Dukes Nits

By Nick747 Date 2005-04-20 13:52

May be no one else watches the show. But right now in my queue are 3 nits for the DoH.

Don't learn from your mistakes. Learn from other people's mistakes.

By Thor2000 Date 2005-04-20 20:36

There's a majority of shows I don't watch, but I still vote on their nits.

By geode Date 2005-04-20 22:22

How about when you do vote review for movie nits?

By Seanibus Date 2005-04-20 23:00

But Thor, you're not supposed to do that. If you vote the nit in but have not seen the show, how can you possibly know whether the events described actually happened, or whether the nitter has accurately seen and interpreted events? You're just opening the door to a wave of bogus nits (and there are a surprising number of completely bogus nits, not even close to reality).

Please step over into the Master Nitpicker board so we can discuss this.

By Toomanymovies Date 2005-04-21 02:29

This is why I voted 'no' in the Simpsons poll.

By Thor2000 Date 2005-04-21 18:05

Rule of thumb,

If the nit is made obvious in the nit: Example: "He said he was an only child in an earlier episode, but now he has a brother." I vote it though, but if the nit is like: "This is out of character for this person." I skip it. I've read nits for movies already voted through on movies I've never seen (Die Hard, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter....) where the nit describes the set-up and then why its wrong. If the nit itself already proves its a nit, why do I have to see the movie. If the nit says: "You can't get a spell from a Grumbeldore." without telling me why, I skip it. I skip a lot more than I vote through.

In other words, I go by just how well the nit is explained; this is why I don't understand why a lot of my nits are refused after I've already explained the set-up and the reason behind the nit and then somebody says something stupid like.

"Well, I saw the movie and despite the fact that this isn't in the movie, I saw it like this....

"Maybe Lincoln was asking for it just before he got shot?"

By Seanibus Date 2005-04-21 18:43

That is a bad rule of thumb. You shouldn't vote for nits based on assertions you cannot verify. Why should you assume that the assertion the person makes is correct? You yourself have seen that there are plenty of nakedly bogus nits out there, that describe events or situations that simply didn't happen. They are breathtakingly blatant in many cases.

There are those that argue you should never vote on a movie or TV show you haven't seen. I argue that there are certain very narrow exceptions, but only in a negative sense - when there is a testable factual assertion that can be verified, such as "the Nazi colnoel uses a Walter PPK, but that gun was not introduced until 1950." well, that can be check and verified and is clearly factually incorrect whether or not it happened in the movie.

But in a positive sense, I don't think you can ever conclusively determine whether a nit is true without seeing the movie or show. You should simply never, ever vote for a nit that relates to a show or movie you have not seen.

Therefore, you are making a grave mistake and potentially making the site worse. Add to that the fact, pointed out by Blue, that there is no refute option for TV nits at present, so if you vote in a bogus nit and later discover you have been duped, there is no way to remove that bad nit.

So stop doing that.

By Thor2000 Date 2005-04-21 18:50

Okay, I'll take your advice, but....

Nits don't go through just because I vote them through. There's still has to be two other people to help it along, or three if someone votes it out. Maybe those people will know something I don't.

Just because I vote "Decent Nitpick" doesn't mean the next two will vote the same way based on the first. There's so many different vote descriptions I don't think anyone clicks the same thing just because the previous person chose that one.

By Seanibus Date 2005-04-21 18:54

That is why I am addressing it on the open boards - not particularly to single you out, but so that anybody who reads this can see why they should not vote in this manner. And why we are particularly concerned about your statements - you are a master nitpicker. We have gone to great efforts to put out a forthright and consistent message on this and it is troublesome to have a known master nitpicker staking out such a radically different position on such a sensitive point.

By Thor2000 Date 2005-04-22 20:38

Truth be told, I give the people who post nits the same reasoning I expect from the people who vote my nits in. Just because my nits get ripped into I'm not doing that to someone else. Sometimes, I have to rewrite, rework and repost the same exact nit 10-12 times before it finally goes through, I mean, how many different ways do you have to explain "the emperor has no pants." It's crazy. Discussions get posted and voted through constantly in the comments area and I'm getting busted for giving people benefit of the doubt.

By the way, I stopped voting on comments a long time ago because of those reasons.

By Seanibus Date 2005-04-22 21:19

Suit yourself, as long as you are aware that "giving people the benefit of the doubt" by voting on stuff you know nothing about it a bad idea.

By Thor2000 Date 2005-04-22 21:51

I still don't see the problem. Out of 30-40 nits a day, I probably only vote on ten or less. What's wrong with giving others the respect from others on the site I'm not getting? "Do into others......."

I could really be doing something wrong voting against everything and giving no one a chance like a lot of voters are doing.

While we're on the point, you'll be glad to know I have never voted on one Friends, Joey, Sex in the City, Everyone Loves Ray or Sopranos nits. I hate those shows!

By Magnanimous Date 2005-04-24 01:46

>What's wrong with giving others the respect from others on the site I'm not getting?

Sean is talking about following the rules of the site and behaving honestly. You are talking about agreeing with people when you really don't have any idea whether they're right, wrong, or insane. That is a far cry from respect.

>"Do into others......."

You are breaking the rules of the site, misleading other voters, helping vote in bogus nitpicks, and as an MN yo are setting a bad example. I don't see how this follows the rule you quote, unless the rest of your rule is "before they do unto you".

By geode Date 2005-04-22 21:52

Thor, I'm no MN, but you seem like a decent and honest sort. There are a lot of people submitting nits who don't deserve the same level of trust that most of us honest nitters do. No matter how legitimate the submission seems, with our blind submission process there's no way to know whether the submitter is someone trustworthy or a baldfaced liar making it up out of whole cloth.

