 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4 5 6  Previous Next
|
|
Location Unit Credits |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: August 22, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 1,807 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: [...] Quote:
Sorry, but the question is not whether the Rules allow it, but whether it is the right thing to do for the majority of the user base.
Personally, I don't think so. Agree.  Quoting EnryWiki: [...] Quote:
it seems to me that a large majority of users is for NOT including any unit crew. If you are in doubt, I would follow their advice, if anything else for consistency sake. | | | | -- Enry | | | | Last edited: by White Pongo, Jr. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Enry:
That is very broad and bold statement to make. There are without a doubtsome users who want or are not interested in any Crew. There are others which want crew data but are not necessarily interested in all the categories w have, and there are still others which want more categories. For YEARS, not just the few months that you have been here, I have watched this and the reason we have Crew data is the majority of the users, myself included, wanted something beyond director credits. No one is ever going to be completely happy even if we went to totally open crew data<gulps very hard>, but then the Online is not designed to make any set of users happy, that is not its function. The Local database is the only place for a given user to be happy with the data because it is the local that is built to his preferences and biases.
As much as totally open crew data frightens me, it has distinct advantages. Listing EXACTLY what you see On Screen and EVERY user would then have the ability to pick and choose EXACTLY that set of data that was of interest to him/her. God knows I could care less who the accountants or the caterers were.<shivering at the thought>.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 13,198 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
Being the word parser extra-ordinaire that you are, please pay attention to exactly what the Rules say:
Quoting Rules:
Quote:
For each category, include only those people credited with the roles listed in the "Film Credits to Include" column.
Technically, there is no column called "Film Credits to Include", however, if this is to be interpreted as the "Credited As" column in the table, then we cannot include the credit listed in the "Role" column (Art Director).
Does it make sense? Absolutely not, but it is what the Rules state, and that is what your argument is all about; a literal translation of the Rules. You are incorrect in your assumption. If I were after a literal translation, I would have said we can NOT list any crew because there is no "Film Credits to Include" column...I guess I should have stuck with the sarcastic reply as I covered this little diversion in that post.  The crew credit rule cannot be followed 'as written'...as written, it excludes every single crew credit. Not to mention the fact that, if we interpret it the way you assumed I interpreted it, it excludes all 'foreign' credits. That is why, I have chosen the path I mentioned in my last post. For me, that comes closest to following the rule. Quote:
By this point in the history of the program, it should be evident that trying to insist on a literal trasnlation of the Rules is an exercise in futility and would render the database pretty much useless.
There are certian conventions that have been accepted practice for the 8+ years that I've been hanging out around here, and not entering "Unit" crew is one of those, as you well know. Sorry, but 'certain conventions' are not rules. What you are talking about is a forum convention. Something that, if we are lucky, 5% of the DVDP community will ever hear about. Sorry, but you can't enforce 'forum conventions'. Something, I believe, you have stated yourself. Quote:
Why in the world would we want to open up this can of worms? What is the objective? 
I really fail to see what motivates these "positions".
People can place whatever they like in their local databases.
Why is it that everyone with a "bright new idea" or some newly discovered credit has to be accommodated into a database that has been painstakingly built by this community over years of effort?
Just because we can parse the Rules to allow it?
Sorry, but the question is not whether the Rules allow it, but whether it is the right thing to do for the majority of the user base. Is that really the stance you want to take? You do know that there are a lot of people who want to take that stance on every single rule. Talk about opening a can of worms. I, for one, do not want to go down that path. Quote:
Personally, I don't think so. You are welcome to that personal view. In my opinion, the right thing to do, for the majority of the user base, is to follow a rule that the majority will actually see. Your 'convention' will only be seen by a small minority. By the way, this 'can of worms', has already been opened. People are entering 'restoration crew' and 'special edition crew'. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar | | | | Last edited: by TheMadMartian |
| | Registered: August 22, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,807 |
| | Posted: | | | | Skipnet50: Quote:
That is very broad and bold statement to make. [...] Maybe. Maybe not. Let's ask. | | | | -- Enry | | | | Last edited: by White Pongo, Jr. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
You are incorrect in your assumption. If I were after a literal translation, I would have said we can NOT list any crew because there is no "Film Credits to Include" column...I guess I should have stuck with the sarcastic reply as I covered this little diversion in that post.
The crew credit rule cannot be followed 'as written'...as written, it excludes every single crew credit. Not to mention the fact that, if we interpret it the way you assumed I interpreted it, it excludes all 'foreign' credits. That is why, I have chosen the path I mentioned in my last post. For me, that comes closest to following the rule. What is interesting is that you want to use "literal" translation is some cases but not in others. How exactly do you determine which to do when? Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
Sorry, but 'certain conventions' are not rules. What you are talking about is a forum convention. Something that, if we are lucky, 5% of the DVDP community will ever hear about. Sorry, but you can't enforce 'forum conventions'. Something, I believe, you have stated yourself. No, I am talking about a "user" convention. For 8+ years, we users (not just forum users) have managed to understand that Unit crew is not to be entered. Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
Quote:
Why in the world would we want to open up this can of worms? What is the objective?
