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... 15 16 17 18 19 ...31  Previous   Next
The Birds
Author Message
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributormdnitoil
Registered: March 14, 2007
United States Posts: 1,777
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
It doesn't matter, we're not going to agree.  I'll accept skip's big picture view.  But when the big picture actually starts to break profiles, as in this case, I'll just fix them one at a time.  Nothing new here.
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
8Ball I was being as facetious as he was being or perhaps it was sarcastic.

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

Billy Video
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile RegistrantStar ContributorBad Father
Registered: July 23, 2001
Registered: March 13, 2007
Posts: 4,596
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
My brain hurts just thinking about this topic anymore .
My WebGenDVD online Collection
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile RegistrantStar ContributorBad Father
Registered: July 23, 2001
Registered: March 13, 2007
Posts: 4,596
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
8Ball I was being as facetious as he was being or perhaps it was sarcastic.

Skip


I'm sorry . I was told before by someone that "we don't do sarcasm here" .
My WebGenDVD online Collection
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
Quoting mdnitoil:
Quote:
It doesn't matter, we're not going to agree.  I'll accept skip's big picture view.  But when the big picture actually starts to break profiles, as in this case, I'll just fix them one at a time.  Nothing new here.



You just made my argument. If YOU don't like the way the data is presented Online for W.HATEVER reason,,,you or any other user is free to make whatever adjustmments suits his fancy in his local. Lord knows I have a lot of stuff in my own that no one will ever see, unless the Rules are changed to allow for it. The Online does NOT reflect my biases, nor will, and further it should not. The only users who are dead wrong are those that think it should reflect their own preferences. That is yet another of the reasons I think most of these arguments are soooo stupid. Even the concept of "breaking" profiles is purely subjective, mdnitoil.

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

Billy Video
 Last edited: by Winston Smith
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
Quoting 8ballMax:
Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
8Ball I was being as facetious as he was being or perhaps it was sarcastic.

Skip


I'm sorry . I was told before by someone that "we don't do sarcasm here" .


Yeah..right.          

NOAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

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

Billy Video
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorAddicted2DVD
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
United States Posts: 17,334
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting djskyler:
Quote:
Quoting Addicted2DVD:
Quote:
For instance, for the Special Edition rerelease of There's Something About Mary:

    * Title: There's Something More About Mary
    * Original Title: There's Something About Mary


Yes, but the 20th Century Fox's justification for that title modification was that it is an expanded edition different from the theatrical release (and really it's just cover hype since online retailers still list it as Something About Mary), much like Bad-der Santa or Apocalypse Now Redux.

Now if Universal whipped out a previously unknown director's cut of The Birds and chose to rename that expanded edition "Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds," then you'd have something.


But the rules don't say that it has to be a different version or cut of the movie... all it says is If the title on the dvd is different then the theatrical title. So you put what is on the DVD case into the title field.. and if the title differs on the film credits you use the modified title rule.
Pete
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 johnd:
Quote:
This thread demonstrates the bizarre depths that Skip and others have dragged DVDProfiler. These people have totally lost sight of the intent of the product. DVDProfiler is a tool to enhance the enjoyment of movies, not something to hold a dry and dusty catalogue.

If a set of rules diminishes the tools ability to perform this function, then the rules must change. This thread, and several others, demonstrate that some users are prepared to suck all the fun out of this product.

For instance, the slavish listing of cast "as listed in the film" means that the ability to view all movies for a particular actor is now essentially broken, particularly for those earlier films where he may not have settled on the name form he currently uses. "Credited as" is not working, as there are still lots of updates coming down where the cast name is changed, rather than using the "credited as" function.

This thread shows how this perdantic interpretation actually harms the usefullness of the data. "Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds" as a title is plainly ridiculous. This is not the title of the movie, regardless of arguments to the contrary. Consult any textbook on film to see how stupid this argument is.

And trying to bully people into accepting it just won't work, Skip being the prime example of this yet again.



Oh, get over yourself.  Your opinion is no more important than anybody else's.  The program is only disfunctional if people fail to understand that what goes into the online database is supposed to be as generic as possible, so that each individual can tailor that profile for his personal use.  Since every Tom, Dick, and Harry that comes along wants to make it into his own personal sandbox to play in, we have to have rules.  The only way to enter the data that makes sense is to replicate what is on the disc itself as much as humanly possible.  Some people don't like that, so they screech and complain and submit illegal profiles and anything else they can think of to break the rules, and then justify it with polls, and demonizing campaigns, and insistence on using features that are not fully functional yet, ad infinitum.
John

"Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice!" Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964
Make America Great Again!
 Last edited: by Rifter
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantVibroCount
The Truth is Silly Putty
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
United States Posts: 5,635
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
The DGA calls "Alfred Hitchcock's", "Frank Capra's", etc. possessory credits, and states that they are above the title of the film. This specifically refers to them as credits, and specifically separates them from the title.

Not title in my opinion.

Sorry. We have three opinions to the contrary, but, none are more important than any other opinion.
If it wasn't for bad taste, I wouldn't have no taste at all.

Cliff
DVD Profiler Unlimited Registrantdjskyler
It's not where you start
Registered: March 17, 2007
United States Posts: 125
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
we might wind up with legitimate possessives being eliminated, or wind up with some possessives that are marketing hype. I think the latter choice is the better choice, better that way than run the risk of eliminating perfectly good data, in your zeal to eliminate the marketing hype.


I think you are saying excessive data is better than incomplete data.

You know, that system is great if the program is only to be used by us super film geeks who frequent this forum and have the energy to meticulously prune every individual profile to our liking.  Excessive data is great because when you edit you have more to work with.

But it will make things more difficult for the average Joe user, like my brother, who also purchased this program and will never edit a profile in his database.  He will enter UPC and disc numbers and take whatever comes from Invelos and leave it that way.  He certainly won't change any sort titles.  And one day he'll be at the Virgin Records store and see "The Birds" on sale and check his mobile phone to see if he already has that title...and when he comes home with it he'll see another copy already on his shelf and exclaim "what the hell?"

My position is we can nearly perfect the data for average Joe using common sense and consistency.

Quoting Addicted2DVD
Quote:
all it says is If the title on the dvd is different then the theatrical title.

In the post you are quoting from, I said "I honestly do not believe Universal Home Video is changing the original title."  That was in reference to the cover.  Your logical response would be better framed as: you agree with northbloke, the design of the DVD cover suggests to you that the Universal Home Video Marketing Department changed the title of this 1963 film, thus qualifying it under the modified title rules.
So if I understood your stance, that's fine.  I say they didn't, you say they did.
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 mdnitoil:
Quote:
Well, in an effort to sort of get back on topic, its simply intuitive that "Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds" is FAR more useful than "The Birds."  After all, most everybody would instinctively look under "A" when searching for, or filing this film. 

EDIT: doh...forget it.  djskyler is way ahead of me.


That's why there's a Sort Title, or did that escape your notice?
John

"Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice!" Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964
Make America Great Again!
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:
It certainly sounds like possessive titles need special mentioning in the rules.
I myself changed "The Thing" to "John Carpenter's The Thing" a while ago, but now after reading all those possessive credit articles (nice research btw) I'm not sure I made the right decision.
The problem is, I can't for the life of me think of a way of dealing with them that won't also exclude things like "Lemony Snicket's ...", "Frank Miller's" or "Bram Stoker's ..." which in my opinion are valid title possessives.

And as for all this bitching and sniping, I initially voted against moderators, but the sooner they get here the better! 



Serious question here:  Please explain to me what the difference is between "Bram Stoker's Dracula" and "Alfred Hitchcock's Vertigo"?  Or between "John Carpenter's The Thing" and "Frank Miller's Sin City"?  Why do you consider some valid and the others not?  Keep in mind that rules of grammar prohibit the presence of a possessive without a corresponding object.
John

"Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice!" Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964
Make America Great Again!
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 mdnitoil:
Quote:
Quote:
mdnitoil see my comment above. I presume you do KNOW how to set your sort...YES.

Yes, I know how to set my sort, thanks for asking though.

To put it differently, a movie store could sort all of Alfred Hitchock's films under "A".  They could also do the same with, well, whatever other films they might have.  How many people are going to be able to actually find the films they're shopping for?  I wonder how long this store will stay in business?

Every now and then, you just have to step back and ask yourself, "Does this even make sense?"  Obviously this question wasn't properly asked for this profile, or if it was, folks got so wrapped in the minutia of the decision, they never looked at the big picture.

Just out of curiousity skip, now armed with this new information regarding how Hitchcock credited his films, have you renamed all your Hitchcock films locally?  For that matter, has anybody out there felt compelled to rename all their Hitchcock films locally to "Alfred Hitchcock's....?"  I know, skip and others will tell me what people do locally has no bearing on what goes into the online.  But if absolutely nobody will commit to this possessive rule across the board locally, why would we force the online to do it?  It doesn't make any sense.


Yeah, I'd do it if I had any of them.  I do it now for other such films because that is what is on the disc when it plays.  But that isn't even the point.  Whether you or anyone else does or doesn't has NOTHING TO DO with how the online is set up.  That is the root source for EVERYBODY and should be as close to the exact way it appearances in the movie as humanly possible, and your preferences, or anyone else's, be damned.
John

"Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice!" Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964
Make America Great Again!
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 sugarjoe:
Quote:
I think this does not bring us anywhere.