Unless, of course, the voter has seen the movie. Hence Seanibus's fervor.

By Thor2000 Date 2005-04-22 21:55

I think you hit the point home with that "blind trust." I just don't want to be as ruthless as some of the people doing the voting. If I skipped everything I didn't watch, I'd be voting on nothing and I check this site every day before checking my own e-mail.

By Seanibus Date 2005-04-22 22:17

I maintain that you are better to vote on nothing than vote for a nit on a work you know nothing about. That is, in fact, the exact position I take and I believe most or all of my MN colleagues would agree. I have something like 122 votes and I'd be surprised to find that I use more than 10 or 11 in any given day. Not voting on a work you have not seen is a sign of respect to the site. You are doing the voters you support blindly no favors with an empty and uninformed vote. the fact that you have been wronged by bogus voters doesn't mean you should be in the position of supporting bogus nits.

As our wise friend Boop often counsels, the most important vote on this site is "Skip"

By blueblue Date 2005-04-22 22:57

>I have something like 122 votes and I'd be surprised to find that I use more than 10 or 11 in any given day.

93, and I rarely use more than 25, which would mostly be on comments.

By Thor2000 Date 2005-04-23 14:55

Let me ask you this, how about a series I have seen, but not in a long time. There's a number of "Greatest American Hero" nits going through, and I loved that series when it was on, buit I haven't seen it since. Someone must have taped episodes of the series.

By geode Date 2005-04-23 16:45

It's out on DVD! Series one at least.

By blueblue Date 2005-04-24 01:04

What are you doing? Are you trying to be a smart aleck? You know you're supposed to vote on material with which you are familar enough to judge. if you don't know something or haven't seen it in 25 years, don't vote on it. You're setting a terrible example. If you're so worried about using your internet time well, get your butt over to the MN board instead of avoiding the issue of what you've been doing with your MN responsibilities for the past 6 months plus.

By Magnanimous Date 2005-04-24 01:53

This site is called "Movie Chatter"! It is for people who watch movies! Maybe not an incredible number, but at least some. And the Nitpickers site is for people who like to nitpick movies!

No one says you have to watch every movie and TV show, or even a lot. There are enough voters with enough different interests that there should be at least a couple of other nitpickers who have seen a particular movie and can vote honestly. But if you don't watch at least a few movies or TV shows, what are you doing here?

By Cassie Date 2005-04-22 05:53

> Just because I vote "Decent Nitpick" doesn't mean the next two will vote the same way based on the first.

Some will do just that. People are sheep.

By blueblue Date 2005-04-21 22:15

>Rule of thumb, If the nit is made obvious in the nit: Example: "He said he was an only child in an earlier episode, but now he has a brother." I vote it though, but if the nit is like: "This is out of character for this person." I skip it.

What if the nitter missed the episode where he found a long-lost brother? You would never know! Forinstance, on Friends, it seemed for most of the show that Phoebe's mother was dead. Later, we learned that her birth mother was alive and she had been raised by a woman who was very close to her mother and father. (Or something like that, I'm in a hurry). There are lots of things that could be like this. That's why it's important that you watch the show, because even people who watch the show have to be careful.

By geode Date 2005-04-22 04:13

Or the submitter could be a very convincing liar.

By blueblue Date 2005-04-22 05:44

"On the show Blind Injustice, it is well-known that the lead detective has been blind since an incident with acid on the job. However, when he was speaking to Dr. Kuchulin, he says that when it happened, he felt 'the bullet enter.'" Though there are guns shown in the flashback scene where he is blinded, he is not hit by any of them!"

By Magnanimous Date 2005-04-24 01:47

Or a really poor judge of movie plots.

By Rev. Jim Date 2005-04-24 04:04

or nitpicking the wrong movie of the same name

By Juniper_6 Date 2005-04-24 04:08

or accidentally submitted a nitpick for Gigi instead of Gigli. :-)

By blueblue Date 2005-04-24 04:42

Or is all thumbs. ;-)

By Magnanimous Date 2005-04-27 07:06

That was hilarious! Yes, the nitpick about the characters in Gigi cutting off someone's thumb with plastic cutlery did not deserve the benefit of the doubt.

By JediKnight13 Date 2005-04-24 04:57

or is David Bowman.

By Toomanymovies Date 2005-04-24 05:19

**CoughDesperateMeasurescoughcough**

By blueblue Date 2005-04-20 23:21

What!? You can't do that! Sean is right. I could see if someone often watched a show and knew it was common, for instance, for items to shift around during conversation scenes---you could give a benefit of doubt vote for something you didn't personally see. But if you don't even watch the show regularly, voting on nits is unfair and irresponsible. It's bad enough that when false movie nits get through, we have to go to the trouble of commenting on and refuting them. We can't get rid of false TV nits. They clog up the DB and give more voting rights and posted Nitpicks to people who don't deserve them.

By grumpy_otter Date 2005-04-21 15:30

>There's a majority of shows I don't watch, but I still vote on their nits.

You might want to recall what you said here:

http://www.moviechatter.com/topic_show.pl?pid=77335&hl=public%20internet&hlm=and#77335

Or do TV shows not count?

By blueblue Date 2005-04-20 19:43

I just had to resubmit several nits on Dawson's Creek, Cold Case, and something else (Charmed? others?) because they were in the queue too long and just died. I think the massive onslaught of new shows is decreasing the voting numbers. I was thinking it might be a problem for a little while, until we have had the new shows for long enough to lessen the number of new submissions a bit.