I really fail to see what motivates these "positions".
People can place whatever they like in their local databases.
Why is it that everyone with a "bright new idea" or some newly discovered credit has to be accommodated into a database that has been painstakingly built by this community over years of effort?
Just because we can parse the Rules to allow it?
Sorry, but the question is not whether the Rules allow it, but whether it is the right thing to do for the majority of the user base.
Is that really the stance you want to take? You do know that there are a lot of people who want to take that stance on every single rule. Talk about opening a can of worms. I, for one, do not want to go down that path.
Quote:
Personally, I don't think so.
You are welcome to that personal view. In my opinion, the right thing to do, for the majority of the user base, is to follow a rule that the majority will actually see. Your 'convention' will only be seen by a small minority.
By the way, this 'can of worms', has already been opened. People are entering 'restoration crew' and 'special edition crew'. I am not suggesting that we do anything contrary to the Rules, but rather, we should take the stance that if the Rules do not explicitly include a crew credit in the table (role or credited as) then it is understood to be excluded. That should be true of any Rule: exclude anything except what the Rules allow for. Currently the Rules do not allow for Unit Crew and in fact explicitly exclude it in specific instances. This more than implies that Invelos does not sanction Unit Crew. It would be nice if Invelos would take an offical stance on that. We have a voting system that does in fact allow us to enforce "user conventions". People do not need to come to the forums to get feedback. The voting system allows us to do that. Why do you beleive that after all this time, we should suddenly start letting this stuff in? And I agree that restoration crew and special edition crew are not allowed for under the Rules and should also be excluded until such time as Invelos actually adds them explicitly. Just because people are doing it, doesn't make it right! | | | | Hal | | | | Last edited: by hal9g |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,198 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
What is interesting is that you want to use "literal" translation is some cases but not in others. How exactly do you determine which to do when? I ask myself one simple question...is the rule unclear, or so badly written it can't be followed? If the answer to that question is 'yes', then I do not advocate a 'literal translation'. Yes, I am a parser, but there are some rules that, even I, can't parse into something that makes any sense. You can't parse clarity into something that is unclear. Quote:
No, I am talking about a "user" convention. For 8+ years, we users (not just forum users) have managed to understand that Unit crew is not to be entered. And you know this how? Have you checked every crew entry that has been submitted to make sure they weren't under a 'unit' heading? At best, you are just guessing here. There is no way to know what 'we users' have been doing for 8+ years. And even if we could, so what? For quite a few years it was a 'user convention' to enter the cast and crew from IMDb. We even had programs written to make it easier to do. Can we still do that now? Just because something was a 'user convention' doesn't mean it has to continue to be one. Quote:
I am not suggesting that we do anything contrary to the Rules, but rather, we should take the stance that if the Rules do not explicitly include a crew credit in the table (role or credited as) then it is understood to be excluded. That should be true of any Rule: exclude anything except what the Rules allow for. Currently the Rules do not allow for Unit Crew and in fact explicitly exclude it in specific instances. This more than implies that Invelos does not sanction Unit Crew. No, that is not what you are suggesting...that is what I am suggesting. This crew member is credited with the role 'art director'. That is his role. Under the above suggestion, he can be entered. What you are really suggesting is that we ignore the role if it is listed under a heading of 'something' crew. Quote:
It would be nice if Invelos would take an offical stance on that. It would be nice if Invelos fixed the rule so that it actually made sense. Quote:
We have a voting system that does in fact allow us to enforce "user conventions". People do not need to come to the forums to get feedback. The voting system allows us to do that. No, we have a voting system that allows us to express our opinions on a particular submission. I have seen profiles full of 'no' votes get accepted. I have also seen profiles full of 'yes' votes get declined. We aren't enforcing anything...Gerri is. Quote:
Why do you beleive that after all this time, we should suddenly start letting this stuff in? You are assuming I believed they were never allowed in the first place. That is a mistaken assumption. As I said before, if the credited role is the same as the DVDP role, it can be entered. Quote:
And I agree that restoration crew and special edition crew are not allowed for under the Rules and should also be excluded until such time as Invelos actually adds them explicitly.
Just because people are doing it, doesn't make it right! True, but the fact that Invelos is accepting them...and the fact that they were 'special edition crew' was spelled out in the contribution notes...seems to indicate that it is. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
True, but the fact that Invelos is accepting them...and the fact that they were 'special edition crew' was spelled out in the contribution notes...seems to indicate that it is. Sorry, but I don't buy this. They let stuff in all the time that is blatantly against the Rules. All I can say is that if we continue to re-interpret the Rules every other day, we will never have a database that's worth a damn!  Parse away! | | | | Hal | | | | Last edited: by hal9g |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,198 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
Quoting Unicus69:
Quote:
True, but the fact that Invelos is accepting them...and the fact that they were 'special edition crew' was spelled out in the contribution notes...seems to indicate that it is.
