Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:
how can you determine whether or not the Gaffer is Cast,in all likelihood he may have been part of the crowd scene, how can you decide.

Simple. If the gaffer appears on-screen, then he is a cast member.

This has turned into another example that people use to point and laugh at this forum. A cast member is someone who appears on-screen, regardless of where they appear in the credits.

Quoting johnd:

Quote:
Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:
how can you determine whether or not the Gaffer is Cast,in all likelihood he may have been part of the crowd scene, how can you decide.

Simple. If the gaffer appears on-screen, then he is a cast member.

This has turned into another example that people use to point and laugh at this forum. A cast member is someone who appears on-screen, regardless of where they appear in the credits.

How doyou know, john, how can you tell, there are a lot of people in those crowd scenes.

***Off topic***

First, my apologies to the members of this community for this post. I am going to try very hard not to not respond to another post of Skip's after this one. I hope that others might follow suit.

Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:
Since you refer to the majority opinion possibly being wrong, then again I must say that I have knowledge about this that the majority does not possess, that simple. And that makes the majority wrong.

I find this statement to be extremely arrogant. You are one person. Your opinion does not carry any more weight than any other user of this program. How dare you suggest otherwise.

It might be because your "intimate knowledge" was from so long ago it is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

Or, as you stated you have done in the past, it might be that you just like to take the opposite position in order to argue. That is what people call trolling, isn't it? 

Or, it just might be that you are just wrong.

You have voted "no" on many of my contributions and in most cases it was you that were wrong. I don't see topic being any different.

And, just so my motives are clear and so you don't have to find hidden meaning in my posts to you I am going to make my feelings very clear.

Although you may, at one time, contributed to both the database and the forums, that was long ago.

As of right now, and for quite some time, you have contributed nothing to the database. I believe that you are a detriment to the forum community.

You have stated that you place yourself and your opinions above everyone else. You do not listen to others viewpoints and can not discuss them without resorting to name calling or other derogatory comments.

Your behavior is unacceptable. It has been for many years. It is obvious that temporary bans have not been able to curtail you from trying to hurt others with your words.

If you continue to treat other members of the community the way you have the last several years it might be best if invelos revokes your membership.

Don't bother responding to me Skip. I don't find value in anything you have to say.

Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:
And YOU believe that you can interpret them and that only you can do so. And I can tell you that you are wrong in your interpretation and approach. Sorry, amigo, you just aren't right at all. You believe you are  but...simply put you weren't there and you weren't involved at that stage.

Of course I believe I can interpret them...they are written in English and I have an excellent grasp of the English language.  I do not, however, believe I am the only one who can do so.  That distinction, as evidenced by your posts in these threads, belongs to you.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:
And YOU believe that you can interpret them and that only you can do so. And I can tell you that you are wrong in your interpretation and approach. Sorry, amigo, you just aren't right at all. You believe you are  but...simply put you weren't there and you weren't involved at that stage.

Of course I believe I can interpret them...they are written in English and I have an excellent grasp of the English language.  I do not, however, believe I am the only one who can do so.  That distinction, as evidenced by your posts in these threads, belongs to you.

Except that YOUR belief allows for no other, and you are wrong. From one who KNOWS. You not only believe that you can interpret, you believe that yours and only yours is correct. That is...ni I can't say it,my friend,I respect you too much for that to give voice to that particular thought. Iunderstand your interpretation, but there are also other possibilities and some of those have more information than you possess.

That particular section of the rules remains very close to the way it was designed by myself and danW

