I'm auditing a movie where there are 3 people listed under Sound Editorial.  No other valid Sound Editors credited.

Rule : "For each category, include only those people credited with the roles listed in the "Role" and "Credited As" columns. "

Is "Sound Editorial" listed in the "Role" and "Credited As" columns ? So...

Quoting surfeur51:

Quote:
Rule : "For each category, include only those people credited with the roles listed in the "Role" and "Credited As" columns. "

Is "Sound Editorial" listed in the "Role" and "Credited As" columns ? So...

You didn't post the complete rule, so here's the addition: "If someone is not credited with one of these roles (or direct translations of these roles), do not include them in the Crew section."

Enter whatever you like. It's all good.

That's the current position of these forums!

And since Ken refuses to intervene or clarify, he obviously doesn't care.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
, 'editorial' is just another way of saying 'editor' or 'editing'.

Yes, another way. Not a translation, and not in the list. Rules are rules... sorry...

Quoting No_Name_Needed:

Quote:
.. but if this is your new way to act this is quite childish...

I'm just a little tired of users who say "apply strictly the rules that I like..., and let me interpret as I want the rules that I don't like".

Or we take rules at the letter, or not...

Quoting Kathy:

Quote:
I would consider Sound Editorial to be the same as Sound Editor - especially since there is no Crew addressed as Sound Editor.

I don't see this as any different as including Crew if their roles are listed as plurals. For example, if Crew are listed as "Writers" or "Screenwriters" I would include them although the "s" is not specifically listed in the rules either, only "Writer" and "Screenwriter".

Exactly.  'Written for the screen by' is not in the list, but we enter it because it is another way of saying 'screenwriter.  This is no different.

Sorry but "Sound Editorial" only tells me they worked in the sound editing department - it doesn't tell me what job they did in that department - all 3 could be editors, 1 could be the editor with 2 assistants, or 1 editor, 1 assistant, 1 technician.
With no other info, I don't see how we can credit any of them.

I also agree with Surfeur, there does seem to be a trend recently of users who seem to enforcing some rules to the letter but being flexible with others. However I also agree with Hal - Ken obviously doesn't give monkeys so why should I? Ho hum.