NO USER is required to make any change he does not wish to make , Rick. By your standard, if a user chooses NOT to add an edition for his own purposes that is his business not yours or mine. I have the ability as do you to make the change. I am not as free with the italics as others are for me it designates the title or actor name, when italicized. You are attempting to impose your will on another user and that is WRONG PERIOD, personally I view it as a violation of your votin privilege and i would hope Ken would take corrective action against the users involved.

There is nothing that says any user is required to make ANY specific change, if you want it...be my guest, but stop blackmailing me.

Skip

Erik:

I hope yoiu are not trying to say that we must not only Contribute accurate data, but it must be complete as well. If so I will have to vote No a lot more than I do now.

Skip

Lopek:

IF Ihad changed data their logic would be correct.

iIn short if it was Uncle Martin on the cover and it was 'Uncle Martin' in the Overview for me to change it to Uncle Martin would be wrong. However if it is Uncle Martin in the Overview and I choose for whatever my reasons are to not change it, then any user voting NO is abusing their voting privilege and attempting to leverage their vote to force a user to make a change he does not wish to make. If that user would prefer to come back with "Uncle Martin' then obviously he would be right and i would vote yes.

But I repeat I am NOT required to make that change if I do not choose to.

Skip

Independent from this particular case:
If a contribution adds new errors, it gets a No vote from my part.
If a contribution does not add any new error but does not correct every existing error, I usually vote Neutral or Yes, depending whether I have double checked the changes or not.

This particular case leaves a bad taste behind, because the contributor resubmitted his contribution without any change but adding a personal remark to the contribution notes. Resubmitting (before processing by the screeners) an unchanged contribution just to clear the votes and add a personal remark is a violation of the contribution system IMO.

Quoting Dr. Killpatient:

Quote:
PM the contributer with this thread.

See the 8.59 post. There is no need.

Since all who have posted an opinion here agree with my NO vote I won't get into the "debate" with you Skip. It is obviously a matter of principal that you haven't either changed it or removed that part of your contribution. The only thing I can see is it is because if was me who pointed it out. We all know I'm out to get you after all. 

Just out of curiosity, wouldn't this be one of those conditions where you submit the correct and complete information based on the posted rules but then change it for your local? It was my understanding you keep two databases for just such an occasion.     

EDIT: While I was posting this RHo voiced an opinion that did NOT agree with my NO vote. So I guess the first line should read

Quote:
"Since all but one who have posted an opinion here agree with my NO vote I won't get into the "debate" with you Skip.

And to further claruify the record, Rick's initial No vote was vote was fine. I responded withg a note specific to his concerns explaining that it was MY choice not to italicize the word and he still voted No. So YES he is abusinmg his voting privilege and attempting to impose his will on another user.

If you want the change Rick, YOU MAKE IT and get out of my face on it. You are abusing your voting privilege PERIOD..

Skip

Not at all, lopek, I made a CHOICE not to make a change. If any other user wants to make it I won't block it, I will not accept it locally, but that too is my choice. Once it is there, should I discover a further change is necessary i would not change it. But I have no right to attempt to use my vote to blackmail a user. And yes. you may consider it over the top, but blackmail is precisely what it is.

Skip