| Author |
Message |
| Registered: August 22, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 1,807 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Since the Reports and Layouts are generated by users and not Invelos, that would be up to the people designing said Reports and Layouts. Kind of like expecting Microsoft to be responsible because the third party developers aren't smart enough to properly incorporate their API's.. Functionality works fine IF you design things properly.
Skip The program works fine. But if we choose to omit that relevant piece of information -who the feature actors are- that could be gathered from the opening titles, there is no way for the program (or for a 3rd party) to retrieve it. | | | | -- Enry |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | So restructure the data the way you want to make use of it LOCALLY, Enry. that is why we have a two tier system. Your local database handles it the way YOU want it, that is NOT the job of the online.
What I hear is a few people complaining that the Online as it is structured does not do what THEY want it to do, not ONLY that they don't to expend the energy to customize their local database to do what they want, they want it done FOR them. What about the concept that the Online is not going to be all things to all users that you do not comprehend, and if it is changed then we will have this SAME argument from another pack of users. I have an answer for this condition, it is called lazy users.
Get over it.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
|
| Registered: April 7, 2007 |  Posts: 357 |
| | Posted: | | | | I think a poll for a rule change is a good idea. I know it's up to Ken but if it is local vs online then surely the online should reflect what the most users want? Then you could keep it as it as is locally Skip. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Polls have been taken on this before, grave. and the answer has been the same. You people are simpluy UNBELIEVABLE. Waaaahh. sheesh
I am expecting a fresh shipment of cheese on Monday.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: August 22, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,807 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Simply too much work invested, It's all about (useful, in my view) information that can be *added*. It would be something in addition, not to change or toss away what already has been done. | | | | -- Enry |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | You said it exactly right, enry. Useful...in your view.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 1,029 |
| | Posted: | | | | The job of the online database is to provide data that are consistent with the functionality of the program. So in honor of Skip's repeat-the-same-again-and-again approach, I quote myself from the previous page: Quoting goodguy: Quote:
Maybe someone should start a poll and follow up with a rule change proposal if the poll results justify it.
Basically, I see 3 options:
Leave it as it is. Follow the end credits.
Use m.cellophane's approach: put a duplicate of the top-billed actors first, followed by a divder, followed by the end credits.
Just move the top-billed actors first without duplicating them.
It should be pointed out that the current rules damage program functionality in various areas, including:
Movie Pick
Detail View
Reports
PDA And no, I won't do it. While I might be an expert in some areas, I certainly lack the discipline and calmness required to moderate such a proposal despite Skip's constant obstructions. | | | | Matthias | | | | Last edited: by goodguy |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 813 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
You said it exactly right, enry. Useful...in your view.
Skip And mine, and James' apparently as it is his model, and GoodGuys.... But not in Skip's, so lets not bother eh.  | | | Andy 
"Credited as" Names Database |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Goodguy:
There are THOUSANDs of users who will agree with you, there are more thousands that will say the way it is, there are MORE thousands that may hatheir own idea relative to functionality. And you know whaty they are ALL correct, but they cannot all be handled by the Online, that is why you have a LOCAL, you and other clearly don't comprehend that and you don't care about any other interests other than YOUR own. I repeat givbe it up, the Online will never be all things to all people. there was a time before the rules when user blatantly and repeatedly tried to manipulate the database to their own purposes and it was not a pretty sight. The database was an absolute MESS.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Lopek: Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
You said it exactly right, enry. Useful...in your view.
Skip
And mine, and James' apparently as it is his model, and GoodGuys....
But not in Skip's, so lets not bother eh. You THINK I am alone, Lopek. You couldn't be more wrong. The difference between me and you and others is that I bring no personal agenda to the dance. I just happen to be the most vocal. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: August 22, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,807 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
You said it exactly right, enry. Useful...in your view.
Skip Of course. The studios top-billed the featuring actors in the opening credits, but what do we care?  | | | | -- Enry |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | That has been explained, i am sorry you either don't get it, don't care or whatever. Make your changes locally and be happy.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: August 22, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,807 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
The difference between me and you and others is that I bring no personal agenda to the dance. "Personal agenda"? What are you talking about? There are different points of views and you should respect that, even if you don't agree with someone else's opinion. | | | | -- Enry | | | | Last edited: by White Pongo, Jr. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 813 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
You THINK I am alone, Lopek. You couldn't be more wrong. The difference between me and you and others is that I bring no personal agenda to the dance. I just happen to be the most vocal.
Skip Where did I say that I thought you were alone?  The point is that you try to shut down any discussion about any development that you are not interested in. Take this thread alone: Quote:
If you want to go by your concept of billing, be my guest, LOCALLY. Quote:
It is the way WE do things in Profiler Land. Quote:
It is not going to happen. Quote:
Live with it. Quote:
Get over it. Quote:
Make your changes locally and be happy. and it is the same in every feature request thread that you don't agree with. It ain't your personal programme, let Ken decide what will and won't happen, what will be implemented into the software/main database, and what we have to keen locally. | | | Andy
"Credited as" Names Database |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | I respect the viewpoint and it was all discussed over two years ago, Ken made the decision and set the course. So respect the decision that Ken reached. The power to do what you want is in your computer.
You aren't repsecting a counter-thought that brings absolutely no agenda to the table.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 813 |
| | Posted: | | | | Two years ago it was not possible to do what James is doing now, as it was not possible to have the same actor/actress in the cast list twice. Also there were no dividers. This was not an option when the rules for cast in credited order from the end credits rule was written.
Things have changed, new things are possible, so it seems totally sensible to me to consider what the new functionality allows and what benefits it can bring - which is a lot as goodguy has clearly hightlighted. | | | Andy
"Credited as" Names Database |
|