Quoting pauls42:

Quote:
Is this a good time to point out that when you install windows, Microsoft treats American and British English as different languages.

So does Facebook - but it also has English Pirate so I guess it's a bad example  

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Leaving out a valid crew credit, simply because they don't use the same term as we do, doesn't make any sense.  Like it or not, The Queen's English is, in many ways, different than American English.  To not allow for that difference, again, just doesn't make any sense to me.

What makes sense to you doesn't really matter, however.

The Rules currently prohibit entering them just like they prohibit entering Supervising Producers.

I never said what made sense to me mattered, simply that it didn't.  As to your assertion that the rules currently prohibit entering them, I guess we will have to agree to disagree.  Because of the reasons I already stated, I see these as direct translations.

There are only a few very pertinent issues here:

Is Dubbing XX in the crew table?

NO

Does 'Direct Translation' mean to include different dialects?

To my knowledge: NO. At the time the rules were devised it was for foreign languages.

Has Ken/Gerri made a ruling in the forum on this issue?

NO.

Therefore, in my opinion, whatever this forum decides is totally irrelevant.
We have seen situations like this countless times. One group think one thing and another group disagree.
Currently there are different interpretations of 'Direct Translation'. For me it's simple - if Ken/Gerri rule that Direct Translation can encompass USEnglish to British English; then fine. I will subsequently included Dubbing XX into my contributions.

Until that time it's not allowed under my interpretation of the rules. It's not in the crew table and Direct Translation does not apply. I could be totally wrong, but until Invelos weigh in with a decision I will continue to leave these out of my contributions and vote NO when they are added.

Quoting Pantheon:

Quote:
I could be totally wrong, but until Invelos weigh in with a decision I will continue to leave these out of my contributions and vote NO when they are added.

Agree with Pantheon. Strict application of rules directly leads to this position. Most users voted against an intelligent reading of rules, so they should not now try to find bad reasons to violate them.

Quoting Pantheon:

Quote:
All people who submit this data do not care about whether they are correct to do so - they just do it anyway.

No, they do so because they believe that to be within the rules. If Ken or Gerri would tell us to do it otherwise, you'd be right, but AFAIK that is not the case so far.

Quoting Pantheon:

Quote:
All people who submit this data do not care about whether they are correct to do so - they just do it anyway.

No! I do care about whether I am correct or not - I submit it simply because that's what the rules tell me to do. This is a ridiculous comment at any rate - you've said that you're still voting against this data, right? Well, then I could say the same to you: "All people who vote against this data do not care about whether they are correct to do so - they just do it anyway." See? It makes for a wonderful soundbite, sure, but it's entirely meaningless, as it works both ways... I love how you're able to declare that you "do not adhere to the 'I'm right, you're wrong' attitude", and then go ahead and do so anyway.

Again: it's a well-known, and well-documented fact that the British English term "dubbing mixer" is a direct translation of the American English term "re-recording mixer". As such, it can be entered per the rules. This is further cemented by the fact that virtually everyone indeed includes them in their profiles, by the pretty unanimous results of various previous forum discussions and polls, and finally by the fact that the screeners have accepted thousands and thousands of them, ocassionally even despite your misguided no-votes, and are continuing to accept them as we speak.

Last but not least, you yourself indicate that you actually want to track the data (as you apparently do understand that they're the people we're after), and that you do so locally. So you do track this data, but apparently you just want to rob the database, and thereby the community, of this data, leaving everyone to enter it for themselves?

All this just because you feel American English and British English are just "dialects" to which the direct translation comment doesn't apply...  IMHO, that's a pretty far-fetched argument for excluding valid data that you yourself deem worth tracking.

At least two of those qualifications certainly seem to apply here, yeah.

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Quoting Pantheon:

Quote:
All people who submit this data do not care about whether they are correct to do so - they just do it anyway.

No! I do care about whether I am correct or not - I submit it simply because that's what the rules tell me to do.

In your interpretation of the 'Direct Translation' rule. However, because others (not just myself) disagree with your interpretation this is not a clear-cut matter by any means.

Quote:
This is a ridiculous comment at any rate - you've said that you're still voting against this data, right? Well, then I could say the same to you: "All people who vote against this data do not care about whether they are correct to do so - they just do it anyway." See? It makes for a wonderful soundbite, sure, but it's entirely meaningless, as it works both ways... I love how you're able to declare that you "do not adhere to the 'I'm right, you're wrong' attitude", and then go ahead and do so anyway.

Point taken on my voting behaviour. I shall now vote neutral to these additions; and obviously will not submit them myself. Now - I'm willing to accept that I may be wrong. Are you?
Will you now refrain from adding these entries or voting Yes to their submission?
I bet the answer to that is NO.

Quote:
Again: it's a well-known, and well-documented fact that the British English term "dubbing mixer" is a direct translation of the American English term "re-recording mixer".

I agree that these are the same. I disagree that Direct Translation covers their entry into Profiler. Just because I disagree with you, does not mean I am wrong; and vice versa.

Quote:
As such, it can be entered per the rules.

While there is an element of doubt, this is not the case.

Quote:
This is further cemented by the fact that virtually everyone indeed includes them in their profiles, by the pretty unanimous results of various previous forum discussions and polls, and finally by the fact that the screeners have accepted thousands and thousands of them, ocassionally even despite your misguided no-votes, and are continuing to accept them as we speak.

The 'everyone does it, so it must be correct' standpoint holds no water with me. Everyone could be doing it wrong - we don't know until Invelos clarify the issue.
Also I do not blindly follow the example of others who could be incorrect in their assumptions.

Quote:
Last but not least, you yourself indicate that you actually want to track the data (as you apparently do understand that they're the people we're after), and that you do so locally. So you do track this data, but apparently you just want to rob the database, and thereby the community, of this data, leaving everyone to enter it for themselves?

What's this 'rob the community' rubbish? The majority of users don't bother entering crew anyway. There have been numerous polls showing that Crew is the least important of all the features.
First and foremost, I edit my profiles for myself (and anyone who says they do it for the 'community' is a liar).
The fact that I choose to contribute my work shows that I want others to share from my work.
I just won't submit data that I am unsure of regarding the rules. Once I know they're allowed I will happily submit them.

Quote:
All this just because you feel American English and British English are just "dialects" to which the direct translation comment doesn't apply...  IMHO, that's a pretty far-fetched argument for excluding valid data that you yourself deem worth tracking.

So far you have said my standpoint is both ridiculous and far-fetched. You are insulting. Fact.

I do not think your view is either of these things. It is merely different from mine and some other users.

I fully see your POV and in many ways agree with it; but while the rules on this issue are ambiguous I will NOT submit data which may be wrong.

As for my comment that people who DO submit it don't care....maybe I should say that if people continue to submit this data now that it's validity has been brought into question don't care.

A similar situation arose with Supervising Producers. I was submitting them (as were many others). It came to light that this may be wrong - I stopped contributint them immediately. In this instance, I adhered to the forum decision that they should not be contributed and have subsequently tracked this information locally only.