The problem as I see it,martian.Is that you have set yourself above almost all, save ken and gerri. It seems tome that short of Ken and Gerri's input, which we don't have on this, then as you have put it  indirectly it falls to what was intended by myself and danW, even though Idon't own the program and don't pretend to,it was dan and myself that designed the foundation for the rules. But you pretend or seem to that your parsing abilities precludes any discussion of intent. Which tome is just plain wrong as is your interpretation. This is one of the reasons we have so many problems, for some reason it galls to simply say that absent input from Ken and Gerri, then perhaps Skip has the correct answer relative to  what they were trying to achieve. So what do we have  a bunch of users trying to poke a variety of different holes, for example the discussion about Chapter Inserts, it was never intended to be a part pf the system and in ALL of the titles that used Chapter inserts,they have NEVER (in ten years been included) yet  for some strange reason all of a sudden a user brought it up with respect to one title. No tome I lookat the entire picture and say gee, these have never been included,so I must not be entering these for the Online at this time. But no the question is raised and i say WHY? If I don't have any idea on a particular subject, or one that has been significantly changed from what we were looking to achieve, I will say so...for example the Title issue and where to take it from. This issue tome has strayed significantly from where it was planned and I don't think it has been of the better, the number of times it comes up for discussion would seem to back my premise, but it is what it is. This is not true for cast and Crew data; it remains very much in line with what was at the time and still believe to be the correct approach. As for my (tic)  references to Maguc 8 Balls and divining rods, you are playing with fire as I have described,if you think these things weren't discussed between myself and dan then you would be dead wrong...they were. And they were discarded for exactly the reasons I have described, some of us think it is easy to divine such data and i can tellyou that you are only kidding yourselves if really believe that is true. These particular people are contained NOT within the cast but within the Crew.You might recall that I joke abut being in the crowd scene in Tank, I can promise you that alot of those people were Crew personnel, including at least one of the accountants. The shot from the helicopter, yeah I amgoing topoint at that ill-defined little dot and say that's me or that's the accountant and this little dot was a Key Grip. Similarly,in Ferris Bueller, that guy that ytou can just barely see upon the 17th Floor of this building...well he was the 2nd Assistant Director...Yeah right.

I don't understand the hatred of me, unless it's plain and simple jealousy that Dan and I got something accomplished which the program desperately needed. But like Isaid it seems to that in the absence of input from Ken and Gerri, it seems to natural to look to the rule Designer. Martian, I have said this many times but were the shoe on your foot and not mine (and trust me I WISH this were anyone's foot but mine, I think it might be most enjoyable to someone else get pounded as I have, except that i would defend that person) I would not adopt ANY of the stances that you have, I would instead look to you for guidance in the absence of input from Ken and Gerri and I would be telling people to shut up and listen to the Martian, instead of telling that I can read and interpret and what you intended has no meaning or significance. That I think is one of the differences between me and most here, I don't have time to hate people, we have a bunch of users who must have a really miserable  life...they are so eaten with hatred and their overwhelming desire to attack and SILENCE one vocal user that it is reallly a shame and does not bring credit to themselves and does not help the Program

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Quoting johnd:

Quote:
So, a cast member is only defined within a certain section of the credits? That is too stupid for words.

It would, indeed, be stupid if that is what the rules said...fortunately, that isn't what they say.  This is how they are broken down...

First, they define standard credits:
For the purposes of this section we define "standard" film credits as those where all credited actors involved are listed at the end of the film - defined here as the "end credits". The section details both the actor’s Name and the Role that they played in the film. The credits may be listed "in order of appearance", "alphabetical order" or in an order of importance decided by the filmmakers. Some actors may be credited a second time in either credits at either the opening or close of the film.

Second, they tell us what to do when a film does have standard credits:
For any film with standard credits, take the actor information from the end credits only, with names and roles listed exactly as they are in the credits and in exactly the same order credited.  Exception: If the credit information is entirely capitalized, use standard capitalization rules instead.

Third, they tell us what to do when a film does not have standard credits:
If a film does not have standard credits, use the following rules:

If a film does not have end credits, as defined in the first section above, the second section does not apply.  Instead, we follow the rules in the third section.  That is what should be done, per the rules, for this film.

The guidelines certainly make it clear to, well, just about everyone how they should be entered. These people should definitely be credited.


*edit*

That picture always makes me laugh.

They match up with, Martians,interpretation. But as have said they donotmatch up with what was envisioned at all,and that section of the Rules remains virtually identical toour original conception.So I repeat, the martian is not the ultimate authority, nor do I pretend to be. But given Ken and gerris's silence, then I am a lot closer to it than the martian, and his interpretation is just that and it's incorrect. As I said Dan and I discussed this very issue and  we after the Actual Cast listing not some users Magic 8 Ball or divining rod to decide what is or is not cast. If Ken or Gerri wish to weigh on I will gladly yield to them, but i will not yield to someone who  was not involved in the process, not now, not ever. Nor willI yield to some majority, who also was not involved in the process.