In the new DVD Profiler 3.0 we are now allowed to added cast members that have more than one role separate as long as it is credited that way. The old system made us combine the roles together. Some users are still doing it that way.  In my opinion it should be as credited like the rules states.

2. The DVD I am talking about is Evening. 

This is how it was submitted:
Kara Doherty as Chloe / Constance Age 6
Chris Stack as Phil Mars
Maxine Prescott as Great Aunt Roo
Margaret Coen as Constance Age 4
Annie Wardwell as Nina Age 4

2. This is how it should look:

Kara Doherty as Chloe
Chris Stack as Phil Mars
Maxine Prescott as Great Aunt Roo
Margaret Coen as Constance Age 4
Annie Wardwell as Nina Age 4
Kara Doherty as Constance Age 6

Here is the rules and we have yes votes for the first way which it violates the rules.

“For any film with standard credits, take the actor information from the end credits only, with names and roles listed exactly as they are in the credits and in exactly the same order credited.  Exception: If the credit information is entirely capitalized, use standard capitalization rules instead.”

These users may not be aware that you are now allowed to list an actor more than once. Have you PMd them to let them know?

they could be simply overlooking it... could be that they are trusting the contributor if they are just saying it is going by the credits (depending on their notes). or who knows. but the rules are still there and they need to be followed... for online anyway.

I have made mistakes as I am human but when some one tells me that I have I re-
verify and fix my mistake. If I vote Yes for a profile that was wrong and someone tells me it was wrong I then verify it and change my vote.

I did notify some that they voted yes on a profile that was wrong.

Quoting Dragon73:

Quote:
Then why do we have well known contributors and ones that follow the rules vote yes for a contribution that violates the rules.

Yo don't really want me to answer that one, Ira.

Skip

I like it that I can vote for "or".

Very good.

Apart from the question which form of entering the credits is correct (I don't own the title, so I can't check) I find it offensive that this thread was obviously started because the threadstarter contacted users who voted "yes", they didn't change their votes and now the threadstarter is disappointed. That behavior is very bad form IMO.

You don't agree with the "Yes" votes? Well, tough luck. You've only got one vote. Cast it, put in the proper notes and let the system take care of the rest. If the contribution gets through, resubmit and correct.

Even though we have the ability to see other user's votes, that does not entitle you to contact other users because you disagree with their vote. How I vote is my business, and voting "yes" to faulty contributions is - per the rules - not an abuse of the voting privilege, but should be avoided. Due to the fact that we all can make mistakes, this is the only way to handle voting.

So, bottom line, cast YOUR vote, maybe look at the others' votes to confirm your position, but don't harass others because you've got a different POV on what's correct. That's NOT your business.

Quoting Lopek:

Quote:
How I vote is between me and the contributer and Invelos.

I wonder if the voting would be even more accurate if the contributor didn't know who the voters are. Show the voting comments to the contributor but not the voter's identity. Perhaps this would work best if the contributor was allowed a rebuttal comment.