Quoting Mark Harrison:

Quote:
Do we really have nothing better to do around here than argue with Skip?  The vote isn't even close, but we have a 3 page thread on it already.  And I'm sure it will be much bigger by tomorrow.  And for what?  You're not going to change his mind and I doubt his vote is going to matter.  So what's the point here?  Just let him have his vote and move along.  If you don't want to hear what he has to say then just stop talking to him and he'll stop replying.  There's nothing to be gained here.

Unless of course people actually like arguing with him.

You make a good point, Mark.  He's turning his vote into Mr. Irrelevant.  If that's what he wants to do, you guys shouldn't delay the process by dragging it out in the forums.  It lends his vote far more weight than it actually deserves.

midnitoil:

I a AM one of the very few users who actually pays attention to NO votes. I don't submit garbage data and i will not put up with garbage data from anyone else either, What I have concluded is that there are a lot of users I think should go use IMDb, since all they want to do is re-create the inaccuracies found there here. They will not supply documentation, they INVENT and are willing to accept fictitious data simpluy because they refuse to deal with REAL and CORRECT data.

@ Mark:

It is pretty pathetic isn't it.

Skip

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
Cmae:

I don't care how you think it was marketed, the question is what is the registered copyrighted title.

Skip

What part of "follow the rules" don't you understand.

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
The copyrighted title is VERIFIABLE per the Rules, Grendell, what don't you COMPREHEND.

Skip

I guess he doesn't comprehend how you came to that conclusion.  Nobody else, including Ken, has come to that conclusion.  How in the world did you? 

It is very obvious to one who understands the english lkanguage, Unicus. I don't buy your interprettaion, if Ken wants to tell me I am incorrect then fine. But I can verify the copyrighted title and that is what the Rules say, I do not see what follows as the SOLE definition for verifying in the oway ken constructed the rule. I will NOT willingly go along with a bunch of users who simply want to create IMDb II. That is up to Ken.

Gendell, your behavior is borderline for banning

Skip

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
It is very obvious to one who understands the english lkanguage, Unicus.

Please tell me you didn't just say that to me.  I am a parser...'nuff said.

Quote:
I don't buy your interprettaion, if Ken wants to tell me I am incorrect then fine.

You don't have to buy it, but it is the correct one.  You could, of course, just ask him.

Quote:
But I can verify the copyrighted title and that is what the Rules say, I do not see what follows as the SOLE definition for verifying in the oway ken constructed the rule. I will NOT willingly go along with a bunch of users who simply want to create IMDb II. That is up to Ken.

Now see, this is where your logic just makes a sharp left turn.  According to you, the rules allow you to look at the US Copyright website to verify the title.  Well, if I go to that site and look up 'The Thing' it clearly states, "John Carpenter’s The Thing".  If your interpretation was correct, I should be able to enter that as the title per the rules.

Unfortunately, I can't.  Why?  Because the rules clearly state that the title is "The Thing".  Since the example in the rules goes against your interpretation, your interpretation has to be wrong.  I am sorry, but there is not other logical conclusion.

Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
It is very obvious to one who understands the english lkanguage, Unicus.

Please tell me you didn't just say that to me.  I am a parser...'nuff said.

Quote:
I don't buy your interprettaion, if Ken wants to tell me I am incorrect then fine.

You don't have to buy it, but it is the correct one.  You could, of course, just ask him.

Quote:
But I can verify the copyrighted title and that is what the Rules say, I do not see what follows as the SOLE definition for verifying in the oway ken constructed the rule. I will NOT willingly go along with a bunch of users who simply want to create IMDb II. That is up to Ken.

Now see, this is where your logic just makes a sharp left turn.  According to you, the rules allow you to look at the US Copyright website to verify the title.  Well, if I go to that site and look up 'The Thing' it clearly states, "John Carpenter’s The Thing".  If your interpretation was correct, I should be able to enter that as the title per the rules.

Unfortunately, I can't.  Why?  Because the rules clearly state that the title is "The Thing".  Since the example in the rules goes against your interpretation, your interpretation has to be wrong.  I am sorry, but there is not other logical conclusion.

Skip just got 'owned' as they say!

OOOO another totally unneccessary insult from the master. Keep it up , Hal.


Skip