I know it can be frustrating, but do we really need to call users out in the contribution notes?  Ken already stated that we shouldn't do it in the forums, does he need to address the notes as well?  Can't we just let the screeners do their job? 

Of course I also agree... the only time I mention anyone in the notes is when I thank them for bring my attention to something I miss. And I don't think that you are talking about that at least. 

I guess there are two of them as I was refering to a different profile.  I have seen this a few times in the last month, and it is just getting old.  Either send a PM or suck it up and let the screeners decide.

It's a two-way street. If we didn't have personal agendas and antagonistic savior-complex vote comments, directed at specific contributors, we wouldn't have personal comments directed back at said voters.

Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:
James:

Calling attention to an incorrect interpretation of what ken has said, to feed a personal agenda, laziness or even in some cases personal ego, is not a personal comment. A No vote for an incorrect interpretation is ALWAYS the Correct thing to do, whether the Contributor likes it or not, however some of the personal attacks I have seen subsequently in Updated Notes are simply UNACCEPTABLE and the Contributor should censured and have such a Contribution summarily rejected, that is the way I would handle it.

Skip

His data is correct. You are misrepresenting Ken's comments in your 'no' votes. Nowhere did Ken require profiles to be blank in order to copy from another profile.  The problem started with your vote, not with T!M's updated notes.

James:

Once again you are victim to either selectivve readin or memory of what Ken has said. So...here it is in its entirety

"In general, contributions should be made only for profiles which the contributor owns and can verify.  Similarly, contribution votes should be made only for profiles which the voter owns and can verify.

However, there are exceptions.  Obviously, prerelease contributions do not require ownership.  They should be basic starter information (e.g. complete cast and crew is impossible to correctly contribute without having the disc).

Taking another case, if a particular locality has blank or limited cast info, and the submitter would like to fill it in with their verified cast from their own locality, I would tend to allow the voters who actually own the submitted locality to make the call.  However, the submitted contribution notes should clearly indicate that the cast is from the other locality, so that the voters and contribution evaluators can make an informed choice.

One additional reminder to please keep the contribution vote notes completely civil at all times.

The user is not doing as Ken has requested and he is gong to at some point enter BAD data to the database, he probably already has and  it has not been discovered yet. As to your specific comments and that of another voter, once again James, I will tell you that it is not your responsibility to be verifying data for a Contributor, you are in fact of no help at all because your vote comments completely disappear once the Contribution has either been approved or declined and therefor tell anybody anything of value.

As to the specific title and comment I made, in no way can that be interpreted as any kind of an attack on the user. I checked the CLT and found massive amounts of crossover data, which could indeed be correct since we do know that Credit lists are not always the same Region/Locality to Region/Locality or even version to version, but that has NOT verified, right now all we can say that there is crossover data. Now why did I checl the CLT....there is an answer for that...but i will let you come to your own conclusion, that way i cannot be accused of attacking the Contributor, unlike the way he has attacked me in Updated Notes on numerous ocassions.

To put it another way, if this particular user wants to blindly step off a cliff by making ill-advised and  and weakly verified and documented edits to Profiles which he does not own, or weakly verified and documented changes to a title he does own, this user will not follow him off the cliff, I am neither blind nor am I a lemming. I won't ask ANY user to vote for any Contribution on the basis of some of truly awful notes I have seen of late from several user, PLEASE don't ask it of me because I will NOT go along.

Skip


Skip

AESP:

The vote was not any kind of an attack, the Contributor did upadte his notes on several profiles, Past, Present and likely future to include a personal attack on user who dared to vote No on his Contribution, which as the voter saw it was in either violation of the Rules or Comments by Ken. Some then implied that the voter was a liar, others included comments such as "I'd say you're abusing your voting privileges..." which is a completely uncalled for and unacceptable comment. I won't comment on your 5-year-old theory, just keep the facts staright, the Voter made no attack on the Contributor, the  reverse is sadly untrue and I am sure this particular voter will continue to vote his conscience based on ken's comments and the Rules. I am sure he is as well simply astounded at what other users are willing to permit into the database. Well, that will never be said of his Contributions, he will verify and document his data for other users reference now or in the future and he will ALWAYS fix mistakes.

Skip

Skip

Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:
AESP:

The vote was not any kind of an attack, the Contributor did upadte his notes on several profiles, Past, Present and likely future to include a personal attack on user who dared to vote No on his Contribution, which as the voter saw it was in either violation of the Rules or Comments by Ken.
Skip

Skip

It's happened to me a few times, you can probably guess the users who have done it. If somebody feels the need to immortalize me in their notes then, hey, it's their prerogative.