Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
I find it quite interesting that you quote a Rule that you have admitted on numerous occasions that you ignore and advise others to ignore.

I have never advised anybody to ignore any rule.  I have stated what I have done, and what I have seen others do, but I never advise anybody to 'ignore a rule'.

What I find interesting is that, instead of adding to the conversation, you chose only to take a shot at me. 

I notice that you did not deny that you ignore the rule quite regularly (and contribute same), but only take exception to my use of the phrase "advise others".  To repeatedly support the idea in this forum that if someone believes that a job is similar or "just a different name for the same job" as one that is listed in the crew table, then it is perfectly OK to submit them under that crew role is fine, may not technically be "advising", but it is most certainly encouraging them to break the Rules.

There is no such thing as severability, as far as I'm concerned.  Either you support the Rules, or you don't.  There is no moral authority for those who only support what they "like".

Well said, Hal

Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:
ROFLMAO Martian defeated his own argument and Kathy's and doesn't even realize it.    

Whatever helps you sleep at night. 

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:
Funny, you had a completely different attitude when the rules excluded OMB credits. 

This is the same old tired excuse you bring up every time.  But the problem is that it doesn't hold water.  I have NEVER seen a credit in a film of "Original Material By".  I have seen every other credit listed in the crew table in a film's credits.

What is the logical conclusion from this observation?  It seems clear to me that the conclusion is that OMB was placed in the table to describe a "type" of credit and not a specific credit, since the specific credit does not exist anywhere (to my limited knowledge) in any film.  All other crew titles listed are real, actual credits found in the film industry in film credits every day, and therefore the verbiage which says if the crew title does not exist in the table, not to enter it into DVDP applies only to real, actual credits listed in the table.

The fact that you can claim that ignoring this portion of the Rules and enter crew titles that do not appear in the table is not breaking the Rules, I frankly find astonishing.

Quoting the Rules:

Quote:
For each category, include only those people credited with the roles listed in the "Role" and "Credited As" columns. If someone is not credited with one of these roles (or direct translations of these roles), do not include them in the Crew section.

And of course this is all irrelevant today, since Ken has modified the table to cover just about every conceivable OMB credit, which just goes to prove that my belief stated above was correct.

And next we're going to hear how "or direct translations of these roles" means we can do whatever we think is right!  There is a thread somewhere, which I will not go look for, which discusses the changes made to this section of the Rules and the need for folks who are entering credits which are in a "foreign language" to be able to "translate" those into the English equivalents in the program.  That is the only reason for that phrase to be in the Rules.  To use it to support entering credits that you think are "equivalent" is a gross misinterpretation.

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:
Funny, you had a completely different attitude when the rules excluded OMB credits. 

This is the same old tired excuse you bring up every time.  But the problem is that it doesn't hold water.  I have NEVER seen a credit in a film of "Original Material By".  I have seen every other credit listed in the crew table in a film's credits.

What is the logical conclusion from this observation?  It seems clear to me that the conclusion is that OMB was placed in the table to describe a "type" of credit and not a specific credit, since the specific credit does not exist anywhere (to my limited knowledge) in any film.  All other crew titles listed are real, actual credits found in the film industry in film credits every day, and therefore the verbiage which says if the crew title does not exist in the table, not to enter it into DVDP applies only to real, actual credits listed in the table.

Oh, now I get it.  You can ignore the rule as long as you can rationalize it.  Maybe you should go back and read what you wrote.  Here, let me help you.

"There is no such thing as severability, as far as I'm concerned.  Either you support the Rules, or you don't.  There is no moral authority for those who only support what they "like".

As we have been over this before, and neither of us is going to change their mind, I am done discussing it with you.

I wasn't going to respond, but you dragged my kids in to it so I am going to.

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Nothing I said had anything to do with what "I like".  It only had to do with realizing that there is no such thing as "Original Material By" in the credits of any film, therefore, Ken could not possibly have intended it to be used only when "Original Material By" was found in a film's credits.

Spin it all you like but the fact remains you ignored the rule, because you felt it didn't make any sense, and used your own judgement instead...which is exactly what you are accusing me of doing.  How is it that it is o.k. for you to do it, but not anybody else?

Quote:
And, as I said earlier, Ken confirmed what I (and virtually every other contributor who has ever used the program) believed with a change to the Rules.

How does this change the fact that you ignored the rule as it was written?

Quote:
And I always love the argument that "well, you did something wrong at some time in the past, therefore, you have no right to criticize me for doing something wrong now".  I'm sure that works real well with your kids!

Actually, what I tell my kids...including the 600+ that aren't biologically mine...is that they don't have the right to criticize someone for doing something wrong when they are, or have done, the exact same thing.  I tell them that it is being hypocritical.

Now, you can continue pontificating if you want, but I grow tired of this little game.

Martian:

And you aren't spinning to rationalize your own failed argument...only like a top.. Wow! You are simply dead wrong.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
I've never claimed that I didn't enter OMB credits that are not listed in the crew table, because there are none listed there.  That is far from the same as having valid crew titles in the table and deciding on your own to enter alternatives.

First, that's just your opinion.  Second, didn't you just say that there is no such thing as severability? 

Quote:
Someone who continues behavior that they criticize others for is hypocritcal.  Oh, yeah, that's exactly what you are doing.

Again, in your opinion but, who, exactly am I criticizing?  As far as I can tell, you and Skip are the only ones criticizing.

Now you can rationalize it all you want, you can claim there is a difference between one breaking of the rules and another and you can claim it had nothing to do with what you like but none of that changes the fact that you broke the rules.  That being the case, your statement..."There is no such thing as severability, as far as I'm concerned.  Either you support the Rules, or you don't.  There is no moral authority for those who only support what they "like"."...should apply to you as well as me, shouldn't it?  Or are you exempt from your own self righteous indignation?

There is a difference.  The fact that you refuse to see it because of your own personal behavior doesn't change that.  I'd hazard to guess that most people reading this thread also see the difference.