Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
Quoting Darxon:

Quote:
I, too, do like this use of the divider function.

Although adding the same role over and over again is not "pretty", I can understand the necessity to do so for search reasons. So I'm alright with that as well.

However, this is not following "as credited" if we add the roles that are not listed, it's also not following "as credited" if we create the divider for groups of actors all listed with the same roles (something that should be done if we apply this approach as well).

For contribution and presentation purposes, I think that a bit of leeway on "as credited" is OK

What do you mean its not 'as credited'?  Did you not read what I said above?  What about 'Lord of the Rings' where the entire cast list is broken down into sections with labels?

I didn't refer to your post, neither by quoting, nor by adressing it. I did read what you wrote, and as far as I can tell, there's nothing wrong with it.

Read what I wrote, think about and you may be able to understand what I'm referring to as being not "as credited". Don't jump on other people just because their posts contain a key word that sends you frantically typing on your keyboard.

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
What you are talking about is a programming issue for Ken to deal with. Not so much a Rules issue.

Skip

No, we make the rules to match the program is it is now, not any possible future enhancements. Without a roll listed you are breaking a function of the program as it is today. If you enter them with their rolls in addition to using the dividers then no program change has to happen. As you like to say "Ken has enough on his plate right now, just use the program as it is designed" (paraphrasing of course)

We also can't expect everyone to simply "know a divider when they see it" without some guidance. And do we leave it up to the user to decide if he want to add the roll? or leave it without a roll? It needs to be defined.


There is enough ambiguity here to be addressed in the rules. Hopefully a well written sentence or two can do it 

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
Then if we are making Rules for the program as it ius NOW, the search function is a strictly LOCAL issue that has no impact on the Online. In short it follow As credited to the letter now. I create profiles for the Online not for YOU or anyone else, YOUR Profile is your business.

Skip

That makes absolutely no sense. How we create profiles for the online has to have rules. There are too many chances for user interpretation here not to have clarification. This is not a local issue or my preference.

Keep in mind the issue is not about 1 profile, it is ab out how to best use the dividers given to us by Ken and what rules should be put into place so everyone knows how to use them. I just used your submission as an example.

Rick:

You brought up the Search issue, not me. Search is not my problem there is no search Online.

Skip

I see no issue with Skips contribution he has presented it as shown in the credits.  This method probably would have solved alot of issues back when Skip made the contribution for "Clash of the Titans" where we didn't have dividers.

Plus a number of other films where they break the cast list up in sections.

Go sit in the corner. Time out for you, young man.        

Skip

Quoting Touti:

Quote:
I like the idea, I wish I had thought of that actually .  I know it's another discussion but I think the same logic could applys in the crew section to start entering units........noooooooooooooooo please don't shoot me all at the same time 

If you break up the crew using dividers it breaks them apart.  Then you really can't do as credited in the order they are credited.  Since most unit crews fall somewhere in the middle of the end credits.  Let's concentrate on getting the main crew before going down the road of unit crews. We still have a large number of profiles that only have the director.

Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Quoting lyonsden5:

Quote:
There is a submission which has the cast listed using dividers. I asked Skip in a PM about it (it is one of his), since there is no rolls listed. My question was whether or not I missed the discussion and is this something we were going to do with other movies. He obviously isn't in the mood for a simple discussion so I thought I'd get some other opinions.

There was never a discussion concerning this but there should have been.  I entered stuntmen included in a cast list and I got blasted for not bringing it here first. 

That being said, if people want to go this route, it has to be included in the rules.  At the moment, the rules say to enter a role.  I know, there isn't a role listed with the name, but the rules cover that as well when they say, "If an actor is credited by name but does not have an associated role, you may use another source to identify the role."  In this case, the other source would be the cast headings.

First, there are some films that don't have roles, and you'll never be able to find any source for them because they don't exist.  Adult movies is one example.

This is not one of those movies.  There are roles listed, it just happens to be in the group heading so this argument doesn't really work.

Quote:
Second, the rule is to enter the cast list "as credited" and in the order presented.  Before, we didn't have the capability to comply with that 100% if the cast was broken down on screen into labeled sections.  Now, with dividers, we do.  So, it seems to me that using dividers to create those labels is perfectly within the rules and comes under the "as credited" rule.

I said nothing about creating dividers to create labels.  I said there should be a 'role' entered.