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... 3 4 5 6 7 8  Previous   Next
Can we change the Title's spelling if we think it looks better than others??
Author Message
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorWinston Smith
Don't be discommodious
Registered: March 13, 2007
United States Posts: 21,610
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Smokey and the Bandit: Pursuit Pack should be Edition

Skip
ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here

Billy Video
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorLopek
Lovely day for a...
Registered: March 13, 2007
United Kingdom Posts: 813
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
It is already in the Rules

"Episode descriptors are part of the title; separate them with a colon and space; e.g. "Star Trek III: The Search for Spock". For multiple descriptors, use a colon and space for each break, e.g. "Star Wars: Episode I: The Phantom Menace"."

If you check you will find that the specific titles referred also do NOT use the colon. Therefore the meaning is clear this the format to use.

Skip

The rules covers episodic subtitles specifically. They make no mention of how to deal with stand-alone films that include a subtitle, which is what these are. Add the colon currently breaks the rule:
Quote:
Title
Use the title from the film's credits.

If there is no colon, then it can't be added.

I personally like the colon - but with the current rules it is nothing more than a personal preference. It is not supported by the rules so technically should not be contributed.
Andy

"Credited as" Names Database
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorWinston Smith
Don't be discommodious
Registered: March 13, 2007
United States Posts: 21,610
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
It's obvious to me what the intent of the Rule is. I can only say that those of you that constantly look for ways to twist the Rules do NOT have the consistency of the database as their number one prority anfd that includes you, Andrew. There are those who it seems there only function in life is to try to twist the Rules into a pretzel so they can impose ther desires on the database by crawling through a loophole. Most every problem that supposedly come up here, I don't see, and frankly I am think I am far more qualified than anyone because of the sheer number of titles that I have and continue to wade through, maybe its because I am simply looking to follow both the letter and the spirit of the Rules at all times.

You can choose to be just a snippy and childish as you wish, Andrew but that's the way I see it.

Skip
ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here

Billy Video
 Last edited: by Winston Smith
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorLopek
Lovely day for a...
Registered: March 13, 2007
United Kingdom Posts: 813
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
You can guess as to the intent/spirit of the rule as much as you like, but it is what is written in the rules that is important.

You really need to read what I write Skip - how can you accuse me of trying to "impose my desires on the  database" when I agree with you?  Unless you are also doing the same?

You are no more qualified then anyone else, we can all read the rules, and many of us were involved in writing them. Contributing more (which is your choice) makes you no more qualified to understand the rules. You really need to stop throwing that into everyones faces day after day - we don't care, and it's your choice
Andy

"Credited as" Names Database
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorWinston Smith
Don't be discommodious
Registered: March 13, 2007
United States Posts: 21,610
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Andrew:

As I said, and understand I have been through some 2400 titles now, and I have never run into any of the problems that I see endlessly discussed here. I don't sy this to brag, blow my own horn or anything else, I state it as a simple fact. Once in a while I see an oddball credit, that may need to be sorted out or not, it took awhile to realize that "Sound" was not going to able to achieve its desired objective of older film credits, the target kept moving. Bu the discussions about colons and all the other holes I see users poking I simply don't get. As to letter and intent, I suggest you study some law, the law in the UK is not that different from here and both are important considerations.

My biggest concern here is that the users are well on their way to creating a pretzel of the rules, they have been at it for 2 years. It almost seems that we have some users, who while I am sure they don't go looking for holes, when they find them, they are quick to pounce on them as the user who started this thread did. Even the title of the thread answers the question "if we think it looks better than others?",; that is personal preference and the user attempted to exercise it, as he has done before without even bringing it to the forums, and he is not alone in this practice.

Some things will have to be solved through some experimentation, like the BEST answer for the dividers, I have some ideas, but not enough background using them to draw on anything concrete and I have seen some promising ideas from others. Unfortunately , you have decided as some others have that when confronted with two possibilities you automatically come up with the most negative one and the one is usually wrong relative to myself, so we wind up in perpetual conflict. If you enjoy this, then its your problem not mine, I don't but neither will I run from confrontation. You will ultimately walk out again as you have already done twice before. I really do miss your quality work, but its your call.

Skip
ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here

Billy Video
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile Registrantlmoelleb
Beer Profiler now!
Registered: March 14, 2007
Denmark Posts: 630
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Isn't it about time something like this:
Wikipedia "Assume good faith"
is written into the guidelines on how to approach discussions here?

Simply because people do not agree with the interpretation of a rule, it does not mean they are trying to destroy the database, impose your own preferences, etc.
Regards
Lars
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantRifter
Reg. Jan 27, 2002
Registered: March 13, 2007
United States Posts: 2,694
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting hal9g:
Quote:
Quoting Rifter:
Quote:
Quoting Lopek:
Quote:
"The Year We Made Contact" is not part of the title, so the whole : or not is irrelevant.

The Title Screen in the credits shows only "2010", with cast on the pages on either side. Nowhere in the opening credits is is "The Year We Made Contact" listed.

So per the rules, the title should be "2010".

The modified titles rule does not apply, as "The Year We Made Contact" was on the original poster.

I would suggest it is nothing more than a tagline, and so has no place in the database.


Bull.  The cover of the hardbound book I have of that says "2010: The Year We Made Contact".


And this is relevant how?????


It's relevant because the book was based on the movie, not the other way around.
John

"Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice!" Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964
Make America Great Again!
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile RegistrantStar ContributorJykke
Registered: March 13, 2007
Finland Posts: 413
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Rifter:
Quote:
It's relevant because the book was based on the movie, not the other way around.


Actually, Clarke's novel 2010: Odyssey Two was published already in 1982. The movie is based on the book. It was Clarke's novel 2001: A Space Odyssey which was based on the movie. And that movie was inspired by Clarke's short story.
 Last edited: by Jykke
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributornorthbloke
Registered: March 15, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
United Kingdom Posts: 5,459
Posted:
PM this userDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
It's obvious to me what the intent of the Rule is. I can only say that those of you that constantly look for ways to twist the Rules do NOT have the consistency of the database as their number one prority <...snip...>

Skip


Hi Skip,
I think it's a bit unfair of you to say things like this. It may be obvious to you what the intent of the rules are, you had a hand in writing them, but all we have to go on is what's written, and what is written sometimes is a bit vague and can be open to interpretation.
For example, in the rules it says for the title field: "Use the title from the film's credits."
However, for the original title field it says: "The Original Title field will contain the original theatrical title, while the Title field will contain the title of the DVD release."
This contradicts what we've just been told, so you can see where things can get confusing!
I think before you start shouting people down, accusing them of being deliberately obtuse, you should consider the possibility that the rules aren't maybe as clear as you think they are.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorLopek
Lovely day for a...
Registered: March 13, 2007
United Kingdom Posts: 813
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Rifter:
Quote:
It's relevant because the book was based on the movie, not the other way around.

Wrong! As as Jykke said the book came first for 2010.

But even if you were right it is irrelevant to the title in DVDP - books are not a valid source for the title. You book does not even have the correct title, it is likely a film tie-in edition (or maybe the title was changed for the American market - but I can find no evidence of that).
Andy

"Credited as" Names Database
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile RegistrantStar Contributorlyonsden5
Hello old friends!
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
Posts: 2,372
Posted:
PM this userDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting lmoelleb:
Quote:
Isn't it about time something like this:
Wikipedia "Assume good faith"
is written into the guidelines on how to approach discussions here?

Simply because people do not agree with the interpretation of a rule, it does not mean they are trying to destroy the database, impose your own preferences, etc.


DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorLopek
Lovely day for a...
Registered: March 13, 2007
United Kingdom Posts: 813
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
Andrew:

Pressume this is me... equally as sad and pathetic as "Mr Lopek", but whatever makes you happy 

Quote:
As I said, and understand I have been through some 2400 titles now, and I have never run into any of the problems that I see endlessly discussed here. I don't sy this to brag, blow my own horn or anything else, I state it as a simple fact.

And boy do you state it regularly... there are people in isolated villages in the Amazon Jungle) who know it! 

Quote:
Once in a while I see an oddball credit, that may need to be sorted out or not, it took awhile to realize that "Sound" was not going to able to achieve its desired objective of older film credits, the target kept moving. Bu the discussions about colons and all the other holes I see users poking I simply don't get. As to letter and intent, I suggest you study some law, the law in the UK is not that different from here and both are important considerations.

If you don't get them, then you should ask for an explanation, rather than jumping in with both feet and causing loads of issues like you did here.

Law is irrelevant here, and if I need to study law to understand some rules for database for tracking a hobby there is something fundamentally wrong.

I agree that intent is important at times, but you are not the arbiter of that intent - Invelos own the rules, only they can clarify the intent. You may have known your intent during the writing, but once they are handed over that is irrelevant - Ken/Gerri's understanding, and therefore percieved intent they had when publishing them is the only thing that matters.

Quote:
My biggest concern here is that the users are well on their way to creating a pretzel of the rules, they have been at it for 2 years. It almost seems that we have some users, who while I am sure they don't go looking for holes, when they find them, they are quick to pounce on them as the user who started this thread did.

No, I think people look at the rules, and when unclear bits are noticed they are brought here for discussion with the community. Generally with the intention of getting the loopholes closed for greater clarity. But you also miss that because you are too busy accusing people of pretzel making rather than actually reading the discussion.

Quote:
Even the title of the thread answers the question "if we think it looks better than others?",; that is personal preference and the user attempted to exercise it, as he has done before without even bringing it to the forums, and he is not alone in this practice.

I disagree, I read the title in a completely different way. The rules do not allow for the colon to be added. It is not an episodic subtitle, and it is not there in the film credits. The change that is happening so it "looks better" is to add the colon - what you do. I agree it does look better there, I want to see it there, I have them there in my local database, but the rules don't allow for them at at present (even if they intended to).

Quote:
Unfortunately , you have decided as some others have that when confronted with two possibilities you automatically come up with the most negative one and the one is usually wrong relative to myself, so we wind up in perpetual conflict.

Of course I do Skip, when ever I see something my first thought is "What will Skip think?" and then immediately side with the other option. 
It is not all about you, but you just can't seem to grasp that. I make my decisions, it just so happens that you get it wrong in most cases imo, so we disagree. Nothing I can do about that.

Quote:
If you enjoy this, then its your problem not mine, I don't but neither will I run from confrontation.

If I enjoy it, why would it be a my problem? Are things that you enjoy a problem to you?
I don't enjoy it, but like many people I don't enjoy seeing see swanning around the forum like you own the place. It is the lesser of 2 evils imo. 

Quote:
You will ultimately walk out again as you have already done twice before. I really do miss your quality work, but its your call.

Are you a mind reader now? How do you know? I might, I might not... but that is entirely up to me. Depends how long I can tollerate your attitude around here - as like for many people you were the cause of me walking away in the past! 
Andy

"Credited as" Names Database
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantRifter
Reg. Jan 27, 2002
Registered: March 13, 2007
United States Posts: 2,694
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting northbloke:
Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
It's obvious to me what the intent of the Rule is. I can only say that those of you that constantly look for ways to twist the Rules do NOT have the consistency of the database as their number one prority <...snip...>

Skip


Hi Skip,
I think it's a bit unfair of you to say things like this. It may be obvious to you what the intent of the rules are, you had a hand in writing them, but all we have to go on is what's written, and what is written sometimes is a bit vague and can be open to interpretation.
For example, in the rules it says for the title field: "Use the title from the film's credits."
However, for the original title field it says: "The Original Title field will contain the original theatrical title, while the Title field will contain the title of the DVD release."
This contradicts what we've just been told, so you can see where things can get confusing!
I think before you start shouting people down, accusing them of being deliberately obtuse, you should consider the possibility that the rules aren't maybe as clear as you think they are.


He did have a hand in writing them, a major hand.  But, too many people won't admit that openly, and when he says what the intent was, they disallow that as if he were so schmoo off the street.
John

"Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice!" Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964
Make America Great Again!
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorLopek
Lovely day for a...
Registered: March 13, 2007
United Kingdom Posts: 813
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Rifter:
Quote:
He did have a hand in writing them, a major hand.  But, too many people won't admit that openly, and when he says what the intent was, they disallow that as if he were so schmoo off the street.

Rifter to the rescue! 
Andy

"Credited as" Names Database
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile RegistrantStar Contributorm.cellophane
tonight's the night...
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
United States Posts: 3,480
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting lyonsden5:
Quote:
Quoting lmoelleb:
Quote:
Isn't it about time something like this:
Wikipedia "Assume good faith"
is written into the guidelines on how to approach discussions here?

Simply because people do not agree with the interpretation of a rule, it does not mean they are trying to destroy the database, impose your own preferences, etc.



doubleplusgood
...James

"People fake a lot of human interactions, but I feel like I fake them all, and I fake them very well. That’s my burden, I guess." ~ Dexter Morgan
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile RegistrantStar Contributorlyonsden5
Hello old friends!
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
Posts: 2,372
Posted:
PM this userDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Rifter:
Quote:

He did have a hand in writing them, a major hand.  But, too many people won't admit that openly, and when he says what the intent was, they disallow that as if he were so schmoo off the street.


The  issue comes up when the other people involved in writing the rules recall the "intent" as something different. Also keep in mind that sometimes what one persons intent was in writing the rules was not necessarily what the group had in mind, so they did not get what they wanted.

For the record Skip's "hand" was no larger or smaller than any of the other participants. The fact is many times he would stay out of a lot of the discussions, sitting back and watching. Not meant to be an attack at all. Hope it doesn't come accross that way. He freely admitted he was stayign out of a lot of the discussions.

If we were to go with whoever had more involvement gets to decide what the actual intent was it would be Andy He was present more than any of us, followed closely by AJ.* There were ther all the freggin time (with the occasional disapearance during Dr. Who Skip would be 3rd, followed by James. There were many who had input though.

*This is based on the archived chat transcripts I have and frequently review, not by my own memory.



Bottom line (IMO) no matter what the intent behind the rule was, if it was not worded so that intent is clear,then it needs to be revised. IF the original intent is not clear, which has been the case more than once, then that too needs to be clarified.
    Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion Page: 1... 3 4 5 6 7 8  Previous   Next