| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 462 |
| | Posted: | | | | This is why I feel it's a waste of time to contribute here.
I submitted a contribution for the movie Invincible. I added an uncredited cast member - Vince Papale, the man who the movie is made about. I did this based on two sources:
#1.) My own recognizance of him in a scene.
#2.) The man himself told me. Pretty reliable source there, right?
Apparently, a couple of people don't think so. I've had two 'no' votes, telling me it wasn't good enough and that I needed to provide an exact timestamp of the very moment he appears in the film.
Sorry, but I'm not going to do that, and shouldn't have to do that. I made a clear note in the contribution regarding the scene he appears in - he is seen applauding in the background during the open tryouts for the Eagles at Veterans Stadium. When I can call the guy and confirm it with him that he's in the film, I'm sure as hell not going to put an exact timestamp just to appease the more anal members of the community.
I understand we have champions of accuracy here, and that's fine...but I mean, even Skip voted yes for this, and he's the most anal of all about the rules. (No offense meant, Skip - just trying to prove a point.) Isn't this silly? This is what fractures the community - this is what makes people like me not want to bother with it. Things like this, like blocking people because your fragile ego is too sensitive to hear them out. It's ridiculous. I've verified my source - Vince Papale. Shouldn't need much more than that. It's not like I go through and add uncredited actors every chance I get...this was a special circumstance, where I noticed he wasn't in the profile, and based on my knowledge, added him. | | | "I am Andrew Ryan and I am here to ask you a question:
Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his own brow?
No, says the man in Washington. It belongs to the poor.
No, says the man in the Vatican. It belongs to God.
No, says the man in Moscow. It belongs to everyone.
I rejected those answers. Instead, I chose something
different. I chose the impossible. I chose…
Rapture." |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Ross:
A time stamp would be nice, I had a similar occurrence recently wit a friend of mine who appeared in a film, I asked some specifics about where he appeared, so that i could moreeasily locate his appearance. But, as I have noted previously, I find your documentation more than acceptable. I would not necessarily think it should be necessary, in fact rather ludicrous, to require you tosit through the entire film with the express purpose of retrieving a time stamp. But IF your friend could provide some information to you that might make that easier for you to locate, that would not be bad.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 5,918 |
| | Posted: | | | | IMHO, those NO votes are invalid. If you SPOKE with the guy and he TOLD you he was in the film considering it's a known fact that the film is about him, that should be enough.
Don't let 'em get to you and let the screeners make the overall decision. |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | Why are you getting so uptight about it? If the screeners believe your documentation is good enough it'll pass regardless of how many no votes you get. |
|
| Registered: June 21, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,621 |
| | Posted: | | | | Isn't this mentioned on one of the featurettes on the disc also?
I don't own it but did rent it and recall something like that in the extra features. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting northbloke: Quote:
Why are you getting so uptight about it? If the screeners believe your documentation is good enough it'll pass regardless of how many no votes you get. I think it is just that chibul is frustrated with the lack of common sense some voters have. I don't even bother to check my contribution page for yes/no votes anymore. It's not worth the irritation. I used to consider not contributing at all after some of the nasty comments over something as simple as a typo (especially in the days before everyone could see the votes and comments). I realized that if there is a problem, someone can PM me to fix it. Otherwise, I'm willing to let it ride. |
|
| Registered: April 3, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,998 |
| | Posted: | | | | Agree with northbloke as long as the screeners agree with your documentation (And there's no reason they shouldn't) it should go through. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | I don't have this title to vote myself... but in my opinion... I wouldn't go off anyone's say so... In my opinion any source used (or at least a single of the sources) has to be able to be looked at for verification. I personally would never go just by someone saying I recognize him... or even I talked to said actor... I don't know you... or any other contributer from Adam... you need to show me where I can see that it is right. Anyone can say anything to get the data they want in the online database.
To me... documentation means proving beyond a reasonable doubt that it is correct... and me having to just trust the word of any contributor does not do that... not in my opinion. Call me cynical... but I do not trust anyone that much. you have to remember... every one of us is still just names on contributions and forum posts.
