| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | This is apparently too complicated to be understood!
If you folks wish to make the actor database a bigger mess and continue to break more and more linking, then knock yourselves out.
I've got my local database locked, so it won't matter one iota to me. | | | | Hal |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Just be aware that there is a hidden agenda on the part of certain users here, to undermine the existing method for linking actors, because they do not believe that Ken implemented it correctly, and they want Ken to adopt their method! | | | | Hal |
|
| Registered: April 4, 2007 |  Posts: 884 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
Just be aware that there is a hidden agenda on the part of certain users here, to undermine the existing method for linking actors, because they do not believe that Ken implemented it correctly, and they want Ken to adopt their method! We all do know that but ultimately it IS up to Ken. If he decides for what most users (including some who have a lot of experience with db) don't want that's a pity, but we can't change it. Let's just hope he bases his decisions on his own mind and not on what whoever tries to make him do. | | | | - Jan |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | I for one personally don't care what method Ken decides to use in the end... his original idea or something totally different. whether it is something these other "certain users here" suggest or something totally different. To me that is completely and totally up to Ken... but do feel anything done at this point... until Ken gets it worked out... is jumping the gun as there is no way to decide on any "common name" at this time... you will end up with multiple common names till there is a strict, unquestionable way to determine what the common name should be. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 4,596 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
Just be aware that there is a hidden agenda on the part of certain users here, to undermine the existing method for linking actors, because they do not believe that Ken implemented it correctly, and they want Ken to adopt their method! Conspiracy!!! : anxious: It could be the New World Order taking over the DVD Profiler database for their own nefarious purposes   . | | | | My WebGenDVD online Collection |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote:
I for one personally don't care what method Ken decides to use in the end... his original idea or something totally different. whether it is something these other "certain users here" suggest or something totally different. To me that is completely and totally up to Ken... but do feel anything done at this point... until Ken gets it worked out... is jumping the gun as there is no way to decide on any "common name" at this time... you will end up with multiple common names till there is a strict, unquestionable way to determine what the common name should be. You guys keep talking about determining the Common Name. I keep telling you that this is not about determining the Common Name. It's about only putting actual film credits in the "Credited As" field WHERE THEY BELONG and NOT putting them in the Common Name field WHERE THEY MAY NOT BELONG. I am suggesting that YOU DO NOT CHANGE THE COMMON NAME FIELD AT ALL until Ken reveals his solution! Am I speaking Zwahili or something? | | | | Hal | | | | Last edited: by hal9g |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting 8ballMax: Quote:
Quoting hal9g:
Quote:
Just be aware that there is a hidden agenda on the part of certain users here, to undermine the existing method for linking actors, because they do not believe that Ken implemented it correctly, and they want Ken to adopt their method!
Conspiracy!!! : anxious: It could be the New World Order taking over the DVD Profiler database for their own nefarious purposes . Actually not not so hidden. It is a stated objective in this forum of one in particular. | | | | Hal |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | You are out of your cotton-pickin' minds. Yes I have said that I thin Ken did not implement it properly and that there is a better way. I have no agenda to undermine anything, we have no standard and this bunch of whacked users obviously is far more interested in personal attacks than in problem solving. So we have to wait and see what Ken is up to, I frankly only care that it works. When it works I will implement it immediately.
Hal, have you been watching too much Rosie O'Donnell of late or what? You don't look like her, but you sure do sound like her. You are completely whacked.<shakes head> So if I have an opinion, I am undermining the Program, if that is true then we all have to shut up and stop voicing our opinions for fear that Hal will accuse us of undermining the program......NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
Quoting Addicted2DVD:
Quote:
I for one personally don't care what method Ken decides to use in the end... his original idea or something totally different. whether it is something these other "certain users here" suggest or something totally different. To me that is completely and totally up to Ken... but do feel anything done at this point... until Ken gets it worked out... is jumping the gun as there is no way to decide on any "common name" at this time... you will end up with multiple common names till there is a strict, unquestionable way to determine what the common name should be.
You guys keep talking about determining the Common Name. I keep telling you that this is not about determining the Common Name. It's about only putting actual film credits in the "Credited As" field WHERE THEY BELONG and NOT putting them in the Common Name field WHERE THEY MAY NOT BELONG. I am suggesting that YOU DO NOT CHANGE THE COMMON NAME FIELD AT ALL until Ken reveals his solution!
