So thank you for that, Yves. Common sense is not universal.

Skip

Sorry about my post yesterday but I was in a bit of a humourous mood.

If I may answer Surfeur's question in a serious way, I can give my views on the matter:

First of all, I agree that there is a need for rules and in the areas where they are crystal clear, we need to follow them.

However, I do like to make some side notes on that:

1. When the rules, even when they are crystal clear, ask us to enter data that seems illogical, incoherent, incomplete or otherwise ask us to go against all better judgment, then I think you have a legitemate point and can bring it up in the rules discussion forum, so that hopefully the next update of the rules takes that into account. That's the whole point of having such a forum.

2. The rules seem to be general guidlines and as such there are many grey areas. I say for those areas it's best to try and stay as true as possible to the spirit of the rules or when in doubt ask in the contribution forums and go with the majority (I've done this on many a occasion even though I on times disagreed on the outcome, followed the majority or Invelos' ruling)

3. There is an urgent (and I can't stress this enough) need for the rules to be updated, even if it's just to incorporate official rulings on grey areas made in the forums. Invelos can't expect every user to wade through post after post in the forums to find an answer. That's also not very customer-friendly.

4. It has already become common practice to use 'official' websites as an outside source of information. I think the rules should incorporate this (e.g.: use general capitalization rules except when you can provide acceptable outside sources to confirm there is a different capitalization). To get back to the Francois vs François issue, such a rule would allow you to submit François if in your contribution notes you refer to his website you've found and where his name is spelled as such. That, in my opinion, is no longer common sense but solid information that helps us to correctly interprete the data on the disc

Those are the main points about my feelings on the matter. So yes, I think rules are necessary and we need to follow them, but I also feel we shouldn't be slaves to them and when we have a legitemate question to ask, we should bring it to Invelos' attention or ask help from others.

Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:
It's not a perfect answer ...

But it is a perfect violation of rules as they are written. Had my change of rules been accepted, the answer would not be more perfect, but there would be no rule violation.

Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:
Well, Yves, I don't see it as you do and that is the problem,. You are there calling it violation. I am a bit closer to the situation  and I simply don't see it as you do. I can appreciate your position but that is where it ends. And you believe that even though you have no background or back story on the rules you can explain that this is or is not a violation, you can't. You can only stae your opinion and explain it, but that does not make it a fact, my friend.

And quite frankly I resent you believing that you can do any more than state your opinion, and trying to tell me, DanW or any of the people that actually did the work on the Rules that you know more than they do. That just doesn't wash, Yves, and that is where you run smack into a wall every time.

Skip

You know, Skip, the same goes for you. Even though you were involved in the creation of the current set of rules, what you post on these forums is also your opinion on the matter, just like Yves or any other user here does. It doesn't carry any more weight than the opinion of other users so please stop pretending like your opinions are fact whilst other users' opinions are mere opinions.

The rules leave quite a few grey areas as well as omissions (because it wasn't discussed, the situation didn't exist yet or other reasons unbeknownst to me). When talking about such matters, all you do is state your opinion and so does Yves ... or other users for that matter. Each opinion carries just as much weight to me and on some occasions, I've seen users not involved in the creation of the rules post ideas that make more sense than what you post.

Quoting Taro:

Quote:
However, I do like to make some side notes on that:

1. When the rules, even when they are crystal clear, ask us to enter data that seems illogical, incoherent, incomplete or otherwise ask us to go against all better judgment, then I think you have a legitemate point and can bring it up in the rules discussion forum, so that hopefully the next update of the rules takes that into account. That's the whole point of having such a forum.

2. The rules seem to be general guidlines and as such there are many grey areas. I say for those areas it's best to try and stay as true as possible to the spirit of the rules or when in doubt ask in the contribution forums and go with the majority (I've done this on many a occasion even though I on times disagreed on the outcome, followed the majority or Invelos' ruling)

3. There is an urgent (and I can't stress this enough) need for the rules to be updated, even if it's just to incorporate official rulings on grey areas made in the forums. Invelos can't expect every user to wade through post after post in the forums to find an answer. That's also not very customer-friendly.

4. It has already become common practice to use 'official' websites as an outside source of information. I think the rules should incorporate this (e.g.: use general capitalization rules except when you can provide acceptable outside sources to confirm there is a different capitalization). To get back to the Francois vs François issue, such a rule would allow you to submit François if in your contribution notes you refer to his website you've found and where his name is spelled as such. That, in my opinion, is no longer common sense but solid information that helps us to correctly interprete the data on the disc

Those are the main points about my feelings on the matter. So yes, I think rules are necessary and we need to follow them, but I also feel we shouldn't be slaves to them and when we have a legitemate question to ask, we should bring it to Invelos' attention or ask help from others.

Well said on all counts. 

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:

Since you are quoting, James. Our founding fathers also said "Beware the tyranny of the majority". Our current Congress is living proof.

Skip

Since when did Congress become "the majority"?

Hal:

I don't want to say this but if you don't understand it, then um,mm, ummmm, ummmmmmwere you at the back of the line when they....

Skip

Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:
You remain completely CLUELESS and just downright insulting. Someday maybe you will comprehend and you will actually bring something to this Program. You never have to data and really don't expect that you ever will.

No need for personal attacks. I mean, we all know there is no moderation, and even if there was, Ken won't do anything about you, but they aren't really necessary.

You shouldn't get mad at me, you should be mad at yourself. I'm not the one who only follows the rules when it suits me.

Quoting Antares:

Quote:
Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:

You never have to data and really don't expect that you ever will.

Can someone please translate this gobbledygook?

"You never have to data (sic: date)" (referring to "bringing anything to the Program").....

It's taken me years to be able to read Skipese....It's kinda scary that I can actually do it most of the time now.