Quoting DJ Doena:

Quote:
A question as a bystander: Does anyone here seriously read the entire contribution history of a certain profile when he or she votes on a specific change?

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
I do, Karsten. It is the only way i know what is going on and what I need to do. It takes me a few seconds.

I'm very interrested in notes too and I still wish Ken would merge the old notes of IVS with the ones of Invelos.

Quoting lyonsden5:

Quote:
        100% LIE! Point of FACT. I voted 1st. You came along and voted after I did, quoting my yes vote in your NO note and then proceeded to come here to start this thread, which made me aware of your vote.                  

I am sorry Skip, but your 'no' vote comments seem to indicate that Rick is correct and he voted first.  How else would you know that he documented the data? 

Edit: I see that Skip has responded to Rick and he does have a plausable explanation.  I hate when this kind of thing happens as there is no way to know who is telling the truth. 

To Rick, I am sorry to see you go.  I wish you would reconsider, but you have to do what is right for you.  I will miss you. 

Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Edit: I see that Skip has responded to Rick and he does have a plausable explanation.  I hate when this kind of thing happens as there is no way to know who is telling the truth. 

Except to explain why he went back into a contribution he already voted on as he claims? I fail to see the plausibility of that. 

I know who I believe... and it is not the person with a history of compulsive lying. 

You're better off away Rick, losing the daily dose of bile in this place does wonders for the digestion. 

I edited my Vote Notes only after Rick had voted, is that hard to understand, Unicus.

My original notes before Rick voted were "Please provide documentation to support your release date change", along with a PM to the user. My notes have been re-edited to reflect a Thank you to the user for his documentation.

But the Rick doesn't care about the truth, CLEARLY.  A very nice attempt on his part at subterfuge. Nor am I surprised that the Bobbsy Twins voted in unison, i have watched them do it before.

I will allow that perhaps we voted within the same minute, which would explain why neither one of us saw the others vote til after. but that does not excuse in any way his callintg me a liar.

Skip

As I said, no where.

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:


I hope Ken locks this thread. This is getting ridiculous

Exactly my thoughts - why start it in the first place?

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
Lyonsden5 and m.cellophane came along later and voted Yes while providing documentation, which as it later turned out was different from the documentation that the Contributor supplied.

That's right. We both looked up the release date at 2 different e-tailers each. You seem to be satisfied that the contributor has offered a link to a user forum. Even though the news items are user contributed there, the staff does review them before they're published. Kinda like here. 

Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:

Quote:
Except to explain why he went back into a contribution he already voted on as he claims? I fail to see the plausibility of that. 

Actually, I do this all the time.  I recently voted no on a contribution for 'Stargate SG-1: Season 8'.  The contribution did not list the credits 'as credited'.  Michael Shanks was credited with the wrong role and in the wrong place.

I do this for several reasons...to see if anyone is swayed by my notes, to see if maybe I was in error and somebody countered my notes with their own, and to see if the contribution is going to be accepted so that I know whether or not I will have to submit a correction.

So, yes, it is plausable.

I agree it's plausable, since I do it myself -- for many of the same reasons as you do, Unicus.  Especially if there's something in the contribution about which I'm unsure.  I have sometimes been convinced that my vote was wrong after reading other people's comments.

I'll agree, too, Unicus, with your latest statement about hating these situations.  It's hard to say with any degree of certainty who has lied -- if anyone in fact has.  Unlike forum posts, votes don't display any time codes.  So there's no way to prove who voted when -- or when someone edited his vote.  So I think it is ill-considered for either Rick or Skip to call the other a liar.  It only adds to the bad feelings that have become all to common here.