurt my argument) we have to go by whats on screen, not what we think the producers may have been thinking even though in reality we have no idea what they were thinking.

As far as involvement, If her involvement was in some way other than acting (appearing on screen or voice only work) than that would make her crew and not cast.

-Agrare

Quoting Agrare:

Quote:

Non of us are God, but as Northbloke said, it could simply mean the production company was too cheap to make alternate opening credits. By the rules though they are standard credits, and in that case the rules say to take the credits from the end credits only, so it doesn't matter why she is credited in the opening.

Some of us say standard credits, some of us say no standard credits! So you can argue all you want. It's only an argumentation.

She is credited as an actor, Agnes Moorehead remained with Bewitched until its run ended in 1972.

Quoting Giga Wizard:

Quote:
Quoting Agrare:

Quote:

Non of us are God, but as Northbloke said, it could simply mean the production company was too cheap to make alternate opening credits. By the rules though they are standard credits, and in that case the rules say to take the credits from the end credits only, so it doesn't matter why she is credited in the opening.

Some of us say standard credits, some of us say no standard credits! So you can argue all you want. It's only an argumentation.

But as I said in the original bewitched thread, then all it comes down to for this is are they standard or not. unless agreement is made on that this argument (or discussion if you prefer) will go on forever. Only way for it to really be determined is word from Ken\Gerri. But for discussion purposes it all comes down to what constitutes involved.

If she doesn't act in the episode (show up at some point, have voice only work) then even if she was somehow involved elsewhere why would we give her an acting credit. We don't give gaffers acting credits even though they are involved in the episode.

And as far as having to watch each episode, I agree with northbloke's comment of:

Quote:
No, we can still copy the on-screen credits as they appear. But if someone notices that this situation has occurred then we will be expected to change it for the online.

-Agrare

That's a non sequitor Hal, we're talking about cast here.
Directors and writers are crew. Crew can be involved without appearing or being heard, but how can an actor be involved as an actor without appearing or being heard?