That is my opinion... and my standards on how to vote on such things at least. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting synner_man: Quote:
I think it is just that chibul is frustrated with the lack of common sense some voters have. I don't even bother to check my contribution page for yes/no votes anymore. It's not worth the irritation. I used to consider not contributing at all after some of the nasty comments over something as simple as a typo (especially in the days before everyone could see the votes and comments). I realized that if there is a problem, someone can PM me to fix it. Otherwise, I'm willing to let it ride. I agree with that. And when I also wrote I would stop contributing, many people sent me PMs to agree and say that also for them the system was going in a wrong way... | | | | Images from movies |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Have some more cheese, Yves. Skip  | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 462 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting synner_man: Quote:
Quoting northbloke:
Quote:
Why are you getting so uptight about it? If the screeners believe your documentation is good enough it'll pass regardless of how many no votes you get.
I think it is just that chibul is frustrated with the lack of common sense some voters have. I don't even bother to check my contribution page for yes/no votes anymore. It's not worth the irritation. I used to consider not contributing at all after some of the nasty comments over something as simple as a typo (especially in the days before everyone could see the votes and comments). I realized that if there is a problem, someone can PM me to fix it. Otherwise, I'm willing to let it ride. Bingo. | | | "I am Andrew Ryan and I am here to ask you a question:
Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his own brow?
No, says the man in Washington. It belongs to the poor.
No, says the man in the Vatican. It belongs to God.
No, says the man in Moscow. It belongs to everyone.
I rejected those answers. Instead, I chose something
different. I chose the impossible. I chose…
Rapture." |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 462 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote:
I don't have this title to vote myself... but in my opinion... I wouldn't go off anyone's say so... In my opinion any source used (or at least a single of the sources) has to be able to be looked at for verification. I personally would never go just by someone saying I recognize him... or even I talked to said actor... I don't know you... or any other contributer from Adam... you need to show me where I can see that it is right. Anyone can say anything to get the data they want in the online database.
To me... documentation means proving beyond a reasonable doubt that it is correct... and me having to just trust the word of any contributor does not do that... not in my opinion. Call me cynical... but I do not trust anyone that much. you have to remember... every one of us is still just names on contributions and forum posts.
That is my opinion... and my standards on how to vote on such things at least. And that's fine, I figured that...which is why I also added what he was doing and in what scene. | | | "I am Andrew Ryan and I am here to ask you a question:
Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his own brow?
No, says the man in Washington. It belongs to the poor.
No, says the man in the Vatican. It belongs to God.
No, says the man in Moscow. It belongs to everyone.
I rejected those answers. Instead, I chose something
different. I chose the impossible. I chose…
Rapture." |
|
 | Ron | | DVD Obermotz |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 168 |
| | Posted: | | | | Your documentation was just fine, I voted yes on the very day you submitted the contrib. | | | Premium member since 29 August 2002 ---- 
Proud owner of a Phillips 42PFL7862D since 27 Oct 2007 :-D |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting chibul: Quote:
Quoting Addicted2DVD:
Quote:
I don't have this title to vote myself... but in my opinion... I wouldn't go off anyone's say so... In my opinion any source used (or at least a single of the sources) has to be able to be looked at for verification. I personally would never go just by someone saying I recognize him... or even I talked to said actor... I don't know you... or any other contributer from Adam... you need to show me where I can see that it is right. Anyone can say anything to get the data they want in the online database.
To me... documentation means proving beyond a reasonable doubt that it is correct... and me having to just trust the word of any contributor does not do that... not in my opinion. Call me cynical... but I do not trust anyone that much. you have to remember... every one of us is still just names on contributions and forum posts.
That is my opinion... and my standards on how to vote on such things at least.
And that's fine, I figured that...which is why I also added what he was doing and in what scene. And just like you don't want to watch a movie to get the correct time-stamp... I don't see it being on us to search a whole movie to check something like this. It is not up to us to search for the proof of what you are saying... it is up to you to provide that information as a source. With a time-stamp... telling me where to look I would probably (depending on my verifying to be correct) vote yes on it. But without it... with just the info you provided... I would have voted no myself. as I said... that is my opinion on the matter... how I tend to vote in situations like this. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Have some more cheese, Yves.
Skip It seems that if I'm not buried by polls, I risk to be by cheese.  Rifter and you seem to use that expression very often (in fact, probably because french expressions are not the same then yours, I 'm not even sure to see exactly what you mean...). And what I am sure of, is that french cheeses are far better than american ones  | | | | Images from movies | | | | Last edited: by surfeur51 |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | No argument there, Yves. Or the wines. I still remeber being present at a friend's house when for reasons only known to him he uncorked an 1847 Lafite, smacking lips at the memory.  Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|