Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
I just double-checked, the actual credit read ZOË SALDANA

And you're in luck: only a few days ago, taking the CLT numbers on face value would have resulted in entering that as "Zoe Saldana [Zoë Saldana]". But today, it can simply be entered as as "Zoë Saldana". It's just unfortunate that it took two-and-a-half years of cleaning up IMDb-mined data to get the numbers to reflect the truth, while it really was pretty obvious from the get-go. And as long as people keep dumping IMDb-mined data in the db (like the nine incorrect 'Avatar' ones), the balance may even shift back - again, like the first time around, not based on ACTUAL credits, but only on IMDb-mined data. 

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
And thank you James, for confirming what I have said so many times about you and the Rules.

You have recently been proven to have contributed IMDb data to Invelos while calling it "STRICTLY As Credited", so you have no standing on which to say anything to me. Ever. Again. 

Quoting m.cellophane:

Quote:
Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
And thank you James, for confirming what I have said so many times about you and the Rules.

You have recently been proven to have contributed IMDb data to Invelos while calling it "STRICTLY As Credited", so you have no standing on which to say anything to me. Ever. Again. 

Wrong there have been other submissions involved, James. I don't deliberately ignore the Rules EVER, you do though. As near as I can tell my data has been corrupted somewhere along the way. Be careful with your incendiary accusations , especially accusations based on remarks made by exceedingly hostile spotters.
I am surprised to find that my data has been corrupted, i try to prevent it, and I don't like not having access to my films, but that's life at the moment.

I know that I stopped using IMDb or any scraping tools in the spring of 2004, James. And as I said the other day your comments are worth exactly $.01. The number of times you have ignored the Rules to cast a yes vote is simply uncountable. I will say that you do follow the Rules for Contributions, but the same cannot be said for your votes. I wish that it could.

James I WILL continue to call you out every time from now on. You have ignored the Rules too many times. So, be very careful how you vote, no spin follow the Rules and vote by the Rules. No more illegal votes iof any kind because I bring them right here for all to see. you crossed the line long ago, and you don't even know when or why.

Most recently was your initial vote on Bull Durham, the one that contained bad data. It was an obvious error but you didn't bother to check and see it. You blindly voted Yes and had it not been for the Contributor making the correction that was needed, you would have been a party to bad data in the database.

Did you really look at South Pacific.

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
especially accusations based on remarks made by exceedingly hostile spotters.

Once again,m you bring this up for no other reason than for baiting. Again I post this to at least try and get a response from you:

Quoting samuelrichardscott:

Quote:
You really make me laugh Skip. 90% of your posts are attacks on other users and you are simply to wrapped up in your own importance to even acknowledge how this reflects upon YOU. You say you have been insulted for three pages (sorry, you said assaulted, which, like most your posts, makes zero sense) but all I see are people dishing back to you exactly what you dish out to them. You seem to think that my remarks at you are the best I can offer this site? Shows how little you know because I often submit to the movie galleries and headshot databases whilst submitting things to the online everyday. Just because you don't see some of the things I submit does not mean I offer nothing to the database. In fact, if you stepped back just a bit, you'll find you are the only member I am not pleasant towards, but then, that is because you are not pleasant towards anyone else. I have a lot of respect for a lot of people here who have helped me in various ways (T!M, martian etc etc) and will continue to respect them because they have respect for the community as a whole. Sure, I'm a complete jackass, but only to those who are a waste of oxygen.

Also, I love the way you constantly try to bait people by saying it's the 'spotters'. Yes, the spotters who are trying to learn the way the database works WITHOUT some increpid old fool trying to 'haze' or 'initiate' (unlike all the other people who have welcomed us with open arms). You can try and bait as much as you like but whenever you get stick back in the same way you dish it out in every thread, you ALWAYS play the card of the bully that is being stuck up to.

Good day sweetheart.

And again, even this thread where the 'spotters' haven't been involved you have been disgustingly rude to various members and as soon as someone says something back you take the defensive. You're nothing but a bigoted bully.

Quoting m.cellophane:

Quote:
Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
James I WILL continue to call you out every time from now on. You have ignored the Rules too many times. So, be very careful how you vote, no spin follow the Rules and vote by the Rules. No more illegal votes iof any kind because I bring them right here for all to see. you crossed the line long ago, and you don't even know when or why.

Most recently was your initial vote on Bull Durham, the one that contained bad data. It was an obvious error but you didn't bother to check and see it. You blindly voted Yes and had it not been for the Contributor making the correction that was needed, you would have been a party to bad data in the database.

Did you really look at South Pacific.

I've never contributed IMDb data and called it as-credited. Deflect all you want. It means nothing to me.

James:

I am deflecting NOTHING. You are making groundless accusations. You need to learn to follow the Rules, with your votes as well as your Contributions.

It was your vote FOR Bull Durham and bad data. it is your vote FOR South Pacific and bad data. It is your vote for much of the bad data that currently is in the database. And like I said i will happily point it out each and every time.

Not at all, you spotters can me to Profile with a chip on your collective shoulder, Sam. The behavior that you display individually and as a group is the same. You all came here whining about what happened to Spot and promptly started as a group to try and turn Profiler into a failed program which left you in the lurch. You do function very well in a group think environment, Sam.

But that's OK I will still try and help any of you anytime I can. You only manage to prove your own purposes.

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
It is your vote for much of the bad data that currently is in the database. And like I said i will happily point it out each and every time.

I completely agree. It's not Skip's fault he contributed 3 YEAR OLD data without bothering to check it while still claiming it was AS CREDITED. It's completely James' fault for not voting "no" to it!!!!