Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:
James

I am a data dunk and ken made that call...true. Today it still makes no sense to me. I have already allowed for precedent and itsva bad precedent. As I said additional voices are in cast sometimes and crew in others. How do you dfistinguish, according to you you don't. You just KNOW that additional voices are cast. It's in your brain. Someone could say the same kind of thing about lighting, we could not say no, because you have removed the line. All he would have to say is his brain tells him it is cast, and his argument on lighting would be every bit as valid as yours.

Well, if this thread causes you to include lighting credits in your cast submissions, good luck with that.

No line has been removed.

Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:
Yes it has james and I amazed you can't see that.

There is no line. There never was a line. The line that does not exist has not been removed. 

Sam can submit the basketball players.

No one is going to therefore submit caterers, accountants, gaffers and what-not.

Everything is going to be fine.

You seem to be under impression that people put more value in your thoughts and opinions than other posters.  You also seem to think that people somehow have to convince you to get their opinions validated.  I'm sorry, but I don't believe that to be true.  In fact it's probably the opposite in many cases; I know that many people could care less of what you think with regards to the rules.  You freely give out your opinion but rarely back it up with rules, evidence, etc.

Your posting style is obnoxious, abrasive, condescending and many times incoherent.  You offer very little substance in your posts, and I for one am sick of it.

Since it seems Ken & Invelos could give a rat's arse about your ongoing behavior that leaves me with little options.  Should I stop posting all together?  No, I'm not going leave just because of one poster.  What I am going to do is ignore you, I won't respond to you or what you say in any way.  Even on the off chance you post something useful I'm not going to bother responding or acknowledging you.  You are now in my books persona non grata.  I encourage others that have similar feelings about you to do the same.

Sheesh...another lengthy discussion about the obvious.

If someone appears in the movie and is listed in the credits, it doesn't matter where that listing is, they should be entered.

Anything else would be lunacy.

Quoting Pantheon:

Quote:
Sheesh...another lengthy discussion about the obvious.

If someone appears in the movie and is listed in the credits, it doesn't matter where that listing is, they should be entered.

Anything else would be lunacy.

That simple Neill. Okay I saw the gaffer in the film...is that all that has to be done...really.I don't think so. My response would be time stamp please. Maybe that's the only way around this

Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:
Jane's
Please give me something solid. Not I am sorry to say pablum. How.is it you, Kathy or whoever know more than the people who made the film.

As interpreters of film credits, Kathy and I are doing just fine, thank you.

Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:
That simple Neill. Okay I saw the gaffer in the film...is that all that has to be done...really.I don't think so. My response would be time stamp please. Maybe that's the only way around this

Your argument is really getting wrapped around the axle. I really can't see Ken requiring timestamps for including cast who are credited in a part of the credits which you find awkward.

Well I guess I am going to give this up. It's definitely not data that I will ever accept. And were I to believe. It contributable I WOULD be more thanwwilling to provide a time stamp for at least some form of documentation to back it up. To expect anything fro Kathy, nah, she won't even do as Gerri asked. I sure would like to serme someone take this seriously and see all the problems that have and can be created with this and help to come up with something that makes real sense. But I see as usual skip is dismissed. It doesn't do any good to even ask for help, because there is not valid argument to be had. Tells me what I need to know, sadly. I will agree with a user who said somewhere that he wanted profiler to be the best there is, it may be but it will never be whatiit could be because no one is willing to do anything mire than is required and take whatever shortcuts ken will permit. Maybe someday I will convince myself to contribute again, but to me it looks like a lost cause. Btw, james, since your brain can distinguish between cast and crew, exactly how many movies have you worked on to give that fantastic mental ability. <shrugs>

Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:
Rofl, double. At least I don't present lame arguments. Like I know more than the filmmakers, or t is because I want it to be or say it is. Perhaps you need to learn how to better argue, my friend. Smoke and mirrors don't cut it with me.  This database would be many times better than it is right now if people would pay attention and if ..no ill let that thought end right there.

What are you calling "lame arguments"? You mean the ones the point out the exact rule that tell us these credits are valid?

What would you then call statements that are made without any providing any documentation at all? "Lame"? "Bunk"? "Clueless"? "pure garbage"?

The filmmakers choose to credit these Cast members placing them where they wanted to in the end credits. Who are you to tell them where those credits should go? 

"Perhaps you need to learn how to better argue, my friend. Smoke and mirrors don't cut it with me".

The problem is you know that you are wrong - you've even said so in this thread - and are fighting it because you don't agree with Ken's ruling.

Quoting KinoNiki:

Quote:
Can they be listed? Yes.
Should they be listed? I probably wouldn't bother.

Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:
Kino
You've come the closest to making any sense. I agree with the first part based only on a very poorly decided precedent. I still font get hoe you can determine what something is that it isn't. Without including all crew in cast. It looks to me like we are using reverse logic, we want to achieve this desired result, so what can we out together that hopefully sounds good to meet the desired end result. But there is nothing there, its all smoke and mirrors, we want it to be true so it is true.   

I agree with your second as well, nor would I accept such a poorly grounded update.

Who are you to tell Ken that his rulings are "very poorly decided"?

You have made clear what your thoughts are when Ken decisions go against your judgment. on Additional Voices credits:

Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:

I know they are allowed, and it is one of those ken things that makes no sense. If we can just decide this bunch of data is actually cast, then all crew is basically cast ad well or most of it anyway.

but this is not your program - it is Ken's. If you don't like it, as you often tell others, keep it local.