Who is there to decide when a possessive is dominant enough to qualify ?

KISS (Keep it simple and stupid), therefore it is 'The Birds'.


Language has rules of use, SIR, and you don't forego those rules because YOU think they are not dominant enough.  You do NOT use a possessive unless you have an object to possess.  That IS making use of the KISS principal.
John

"Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice!" Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964
Make America Great Again!
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 lyonsden5:
Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
Rick:

I exoect nothing from someone with the intelligence level of a gnat, such as yoursalef.


Classic. Insult someone's intelligence and spell 13% of the words wrong



Personally I like what Dan said those many pages ago. Something about the title being found "in quotes" as in "Bram Stroker's Dracula" Seems easy enough to me.



I find it absolutely hilarious that you take Skip to task for his lousy spelling, then you turn around and do the same thing yourself in the very same message.  It is "Bram STOker", not "Bram STROker".  Hoist on your own petard, eh, James?

I should point out that Skip's spelling is not from a lack of being able to spell, but from typing too fast.  They are called "typos" and nobody is immune from that.
John

"Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice!" Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964
Make America Great Again!
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
Quoting djskyler:
Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
we might wind up with legitimate possessives being eliminated, or wind up with some possessives that are marketing hype. I think the latter choice is the better choice, better that way than run the risk of eliminating perfectly good data, in your zeal to eliminate the marketing hype.


I think you are saying excessive data is better than incomplete data.

You know, that system is great if the program is only to be used by us super film geeks who frequent this forum and have the energy to meticulously prune every individual profile to our liking.  Excessive data is great because when you edit you have more to work with.

But it will make things more difficult for the average Joe user, like my brother, who also purchased this program and will never edit a profile in his database.  He will enter UPC and disc numbers and take whatever comes from Invelos and leave it that way.  He certainly won't change any sort titles.  And one day he'll be at the Virgin Records store and see "The Birds" on sale and check his mobile phone to see if he already has that title...and when he comes home with it he'll see another copy already on his shelf and exclaim "what the hell?"

My position is we can nearly perfect the data for average Joe using common sense and consistency.

Quoting Addicted2DVD
Quote:
all it says is If the title on the dvd is different then the theatrical title.

In the post you are quoting from, I said "I honestly do not believe Universal Home Video is changing the original title."  That was in reference to the cover.  Your logical response would be better framed as: you agree with northbloke, the design of the DVD cover suggests to you that the Universal Home Video Marketing Department changed the title of this 1963 film, thus qualifying it under the modified title rules.
So if I understood your stance, that's fine.  I say they didn't, you say they did.


DJ:

I understand what you are saying. Consistency IS absolutely important. Common sense becomes problematic, you can't codify it, your concept of Common Sense may not agree with the next guys, it's like beauty, it's all in the eye of the beholder. Consistency is handling all the data in the same way, which is the purpose of the rules, to ATTEMPT to get every user working from the SAME page and NOT applying personal interpretation, we have seen what happens when user preference and interpretation enters the picture, we have a mess. Some refer to this as mindless, slavish, etc, data entry is boring and slavish and mindless to some extent by DEFINITION. There is NOTHING I hate more than when I pore over a problem for sometimes years, and think I have a solution only to discover that there was a variable I was unaware of. Then there is always the answer that when exposed to the light of the users, winds up becoming problematic (see the BY issue ).

It is much easier to cope with data when you control the data, but in a situation such as the program, we have absolutely no control over any of the data, the data is there we have to figure out the best way to cope with it, it has to be easy to do, easy to understand by ALL users, and usable in ALL situations. This inevitably results in some areas being problematic and may sometimes result in "excessive" or data which some common sense would dictate  be excluded, but consistency demands that it be done. The SRP was a case in point, the Rules say DON'T DO IT. and that applies to all cases no matter what. But a user decided to ignore that and Contributed a small change nyway and then proceeded to spin, rationalize and do everything he could think to support his position, sadly Ken and Gerri did NOT apply the Rule regardless of the vote, so in terms of SRP we now have NO RULE, a precedent has been set. Some users will vote yes even on IMDb data.<shrugs>

I don't know what to suggest for your brother, I understand the point that you make . But for ALL of the strengths of the multi-tiered Db created by the user-built design, it does have one glaring weakness and you have highlighted it...and I can't say that I have a good answer. At least not at this second.

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

Billy Video
    Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion Page: 1... 15 16 17 18 19 ...31  Previous   Next