Quoting Berak:

Quote:
The text over the picture is a part of the Overview IMO. It is not a tagline, and not a review, so according to the rules it should be entered as part of the Overview.

In my opninion that is... 

Well stated, berak. Your opinion.. It is separated from the Overview, it is in a totally different font type and style than the Actual Overview and therefore is not part of the Overview. But you are free to your opinion.

Skip

Overview=Summary, Synopsis, north. That is not part of either.

Based on your interpretation, we shoud simply provuide an image of the entire back cover because you believe that nearly all of it is Overview. All my specific knowledge can do is provide guidance and background into the intent, which personally I would think people would find useful and helpful. Instead of pontificating as if they knew what they were talking about when they don't.

Skip

Sorry Skip but there is absolutely nothing in the rules that says that that top line can't be entered as part of the overview. That may have been your intention & your opinion of the situation but as it currently stands it is not how the rules are worded so there is no reason for it to be excluded from submission.

Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:
Overview=Summary, Synopsis, north. That is not part of either.

Based on your interpretation, we shoud simply provuide an image of the entire back cover because you believe that nearly all of it is Overview. All my specific knowledge can do is provide guidance and background into the intent, which personally I would think people would find useful and helpful. Instead of pontificating as if they knew what they were talking about when they don't.

Skip

Many of us were involved in the development of the Rules.  But as northbloke points, that is irrelevant.  What is relevant is what they actually say today, and nothing in the current Rule says to exclude this paragraph.

Like I said earlier, I would include it.

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:
I vote based on the Rules [...]

No you don't.

Quote:
[...] and the understanding i have of them

That you do indeed. But that is something entirely different. Your "understanding", as you call it, is often just your personal preference, and, as you keep telling others, that belongs locally. Why can't you do that yourself?

Once again: you've stated your preference. Fine. That preference is, however, not supported by the rules. A vote against inclusion of this particular part of the overview would be a violation of the rules.

Quote:
[b]All my specific knowledge can do is provide guidance and background into the intent, which personally I would think people would find useful and helpful.

Please keep your "specific knowledge" to yourself[/b] - especially when it clashes with the rules.

Once you STOP pretending that you know something which you don't have a clue about. The overview never showed a problem for three years, until you opened your mouth.

And from where I sit, Tim, you don't support or follow the Rules at least a quarter of the time. You are only fooling yourself if you think you do.
I might disagree with hal, but he, at least has a basis from which to speak, you have ONLY your opinion. Tim. YOU take any weakness you can find in the Rules and then go off and spout as if you have knowledge and it is always with the same goal, to force your personal preference into the system. so when you stop and simply follow the Rules...

Skip

Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:
so when you stop and simply follow the Rules...

I am following the rules. You're the one who's not. You can keep blowing smoke, but that's what it boils down to. Your personal preference with regards to overviews does NOT match the rules are they are TODAY. Again: you're perfectly entitled to that opinion - you just shouldn't force it upon the rest of us. That's all.

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Many of us were involved in the development of the Rules.  But as northbloke points, that is irrelevant.  What is relevant is what they actually say today, and nothing in the current Rule says to exclude this paragraph.

Like I said earlier, I would include it.

Excellent point, Hal, about the relevance of what the rules actually say as opposed to what Skip thinks they say.  It's also irrelevant what Skip knows about the development of the rules, since often what went on during the development didn't make it into the rules when they were published.

I find it amusing when Skip says that what anyone else says is only that person's opinion, but whatever he (Skip) says should be taken as if Moses brought it down from the mountain inscribed on stone tablets along with the Ten Commandments.  Skip's opinions are only that, his opinions, and they have about as much weight as anyone else's when compared with what the rules actually say.

I agree that the paragraph above the pictures should be included in the overview.

Upon what basis, ken. You have not nor has Hal, addressed the points i have raised. It is physically separated from the Overview, it is also in a totally different size and typeface which makes it NOT connected to the overview and therefore not part of it.

I am thrilled with your opinion and everyone else's and your personal attack as well. NOW back it up, I have backed up my opinion, which is far more than anyone else has done here.

Come up with a factual reason why, not your inventions. I have explainwed why it is not, explain why it IS. This goes for you as well, Tim. I am not interested in your unsupported OPINION.

You guys are terrific with the personal insults and attacks, but you REASLLY, REALLY haye it when I bite back, because you have no defense for your opinion.

Skip