I've just re-read this thread and there is still no response from the NO voters explaining why this feature is a bad idea.

If any of you read this - look at this from the perspective of those users who DON'T want the Credited As information and ask yourselves if this feature is going to do you any harm at all?

At the moment it can be argued that it hurts no one to accept the data. I have tried to explain why that is not the case.

So, could someone explain to me why keeping the feature as it is helps those of us that don't want the information?

(explanations other than "why wouldn't you want it?" and "the program can't do it" - as neither of these are actual explanations).

Thanks. 

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
I'm afraid you just don't want to hear an explanation... Let me go back and try to sum up your view:

Quoting Pantheon:

Quote:
I absolutely do NOT want to do away with the Credited As feature.

Quote:
I do not want to be revisiting profiles just to change credited as entries. I want to be able to choose ONE name and stick with it.

So you like the feature, but you don't agree with Ken's "most-credited form" choice (which, by nature, means that common names will keep evolving over time). That's the gist of it, right? Then why don't you campaign to change "the most-credited form" to documentable "correct" names? That I'd understand. As it is, you're simply ignoring Ken's specific instructions to use "the most-credited form", and are subsequently asking for him to provide additional tools to help you keep ignoring those specific instructions.

Again, basically you're saying: I don't want to follow the rules, but I still want to be able to accept and contribute updates. And you're surprised most people don't agree with you? If you don't like the rules, try to get them changed! Propose changes, submit better alternatives, whatever. Don't just ask for a method to allow you to circumvent them...

Whoa!!!
Hold on a minute....where have I said I want to change the rules?

You quote me in your post but there's nothing there that says I don't want to follow the rules. I always follow the rules (after all, I'm not the one adding Dubbing Mixers etc which is NOT allowed in the rules).

All I have said is that I don't want to have revisit my profiles simply because the supposed 'common name' keeps changing. That is not practical when you own a large collection.

I want to be able to keep the common name that I have (which is the one that the CLT agrees with more often than not) but still be able to accept other credited as information as and when it is added to a profile.

I also want to be able to choose NOT to submit any credited as information - if for example the name changes and I don't want to have to change my profiles.

This has absolutely nothing to do with circumventing the rules or getting my way. This has everything to do with giving people the option on what they accept.

Now....if you would like to come up with a decent argument against making this optional then great. Otherwise please stop hurling accusation. People in glass houses....

Pantheon, you haven't answered either:

Quoting Pantheon:

Quote:
3. I have fully audited every single one of my film and (until I trusted other users) they were 100% accurate as per the film credits.

Quoting DJ Doena:

Quote:
If you have edited all your cast yourself, why don't you simply lock it on all profiles?

Quoting DJ Doena:

Quote:
Pantheon, you haven't answered either:

Quoting Pantheon:

Quote:
3. I have fully audited every single one of my film and (until I trusted other users) they were 100% accurate as per the film credits.

Quoting DJ Doena:

Quote:
If you have edited all your cast yourself, why don't you simply lock it on all profiles?

Actually I did answer this.

I stated that I do lock my profiles (who wouldn't, after all?!) - but there are occasions when additional data is added to the profile that I want to accept, eg. more credited as information.

In these circumstances I do not want what I have locally overwritten - but I want to be able to accept the new data.

Hope that is clearer now.

Quoting Pantheon:

Quote:
but there are occasions when additional data is added to the profile that I want to accept, eg. more credited as information.

In these circumstances I do not want what I have locally overwritten - but I want to be able to accept the new data.

But I assume that are only one or two names max per profile per update. Couldn't you simply write that down and change it manually?

The reason I ask is because I don't see a technical way to lock certain entries in the list. What would the basis for the lock be like? The position in the list? What if it's re-ordered? The character's name? What if that is changed in the contribution? The actor's name? That's the part you want to accept...

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
but does he complain about it? Again: no! So why do you? What's the difference? Why should Ken accomodate your local way of handling this, but not his? Because your way is "better" than his? It's not.

I actually really don't appreciate your attitude here.

I am NOT complaining - unless your definition of complaining is requesting something and then asking for an explanation when other people disagree with you.

I'm sorry if I don't adhere to the 'just do it' way of thinking that you seem to advocate.

I made a request in the request forum as is my right. I made an argument for why I would like this request implemented. I then asked people who didn't want the requested feature for an explanation as to why - so I could understand where they were coming from.

I personally start out with a duplicate of the credits - and invariably this is what I contribute. However, if there is an obvious Credited As entry I can include then I do.  My request was simply an attempt to ensure that any personal preference I have locally does not end up being contributed. The Credited As feature is the ONLY thing in my local database that I occasionally have different to the online DB.
So excuse me if I don't want to mess up the online database accidentally. I would prefer to play it safe.

However, you insist on accusing me of attempting to circumvent the rules and moaning. I don't appreciate either accusation. And, quite frankly I really don't think you are in any position to accuse me of such things.

All that aside I think there is a very simple solution to this:
Ken....is it even possible to implement such a change as this?

Now - if the answer to that question is NO then I will happily stop asking.

Quoting Pantheon:

Quote:
My request was simply an attempt to ensure that any personal preference I have locally does not end up being contributed.

Very good. As you've noted yourself, we have a system in place for that: partial contributions. Just lock the fields containing your personal preference and don't contribute these - exactly what DJ Doena does. I don't understand your "itchy" attitude here - you repeatly ask for explanation from the vast majority of the people that voted against your request, and then I try to supply it, you get angry. I'm not trying to be difficult here - I'm simply expressing how I see things, only because you keep asking for clarification. And I'm certainly not accusing you of anything - I don't think I've ever seen you doing something wrong, and I never claimed otherwise - I'm just explaining why your request doesn't make sense.

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
you repeatly ask for explanation from the vast majority of the people voting against your request, and then when you get it, you get angry.

Angry? No. (The only anger I feel is at being accused of attempting to circumvent the rules to my own gain).
Confused? Yes.

I have yet to see a reason against my proposal that explains why giving everyone what they want is a bad thing.