Maybe he's related to the BYed Scott Rudin?  (Or perhaps he IS the BYed Scott Rudin?

I agree, it's a nuisance to have to vote on all these changes if they're unnecessary.  I saw four of them last night.  According to the CRT he's shown in 320 titles (940 profiles) -- so we may have a lot of things to keep track of.

I wonder why this person thinks the BY is needed?  Even IMDb only shows ONE Scott Rudin.

Smee:

There are two aspects to this kind of thing that annoys me. Those that blindly voted No, and those that since the error was pointed out have not changed their vote to No , and some of those same users are users that CLAIM to support the rules, but to neutral. It is simple an error was spotted, I am sure knowing the user that he will withdraw them. I did not bring it here for his benefit. I brought it here because I was shocked at both the quantity and in some cases the identities of users who were simply, blindly following along.

Skip

Doc:

I am not chastising anyone individually and would not, no matter how much I might be tempted to. Why is not appropriate? I didn't look at the votes I do that AFTER I have voted every time. I initially suspected that this was in error, let's face it Rudin is not a common name, so I ran a quick check to verify my suspicions and then voted. Better to take care with my votre than to allow bad data or data that does not conform to the Rules to be further proagated. If those who blindly voted yes have such a thin skin, then they have a problem, not I. But I am sorry when some of these are users who hold themselves up to be supporters of Rules and knowledgeable about all thing Hollywood vote Yes to such an obvious error, or worse yet then chnage their vote to neutral instead of the appropriate No, then I have great difficulty in respecting those individuals or their opinions.

Do I consider myslef knowledgeable about Hollywood? Yes, I am smarter than the average bear, Boo-Boo. But that does not mean I know EVERYTHINHG or that I cannot make mistakes, I do all too often and when such mistakes are pointed out I CORRECT them without fail. I will not change a Yes vote to a Neutral when it should be a No.

Skip

I think a post in the forum is a reasonable way of responding to an incorrect post that's garnered a large number of yes votes.  Trying to PM double-digits worth of users is a little much to expect of anyone.

Quoting smeehrrr:

Quote:
I think a post in the forum is a reasonable way of responding to an incorrect post that's garnered a large number of yes votes.  Trying to PM double-digits worth of users is a little much to expect of anyone.

Only one person had to be PMd - the contributor. If they withdraw, there's no need to contact any of the voters.

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
But I am sorry when some of these are users who hold themselves up to be supporters of Rules and knowledgeable about all thing Hollywood vote Yes to such an obvious error, or worse yet then chnage their vote to neutral instead of the appropriate No, then I have great difficulty in respecting those individuals or their opinions.

Sorry Skip, but they have as much right to vote neutral on any profile as you did when you mistakingly voted "no" to Tim's case type change just over a month ago. Or should we respect you less because you didn't change it to "yes"?

I'm glad you find insulting people so funny... 
So you're saying that people who choose not to vote are not following the rules? So were you breaking the rules when you changed your vote to neutral?

Quoting cmaeditor:

Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
Doc:

I am not chastising anyone individually and would not, no matter how much I might be tempted to. Why is not appropriate? I didn't look at the votes I do that AFTER I have voted every time. I initially suspected that this was in error, let's face it Rudin is not a common name, so I ran a quick check to verify my suspicions and then voted. Better to take care with my votre than to allow bad data or data that does not conform to the Rules to be further proagated. If those who blindly voted yes have such a thin skin, then they have a problem, not I. But I am sorry when some of these are users who hold themselves up to be supporters of Rules and knowledgeable about all thing Hollywood vote Yes to such an obvious error, or worse yet then chnage their vote to neutral instead of the appropriate No, then I have great difficulty in respecting those individuals or their opinions.

Do I consider myslef knowledgeable about Hollywood? Yes, I am smarter than the average bear, Boo-Boo. But that does not mean I know EVERYTHINHG or that I cannot make mistakes, I do all too often and when such mistakes are pointed out I CORRECT them without fail. I will not change a Yes vote to a Neutral when it should be a No.

Skip

As one of those users who changed my YES, and when  I voted there were no other votes so I took the user at his word, who then changed my vote to NEUTRAL, I could care less about whether you respect me or not. Your relentless calling out of people who make honest mistakes as though they have committed a crime is really getting old. I didn't start a thread to call you out when you blindly voted YES when someone changed James King to Jamie King, She is credited on screen as James King, in the Pearl Harbor profile without checking it out. I sent you a polite PM about it. Why you feel the NEED to do this publicly really mystifies me. It's rude, impolite and belittling, yet you wonder why people give you negs (I haven't given anyone a NEG at all).

What's your problem? Skip didn't mention any names, you outed yourself.