Sorry, but I don't buy this. You don't have to buy it. There was a long discussion about this, a contribution was made detailing the facts, and it was accepted. Quote:
They let stuff in all the time that is blatantly against the Rules. But this isn't against the rules...you said so yourself. Quote:
All I can say is that if we continue to re-interpret the Rules every other day, we will never have a database that's worth a damn!
Parse away! As I said, I can't parse this rule as it doesn't make any sense to begin with. The only thing I can do is follow the rule as best I can. What I won't do, however, is pretend there is a rule when one doesn't exist...kinda like name parsing. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | In fact according to the poll that was taken, RESTORATION CREW and SPECIAL EDITION CREW should not be used and the ones that have been inserted should be removed, at least for now, untill such time as we can differentiate them better. 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:
In fact according to the
poll that was taken, RESTORATION CREW and SPECIAL EDITION CREW should not be used and the ones that have been inserted should be removed, at least for now, untill such time as we can differentiate them better.
Skip Only problem. Restoration Crew is not exactly a Unit. Quoting Skipnet50: Quote:
This is a mixed bag, at the moment, if it is done it has to be done via dividers, personally speaking I would probably be inclined to keep that data locally for now. Quoting Skipnet50: [...] Quote:
Dividers have been used to separate restoration crew data for quite awhile now. | | | | -- Enry | | | | Last edited: by White Pongo, Jr. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Yes and I had forgotten that poll, Enry. And i am beginning to remove such crew. Take note as well that that poll included ALL possible crew, Specaisl Edition/Restoration, LOCATION, 2ND UNIT and whatever and the resounding answer was NO!!!! You can thank your new poll for making me look up the old one. Now i have to figure out some way to gather up all the polls and keep them handy for reference.  Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,198 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
In fact according to the
poll that was taken, RESTORATION CREW and SPECIAL EDITION CREW should not be used and the ones that have been inserted should be removed, at least for now, untill such time as we can differentiate them better.
Skip Polls are not rules, they are a guage of opinion. To be clear, they are a guage of forum user opinion. As I said, these crew members were submitted, with notes stating what they were, and Gerri accepted them. There is no reason, in the rules, to exclude or remove them...especially now that we have dividers. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar | | | | Last edited: by TheMadMartian |
| | Registered: August 22, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,807 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Yes and I had forgotten that poll, Enry. And i am beginning to remove such crew. Take note as well that that poll included ALL possible crew, Specaisl Edition/Restoration, LOCATION, 2ND UNIT and whatever and the resounding answer was NO!!!!
That poll mixed oranges (Unit Crew) and apples (Restoration Crew) . The Rules say not to include UNIT crew (well, at least some of them expressly, the rest of them by interpretation), and we never entered them, so it's safe not to enter them. For consistency sake, if anything else. On the contrary, the Rules do not say not to enter Restoration Crew, and they have been entered for a while, as you said yourself. EDIT: Besides, as you noticed yourself, Restoration data are added after a Divider, so their real role is absolutely clear. | | | | -- Enry | | | | Last edited: by White Pongo, Jr. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
In fact according to the
poll that was taken, RESTORATION CREW and SPECIAL EDITION CREW should not be used and the ones that have been inserted should be removed, at least for now, untill such time as we can differentiate them better.
Skip
Polls are not rules, they are a guage of opinion. As I said, these crew members were submitted, with notes stating what they were, and Gerri accepted them. There is no reason, in the rules, to exclude or remove them...especially now that we have dividers. Agreed, Unicus. but I think they are at least a Guide that we should apply until such time as Ken chooses to update the Rules. @Enry In this case I absolutely disagree with you i have seen films where they refer to the Restoration UNIT or Special Edition UNIT, so not apples and oranges at all. They are still units, just with specialized names and functions. A Location or Unit also has a specialized function relating to a given film. Spin, twist, parry, lol Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
In fact according to the
poll that was taken, RESTORATION CREW and SPECIAL EDITION CREW should not be used and the ones that have been inserted should be removed, at least for now, untill such time as we can differentiate them better.
Skip
Polls are not rules, they are a guage of opinion. To be clear, they are a guage of forum user opinion. As I said, these crew members were submitted, with notes stating what they were, and Gerri accepted them. There is no reason, in the rules, to exclude or remove them...especially now that we have dividers. No place in the Rules does it state that this is a valid use of dividers! | | | | Hal |
| | Registered: August 22, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,807 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Agreed, Unicus. but I think they are at least a Guide that we should apply until such time as Ken chooses to update the Rules.
Polls can be a guide when there is a rule that's not really clear, and people can say how they personally understand it. But polls can not make up new non-existent rules. Quote:
In this case I absolutely disagree with you i have seen films where they refer to the Restoration UNIT or Special Edition UNIT, so not apples and oranges at all. They are still units, just with specialized names and functions. A Location or Unit also has a specialized function relating to a given film.
I see your point, still... maybe I'm wrong, but I think they are somewhat different. However, I don't think it's good policy to change interpretations every month or two. Like you said, we've been entering Restoration Crews for a while. Quote:
Spin, twist, parry, lol
That isn't funny. | | | | -- Enry | | | | Last edited: by White Pongo, Jr. |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4 5 6 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |