Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
Sam:

The difference between me and most users, is that when such an error is found I will review it and likely make the necessary change.

Would you care to make an updated screen cap or shall I, since your agenda was oh so obvious as it always is. Jerk

The other difference between you and other users is that we don't feel the need to start threads about people making mistakes, especially in the manner you do. It is also typical of you to resort to personal attacks.

Quoting samuelrichardscott:

Quote:
Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
Sam:

The difference between me and most users, is that when such an error is found I will review it and likely make the necessary change.

Would you care to make an updated screen cap or shall I, since your agenda was oh so obvious as it always is. Jerk

The other difference between you and other users is that we don't feel the need to start threads about people making mistakes, especially in the manner you do. It is also typical of you to resort to personal attacks.

No Sam, the attack was YOURS, not mine. I responded to yours.     Be a good boy and bugger off.

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
Quoting samuelrichardscott:

Quote:
Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
Sam:

The difference between me and most users, is that when such an error is found I will review it and likely make the necessary change.

Would you care to make an updated screen cap or shall I, since your agenda was oh so obvious as it always is. Jerk

The other difference between you and other users is that we don't feel the need to start threads about people making mistakes, especially in the manner you do. It is also typical of you to resort to personal attacks.

No Sam, the attack was YOURS, not mine. I responded to yours.     Be a good boy and bugger off.

I know we're not allowed to say horrible things about other users here so I'll just think it.

I think you're a Forum Moderator: Removed. Please do not bypass the obscenity filter.

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
Quoting Kathy:

Quote:
It is disappointing that this was brought to the forums.

A "no" vote with an explanation should suffice. If the contributor does not check the voting, a polite pm outlining my "no" vote would be helpful.

It might be the contributor does not agree with your assessment. In this case the screeners will make the final decision.

It is likely the contributor does not read the forums and posting a complaint here does not solve the problem.

Kathy:

The reason that I bring it here is not for the contributor but to try and figure out why the voters are willing to accept a direct conflict in notes that is not really explained.

What is the UPC of this DVD?

I still think that there are better ways to deal with these issues. Those who have voted "yes" might not ever read the forums.

People do make mistakes, Alien, me included, but when I see something that is so obvious I have to wonder what people are seeing that i am not. I see a highly well-known and reliable source being cited with two completely different and conflicting sets of data. Roles are being changed , based on the same source and some additional sources are being used which in at least one instance is questionable at best. Something IS wrong, and when someone is changing data, I don't think we should just roll over and accept it, particularly when the same source is cited for different data. It's a little squirrely, I am digging through everything I can find in an attempt to verify the data and have not yet been successful. That is probably a whole hell of a lot moree  than you or anyone is else is doing, Alien, since as usual your purpose seems to be to attack me, though I will grant your post is unusually civil and I thank you for that part.

As for you last statement, wy should I listen to you, I have told you and others a number of times that you are in no position to throw rocks at me. You live in a glass house, does it stop you from attacking at every opportunity you can create...not it does not sadly. Perhaps one day I will see a change in your attitude but I'll not hold my breath, you come after and attack me, but, I only defend myself from your scurrilous behavior

Thank you reybr for the UPC.

You voted "no" because "See previous notes for data on (Uncredited)".

The only difference in the Uncedited data is the addition Thurl Ravenscroft to the uncredited Cast. The contributor supplied 2 different sources for this addition.

I own this DVD and voted "yes" because this contribution is correct per invelos rules.

Kathy, there is also a change in the roles of the uncredited cast, all of them explained and none of the changed roles are mentioned in the scan from Grant's book, so that also looks correct at first glance. If one choose to prefer the documentation without scan from the documentation with scan, of course one can vote no, but that is a personal preference. The same goes for voting yes.

The additional voices are actually the monkeys though, according to Graham Webb's The Animated Film Encyclopedia, and I'm a bit unsure about Hal Smith as The Slob Elephant. Webb has him as monkey, but he could have had both roles.

WEll now Graham Webb's book is a generally reliable source, but I am still trying to understand how two users cite the same source, but produce different data ofr the Roles. Without an explanation, I think i have to go with the previous Contributoor, simply because, while he and i have crossed swords, his Contributions are quite reliable. I just want to understand how the same source provides different data...if it does.

BTW I have PM'd the Contributor in hopes he can help resolve this.

Skip