Quoting bbbbb:

Quote:
I only wonder why each profile I open of the said movie contains the two. 
Meaning that Invelos approved "ca Sound engineers -> Sound" several times.

Probably because someone added them...despite the fact that the rules do not allow them.

Quote:
So it is quasi-official, isn't it?

Unless the contribution notes specifically stated that the contribution was adding Sound Engineers as 'sound' then, no, it isn't 'quasi-official.

Quoting Jubal:

Quote:
Were you not implying that you would go ahead and provide such a credit, despite the fact that it is not in the Rules nor the defined Roles, that is certainly the way i read what you are saying.

I would, yes. Just like I'm using "original material by" and "song writer" regularly for credits not in the list of "defined roles" - and I bet you do too. Yet suddenly this one is different, eh? I don't think so. Like you agreed: these clearly ARE the sound people worth tracking for this film. We both know that, but while you'd rather leave them out on a technicality, I wouldn't. Of course we can argue semantics until we're blue in the face - please go ahead without me - but that doesn't change that these ARE the people we're after. Judging from what bbbbb has said, it would seem that most of the userbase understands that. That's good to hear - the few eternal naysayers here in the forums tend to give a rather gloomy perspective on things, but in real life, luckily things aren't so bad, and most users actually do use some common sense. Phew.

Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Quoting T!M:

Quote:
I would, yes. Just like I'm using "original material by" and "song writer" regularly for credits not in the list of "defined roles" - and I bet you do too. Yet suddenly this one is different, eh? Well, it's not.

Actually, it is.  There are no defined roles for OMB or Song Writer.  There are, however, defined roles for 'sound'.  I guess, if you ignore that little fact, you can say there is no difference, but I'm not going to do that.

Picked the wrong examples for you, did I? Well then, I'll move on: have you ever paid attention to what's in the "credited as" columns for "film editor" or "composer"? Any idea how many different variants for those labels are being entered routinely by just about everyone here? Still don't see the similarity?   Trust me: if you wanna be that strict, you'd be surprised how many absolutely valid credits you're going to have to remove from your profiles. You better be careful what you wish for.

Bottom line: these people belong in the database - they're about the prime example of what the "sound" credit is meant for.

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Picked the wrong examples for you, did I? Well then, I'll move on: have you ever paid attention to what's in the "credited as" columns for "film editor" or "composer"?

Anybody who has been around for any lenght of time already knows the answer to that question.  I always pay attention to what is in the 'credited as' columns for every credit.  In fact, I refer to the crew chart every single time I enter a credit.

Quote:
Any idea how many different variants for those labels are being entered routinely by just about everyone here?

No, and neither do you.  It is impossible for anybody to know the answer to that question.

Quote:
Still don't see the similarity?

Nope, still don't.  There is a huge difference between a variation of a credit and one that doesn't exist at all.  For instance, a credit of 'recordist', in the sound section, can be entered because the word 'sound' is presumed based on it's location in the credits.  A credit of 'sound engineer' can't...unless you are arguing that the word 'sound' makes it a valid sound credit.

Quote:
Trust me: if you wanna be that strict, you'd be surprised how many absolutely valid credits you're going to have to remove from your profiles. You better be careful what you wish for.

No need to be careful as I think 90% of the crew credits that we enter are useless.  It would not sadden me one bit if Ken decided to eliminate them all.  Since that isn't likely to happen, I will continue to enter the credits that are allowed by the crew chart and remove the ones that aren't.

Quote:
Bottom line: these people belong in the database - they're about the prime example of what the "sound" credit is meant for.

No, the prime examples of what the 'sound' credit is meant for are: Sound, Sound Recording, Sound Recordist, Sound Supervisor & Recorded by.  I mean, it is pretty well spelled out in the rules.

Whether or not they belong in the database, well, as I already said, that is a matter of opinion but, please, let's not pretend that they are allowed by the rules because that simply isn't true...and a 'strict' reading of the rules isn't even required to come to that conclusion.

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Once again: I'd include them.

I expect nothing different from you.

Quote:
In my experience, so does almost everyone else.

In mine, they don't so where does that leave us?

Quote:
And rightly so.

In your opinion, not in mine and certainly not per the rules.

Quote:
I'll go and audit some profiles now - you all have fun.

Yea, gotta get those numbers ever higher because it is such a status symbol. 

I already double check his contributions, so, no big change here.  Thankfully, I don't see a lot of them, so it isn't that much extra work.