If you're talking about ratings like this -

Quote:
Contains Strong Violence, Forensic Gore and a Bloody Suicide Scene

Then I think a lot of people disagree with the rule & copy as per the box, i.e for that one it would be just capitalising the first letter only. As the rules say to capitalise all non joining words for English profiles, I do vote no to any that do it "correctly" even though I much prefer them that way.

If that is all the "bad info" you are submitting, I wouldn't worry too much. Although technically an error, I'd rather have that one compared to wrong cast/crew credited.

Quoting jhagblad:

Quote:
I was just surprised by the ratio of Yes votes compared to No when the contribution clearly broke the rules. The purpose of the voting system is by my view to make sure the contributions are correct and follow the rules. Even if you don't agree with the rules you shouldn't vote yes in this case and I hadn't considered that to be a possible reason for the voting.

Per Rules is the correct way to vote. Even says so in the rules section for voting. Unfortunately not everyone follows the rules for voting or contributions. All you can do is make sure you contribute and vote per the rules.

If I was you (if you haven't already) is resubmit the profile per the rules.

I think you need to add another type to the list

4) Those not aware of the specific rule

Of course, ignorance of the rules is not an excuse, but it is a reason: without knowing the rule about formatting the Rating Detail, then you would accept it if it looked right.
This is a new rule, so it will slowly get filtered down to everyone: again, this is human nature, and some react quicker to new rules than others.
But the voting system caters for this, and it does sometimes only require one "No" vote to get something halted/rejected. Especially if the submitter is alert enough to realise what the "No" vote meant.

Quoting Lewpy:

Quote:
I think you need to add another type to the list

4) Those not aware of the specific rule

Of course, ignorance of the rules is not an excuse, but it is a reason: without knowing the rule about formatting the Rating Detail, then you would accept it if it looked right.

Agree strongly with this; though there are people who always seem to vote yes (and a few more of these with the number of titles going through at the moment) I think in this case, with the Rules only recently being updated, a lot of people don't realise that Captialisation is required.
I agree it's no real excuse but I think that is a lot of what is going on in this particular case.

FWIW I found out because the rule was changed 2 days after I'd put in some that matched the box so only the last couple of votes (out of 20+) voted No and I didn't notice until it was too late! I do it 'right' now (though personally I wish it had been "as per the cover") and will, of course, Vote as per the Rules on any I see (giving a full explanation so the contributor can fix things)

Quoting Lewpy:

Quote:
I think you need to add another type to the list

4) Those not aware of the specific rule

Of course, ignorance of the rules is not an excuse, but it is a reason: without knowing the rule about formatting the Rating Detail, then you would accept it if it looked right.

There are probably more people who vote on contributions than come here to the forums.  And this particular rule underwent a number of changes before reaching its current state.  So it's quite possible that people aren't aware of the latest version of the rule.  It wouldn't be the first time something like that happened.

Quoting antolod:

Quote:
You left out 1 voter type:

5) No: agree with others

I actually had a profile with a single no vote with that reason, after a different no voter changed their vote.

Nice 
One would hope that the Invelos Reviewers would notice that, and reject their "no" vote as an invalid reason. Depends how closely that submission gets scrutinised