Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Quoting mdnitoil:

Quote:
Whenever I see single quotes in a name I'm immediately suspicious.

Granted: I've certainly done my best to weed out a bunch of these IMDb-mined single quotes. But occasions do exist where it's the ACTUAL common name, and with a 27 titles/56 profiles vs. 2 titles/2 profiles balance such a change does need a bit of additional explaining.

Agreed.

Quoting lyonsden5:

Quote:

Quoting leo1963:

Quote:
Quote:
Skip did not mention your name lyonsden5.  You did assume and Skip is correct on all fronts.  The CLT has NOTHING to do with uncredited entries.

Actually my name is mentioned many times in the contribution notes. I assumed nothing. Incorrect statement on your part.

Whether or not your name is mentioned in contribution notes is irrelevant to the discussion. Skip not only didn't mention any names in the OP he didn't cite any specific profiles either. You had to go out of your way to find something that anyone besides yourself would know meant Skip might be insulting you.

Quoting Jubal:

Quote:
Then Rick, if you believe you were being referred to, you should PAY ATTEBNTION, "joe" is the standard used by another database which is COOPYRIGHTED, changing to "joe" simply breaks that connection, it has nothing to do with CLT or anything else, ibn fact CLT is essentially irrelevant as it relates to uncredited data.

You want it BOTH ways. To you whatever the data is in the database is sacrosanct, you can't change it to keep from potential problems, you can't remove it even though it was cloned YEARS ago....LONG BEFORE there were Rules. So many years ago in fact, that it is easy to see that despite some recent additions to another source (recent meaning sometimes within at least the last four years, while the Profile is almost NINE years old) that the data wsa cloned and from where.

No Rick, you didn't vote the data, if you had it would have been YES because there is NO logical rationale for otherwise.

And I'll thank you to retarct your very inflammatory and very insulting comment.

Skip

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht
oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist
and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you
can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not
raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

Amzanig huh

Quoting kdh1949:

Quote:
Did Skip edit out the name of a specific profile?  There's nothing in the OP now that has it -- The OP was posted at 1:25 today and edited last at 1:46.  So if he redacted any specific titles from the OP, my previous comment to Rick isn't valid.

You are correct, he did not mention specifics but, since he mentions Rick in the contributions notes...withdrawn and resubmitted several times...and gives an example of the change, it was quite easy for Rick to know who Skip was referring to...looking at the contribution notes, I found it quite easy to figure out.

Could Rick have ignored the post?  Sure, but he shouldn't have to. 

Quoting kdh1949:
Whether or not your name is mentioned in contribution notes is irrelevant to the discussion. Skip not only didn't mention any names in the OP he didn't cite any specific profiles either. You had to go out of your way to find something that anyone besides yourself would know meant Skip might be insulting you.

So what you are saying is it's not an insult if I am the only one that knows I'm being insulted? 

One more time, just to be clear. You are defending the Skip, who insulted me, because I was the only one who knew he was talking to me. So as long as nobody else knows who is being insulted it is OK to fire away according to you.

With that type of attitude there is absolutely no hope of this place ever changing. 

Quoting widescreenforever:

Quote:
Quoting Jubal:

Quote:
Then Rick, if you believe you were being referred to, you should PAY ATTEBNTION, "joe" is the standard used by another database which is COOPYRIGHTED, changing to "joe" simply breaks that connection, it has nothing to do with CLT or anything else, ibn fact CLT is essentially irrelevant as it relates to uncredited data.

You want it BOTH ways. To you whatever the data is in the database is sacrosanct, you can't change it to keep from potential problems, you can't remove it even though it was cloned YEARS ago....LONG BEFORE there were Rules. So many years ago in fact, that it is easy to see that despite some recent additions to another source (recent meaning sometimes within at least the last four years, while the Profile is almost NINE years old) that the data wsa cloned and from where.

No Rick, you didn't vote the data, if you had it would have been YES because there is NO logical rationale for otherwise.

And I'll thank you to retarct your very inflammatory and very insulting comment.

Skip

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht
oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist
and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you
can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not
raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

Amzanig huh

I can read that, terry, quite easily in fact. Does that make me a dim bulb or a genius?            

Skip

Quoting lyonsden5:

Quote:
Quoting kdh1949:
Whether or not your name is mentioned in contribution notes is irrelevant to the discussion. Skip not only didn't mention any names in the OP he didn't cite any specific profiles either. You had to go out of your way to find something that anyone besides yourself would know meant Skip might be insulting you.

So what you are saying is it's not an insult if I am the only one that knows I'm being insulted? 

One more time, just to be clear. You are defending the Skip, who insulted me, because I was the only one who knew he was talking to me. So as long as nobody else knows who is being insulted it is OK to fire away according to you.

With that type of attitude there is absolutely no hope of this place ever changing. 
Rick:

Let me ask you a question. Do you have ANY idea how many times you have insulted me, I will wager you don't because I generally don't comment on them, but I would guesstimate probably a good 75% of your posts insult me in some form or other. You walk in your shoes just fine but you don't give a crap about anyone else's.

I find you to a nasty person, mean spirited, universally argumentative and combative and all that said I will still call you FRIEND.   I must be out of my mind.

Skip

Yes I agree this thread is sad, Achim. But for different reasons,  I think it pathetic that well-known users will deliberately vote yes to a set of images that do not match the Profile, IF they didn't do it deliberately then it is even worse because it indicates that they cast a vote and walk away. Do you have any idea how many times I check titles on which I have voted Yes or No to see if someone found something I missed. I find pathetic attempts to maintain status quo of (uncredited) data which should be modified to break the connection. I am not bragging but I suspect i am the most conscientious user Profiler has, I do things the right way, I don't claim to follow something, I do it in actions and deed, I will make corrections which far more than many users will do, but all that's another story entirely.

This thread was stared deliberately anonymously in all respects, a user decided that he had personally maligned, that is simply NOT true, though he has thrown out a number of insulting remarks in this thread, something that is all too sadly normal. People here have a very thin skin and cannot take criticism of actions that have been taken, I am sorry Achim, you quote one of our more insulting members. I have come to many conclusions based on the behaviors exhibited in these forums and ...well I won't go there, I will keep that to myself, God forbid someone else should get his widdle nose tweaked.

Skip