Quoting widescreenforever:

Quote:
If I may step in here for a second,, I wanted to say that when all this is hopefully fixed  ,,

I will be putting forth "Crocodile" Dundee  as my next 'quotes project' to debate in the forums...

If I had the titles, I'd vote Yes (to it being "Crocadile" Dundee).  I can see that "Crocadile" is indeed quoted in the legal stuff on the back of the case.  At least it is on the covers in the DB. 

Quoting widescreenforever:

Quote:
If I may step in here for a second,, I wanted to say that when all this is hopefully fixed  ,,

I will be putting forth "Crocodile" Dundee  as my next 'quotes project' to debate in the forums...

You mean you're not going to touch Meredith Wilson's "The Music Man"?  That one's gonna be a hoot.

where's  my pen?

Quoting widescreenforever:

Quote:
Quoting Mark Harrison:

Quote:
Quoting widescreenforever:

Quote:
If I may step in here for a second,, I wanted to say that when all this is hopefully fixed  ,,

I will be putting forth "Crocodile" Dundee  as my next 'quotes project' to debate in the forums...

If I had the titles, I'd vote Yes (to it being "Crocadile" Dundee).  I can see that "Crocadile" is indeed quoted in the legal stuff on the back of the case.  At least it is on the covers in the DB. 

I hope that was a spelling error for Crocodile ??

and on the covers in the DB?... data base?  The three titles we have been debating all along have the quotes on the covers in the DB., and in the legal stuff,.
the overviews in my opinion are not the legal stuff.

On the back of the case, at least the ones I am looking at, it says "Crocodile" Dundee is a trademark of Paramount Pictures All Rights Reserved.  I believe that is the 'legal stuff' Mark is talking about.

I don't see any need to discuss these insane ideas over 14 pages. Just vote them down and have some faith in Ken.

Quoting Ken Cole:

Quote:

DVD Profiler must walk a fine line between enough accuracy to keep one side of the aisle happy while maintaining ease of use and entry to keep the other, generally somewhat silent and large majority happy.  My development experience is not trivial, and I've been forced to design systems where one person's concept of accuracy has driven the project into the ground, completely unusable to the end users.  I don't plan to make that mistake here.

Bolded by me for emphasis.

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
No one has denied that "Mister Roberts" appears on screen.

That does not change the fact that the film's title is [b]Mister Roberts.[/b]

Please go to the New Features Forum and start a thread for the addition of a "Scape the On-Screen Title display along with before and after frames" field.

I'm certain it will get overwhelming support!

Not!

Hal:

What do you base that on. It is not based on anything from the film credits which is what the Rules say. It is based either on your personal opinion or from third party source both of which are excluded from the Rules.<shrugs>n You can cite Library of Congress if you wish but that is not what the Rules say. So once again, I am merely trying to figure out how to accomodate both what you want and what the film ACTUALLY says.

Skip

Check the copyrighted title!  Simple!

Hal:

The Rule does not say to do that.

Now does it.

Skip

It says "enter the title from the film's credits".  When you look at the screen, and there is some question as to what on that screen is in fact the title,  the copyright data will quickly assist you in determining which data "on the screen" is actually the title, so it is completely consistent with the Rules to refer to the copyright data when "entering the title from the films credits".

I know from time to time Skip will take DVD Profiler issues to his wife.  As a database “something” (sorry Skip), she's very qualified to answer questions having to do with databases.  Inspired by that, and the fact that the usual suspects seem to simply drag up the usual arguments, I decide to take a page from Skip's book and take this whole Mister Roberts issue to my wife for her opinion.

So I went to her and explained the problem and asked her opinion.  She ignored me of course, so I asked her opinion again.  Then I tapped her shoulder and asked again.  She said "What?"  So I explained the situation again and asked her opinion again.  Then she said, "Leave me alone.  I'm trying to read".  Now, as someone who's been married for 13 years now, I know that perseverance is the key.  So I followed her up to our bedroom and got my foot in the door (literally) before she could shut it.  She said she didn’t know, so I explained it again.  Several times.  Finally we agreed that if she helped me, I would help her and get her two aspirin and leave her alone (another key to marriage right there: give and take).

So finally she agreed that “Mr. Rogers” (her words not mine), should indeed have quotes.  Then I said “No, no, no!  It should NOT have quotes”.  And she said, “Yeah, that’s what I meant to say”.

So there you have even more evidence from a completely unbiased outsider.  I might add that she has no preconceived notions, past grudges or really any stake at all in the outcome.  So there’s no reason to not trust in her opinion.  How much weight her opinion should have is obviously up to the individual voter, as it should be.  But I thought some might find value in an outsider's thoughts on the topic.

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
...

Are we all so blind as to not see what is actually going on here? 

Could it be that the "Tin Foil Hat" is covering all our eyes?

Note: "Tin Foil Hat" needs both caps and quotes to have its full power to save us from the Dark Ones!

pdf