Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
James:

Movie Picker most certainly was around two years ago, james It was a brand new feature.

What you guys are failing to understand is that all the functionality you keep referring ios a LOCAL issue, absolutely NONE of the Features, reports or other wise are executable via the Online.

You keep throwing this around as if it means something.  All the functionality for this program is on the user side.  To be precise, there is very little that is functional in the online db.  You can sort by title or collection number and very little else.  For me, this is a not issue.

Quote:
Now as to Unicus's comment about the decision and the Rules being arbitrary, just precisely pray tell how would YOU know that. There was nothing arbitrary about it.

I didn't say the rules were arbitrary, I said THIS rule is arbitrary.  And I know because I am the reason you decided to specify 'end credits'.  I pointed out, way back when, that 'opening credits' were credits and nothing prevented people from using those first and then using the end.  Little did I know, as it was still a big secret, you were in the process of writing the rules and would incorporate that into them. 

Quote:
The bottom line here is that you people don't want to do any work on your local to make it perform as you wish, you want a ready-made database that will jump through YOUR hoops for you. And that just isn't possible, somebody will then start whining about their desire to have a specific functionality addressed as well.

That is a load of crap and you know it.  I do twice the work just so I can follow the rules for contributing and have my data the way I like it.  You can point that finger somewhere else bud. 

Quote:
Just make yoyur changes locally, that is the wonderful thing about Profiler, every local database is unique to the users OWN specs, based on central data that is becoming increasingly accurate with every given day.

I already do that but please explain how following both the opening and closing credits makes the data 'less accurate'?  From where I sit it is 'more' accurate as it matches the complete film credits.  But, again, that's just me. 

Quoting Dr. Killpatient:

Quote:
Yes, I agree, we can make the changes locally and that'll allow us to take full advantage of the movie picker and other features that take cast sequence into consideration.

The problem is that it would also prevent us from contributing cast changes or receiving them without either loosing our custom sort or manually catching the new field and adding it.

Given the fact that at least half of the movies I audit the cast after watching need corrections, I'd rather not resequence them because it would also require me to restore them back to the original sort order, correct the data, submit profile, and then resequence them yet again back to how I want it.

Thus my suggestion for a check box for top billed actors.

Agree. A large majority said that they don't want to change the way Cast is contributed, so I guess we can submit a request for a LOCAL feature.
Actually I see it more as a little window where you can set the rank of top-billed cast members, in the same order as they appear in the opening credits, IF YOU WANT TO.
You will be able to contribute/update your Cast to and from the online database, because the actual list will stay the same, but you would LOCALLY assign a rank #1, #2, #3 to top actors, and the program will use that rank to show the Featuring actors in YOUR Collection List (Details View), in YOUR Reports and in YOUR Movie Picker. Nothing would change for those who are not interested in all that.

Quoting surfeur51:

Quote:

With complicated rules, first contributions ARE disappearing, specially in countries where few people speak english. 

By the way, have the Rules ever been translated to other languages?

Quote:

But to avoid recontributions and ping-ponging, all changes should be submitted to a vote, not asking "does it fit the rules?", but "does it significantly improve the profile?". If there is a majority of no, the  change should not be accepted. That would have avoided the rush for CoC, for example.

Just a thought, anyway.

Now, you can fire, I'm used to that  ...

OK, I'll fire.    If the owners of a DVD were free to decide what "significantly improves the profile", and forget the Rules, I think the online database would become a total mess in a short time. 

James:

I wish more users would display your understanding, instead of droning on and on and on. As I said no matter what, the Online will NEVER be all things to ALL users, it is a an impossibility. One of the things that I Ken keeps in mind is that quite literally, hundreds of thousands of man-hours have bee expended to get us to where we are RIGHT NOW and then to expend more man-hours on the SAME data on what amounts to not much more than a whim of a segment of the Community, that WILL definitely displease other segments of the Community is simply silly. As Ken told me recently on a question I asked him. "We had to draw the line somewhere."

Skip

Surfeur:

You make it hard when I start reading and find out that you are, yet again, going on and on and on some more about how YOU think the world should work because its how you want it. Please man, we don't do it your way, your way belongs in your local. As I have said Profiler's data is not going to come in a pre-packaged form suitable for ALL users. One size does not fit ALL, WE ALL have to adjust the data to meet our own preferences.

Your previous missive reads like yet another attempt to justify your position to me. When it comes to any database, there are more yardsticks that are possible to use for a standard than you could possibly shake a stick at. Your standard is NO standard and that is why it only belongs in your local. Its not going to be YOUR way, it's going to be the Profiler way, please get used to it.

If I am misreading you, I apologize but I don't think I am.