Am I speaking Zwahili or something? Yes you are and you are ignoring what other users are telling you. you do not have the ability to impose your will on the database. You do not have the ability to override either Gerri or Ken. yet you persist in ignoring what they have said and attempting to apply YOUR own Rule interpretation. You truly do have some very serious issues, Hal, that is becoming increasingly apparent and frankly it makes me very sad. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
  | Kevin | | Registered March 22, 2001 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 609 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
I have no agenda to undermine anything.. Ah, it's always the ones making the most noise to defend themselves that have the ulterior motives. I understand everything now!   |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 1,022 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
You are out of your cotton-pickin' minds.
this bunch of whacked users
Hal, have you been watching too much Rosie O'Donnell of late or what?
You are completely whacked
You truly do have some very serious issues, Hal
Skip, your strength of argument would be increasingly stronger (and easier to support) if you didn't persist in constantly smattering them with personal insults and snipes. You are not the only one doing this, but for the benefit of us all please can you try and set an example and only comment on the issues in hand? Thanks Richard | | |  |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,694 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
Just be aware that there is a hidden agenda on the part of certain users here, to undermine the existing method for linking actors, because they do not believe that Ken implemented it correctly, and they want Ken to adopt their method! Ken himself said it was a work in progress. When I learned English that means it isn't finished yet. If it isn't finished yet, then we can't use it properly. YOU are the one INSISTING on using it now, so just who the hell is the one breaking things here, Hal, hmmm? I don't give a damn what method is adopted. Personally, I don't like any of it, and I'm not using it. My one and only beef is with people like you who can't seem to understand that it doesn't work right now, and that it shouldn't be used at all until it does. So stop trying to foment a civil war here, and stop attributing motives to other people that you have no idea to be true or not. *EDITED* Edited to remove personal attack. | | | John
"Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice!" Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964
Make America Great Again! | | | | Last edited: by Ken Cole |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,414 |
| | Posted: | | | | I don't think it was implemented correctly either, but I have no intent to be undermining the database. As far as I'm concerned it's already irretrievably broken, but I'll be interested in seeing what Ken has in mind as a solution. | | | | "This movie has warped my fragile little mind." |
|
| Registered: March 10, 2007 | | Posts: 4,282 |
| | Posted: | | | | When I considered options for resolving name linking issues due to variations in how cast and crew are credited, there were two main candidates - the credited as system in use today, and a linking system. Linking works well with name variations but doesn't work well with one-off credits, and complicates the birth year solution to credit uniqueness. On the other hand, the credited as solution requires consistency in the common name to work well. There seems to be much duress over determining the "correct" common name for each cast/crew member, when in fact what is needed is merely consistency. I've prepared an online lookup that will allow searching the global cast and crew databases to determine the more common credited as name. Note that whether or not credited as field is currently used as intended, the lookup will remain valid as long as the cast/crew entries follow the credited as standard. Importantly, changing the common name for particular DVDs to align with the most common credited as field will have no effect on the lookup. Before I roll out the lookup functionality, I want to make sure that this solution is workable to the community. Pick it apart, tear into it, I'm thick skinned.  | | | | Invelos Software, Inc. Representative |
|
| Registered: May 9, 2007 | | Posts: 254 |
| | Posted: | | | | I guess my only question is (assuming I understand this): If Joe Schmoe does 10 films where he is credited as Joe Schmoe, that becomes his common name. But then his next 11 films have him credited as Joe C. Schmoe. Does his common name then need to be updated again at that point? Probably not a huge deal, just making sure I understand this.
In any event, I'm all for SOME sort of solution, and I'd be happy to work with this one. | | | | "I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world because they'd never expect it." - Jack Handey |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 404 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Ken Cole: Quote:
When I considered options for resolving name linking issues due to variations in how cast and crew are credited, there were two main candidates - the credited as system in use today, and a linking system. Linking works well with name variations but doesn't work well with one-off credits, and complicates the birth year solution to credit uniqueness. On the other hand, the credited as solution requires consistency in the common name to work well.
There seems to be much duress over determining the "correct" common name for each cast/crew member, when in fact what is needed is merely consistency. I've prepared an online lookup that will allow searching the global cast and crew databases to determine the more common credited as name. Note that whether or not credited as field is currently used as intended, the lookup will remain valid as long as the cast/crew entries follow the credited as standard. Importantly, changing the common name for particular DVDs to align with the most common credited as field will have no effect on the lookup.
Before I roll out the lookup functionality, I want to make sure that this solution is workable to the community. Pick it apart, tear into it, I'm thick skinned. Will the lookup also tell us what is the most common first/middle/last? | | | The Other DVD Forum
Why do people who know the least know it the loudest? |
|