Poll Suggestion: Books That Play an Important Role in the Movie

@Jessica​ 

I've set it public. Everyone should be able to take a look at it, now.

@TheOldJalapenoman​ 

Added National Treasure: Book of Secrets, Fahrenheit 451 and The Omega Code. I just need line for it, because I don't know anymore which book it was that made the protagonist change his mind.

I disagree with the facebook-argument. In Germany many people see it in another way. We got a law about rabble-rousing. It's not covered by the laws of free speech. The law of free speech ends there when rabble-rousing or insulting beginns. Rabble-rousing or insulting is an offense in Germany and telling that a specific crime which happened is good, also is criminal. So facebook has to check they won't provide rabble-rousing or insulting. In Germany, such content would be easily banned after reporting.

@Breumaster​ Elon Musk recently bought Twitter for billions and it has come out now in secret memos that he has found in their corporate offices that the Biden administration had Twitter and other websites delete Conservative posts and posts that went against the political agenda of the Bidens.  This was not criminal activity posts, this was not posts that incited to riot.  These were post of a rival political ideology that came from Christians.  This was not the removing of dangerous materials, it was the censorship of materials because it contained opinions and facts that disagreed with Bidens leftist/socialist ideology.

Well, the issue is that the Twitter company has no legal obligation to arbitrarily obey the Joe Biden administration or any president of the United States. On the other hand, the Twitter company is except as prohibited by its own contractual obligations very much free to be biased in favor of Joe Biden, his friends, Hillary Clinton, her friends, the Democratic Party, Liz Cheney, Mitt Romney, Mitch McConnell, Lindsay Graham, the Republican Party, Cable News Network (CNN), the Young Turks (TYT), Microsoft Network Broadcast Channel (MSNBC), Stephen Colbert, Trevor Noah, Samantha Bee, Amber Ruffin, Jimmy Kimmel, Seth Meyer, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), the Black Lives Matter movement, the March for Our Lives, Moms Demand Action or whomever. ('Tis a long list, where classic Twitter's affinities lay.) Yet furthermore, except as to enforcing the law or fulfilling legal obligations, the executive branch of the United States has no business influencing the ways of social media websites/app, much less illegally manipulating them, like via extortion or bribery. The same goes for committees of the United States Senate, and committees of the United States House, attempting to entertain such sneaky behaviors. The same goes for candidates for public office. This is part of what Edward Snowden, a centrist constitutionalist, tried to warn the public about, by the way.

Please don't forget that the European countries have their own view of law according to the Internet. As I know there was a decision that social media has to delete posts which are not conform to laws. That affects also twitter and facebook. This might look like censorship for Americans, but many countries in Europe have other views on it.

Especially in Germany there is a group which calls themselves "Reichsbürger". They planed to overthrow the German state by military actions. They have been stopped by an operation that connected 3000 officers to catch the masterminds of that illegal group. The main issue to erase illegal posts is to avoid political propaganda of people like that. They will face jail now. The problems according to your capitol could have been stopped in advance, if hounding was forbidden. That did the republicans and the whole land a bad deed. But boiling up the masses with false information and then wondering why they rush into the capitol is a little naiv, isn't it?

A German comedian made jokes about far right wing polititians in which he called them "Twittlers". That's something to think about.

Yes, we understand that some parts of the law in Europe differ considerably from the law in the United States, just as some parts of the law in nations outside the Western bloc differ considerably from the law in nations within the the Western bloc. In order for social media websites to be normally accessible to inhabitants of some regions of the world, the companies maintaining those websites are obligated to follow the law in those regions. Likely there are contexts whereby these companies cannot efficiently and properly isolate the visibility of content that differs in legality across national borders, so the companies respond by simply complying the with strictest most authoritarian nation with whom they have an business relationship/interest. With that in mind, the companies would be irresponsible whenever they consciously conceal this fact from the public at large.

The Constitution of the United States forbids the United States government and every government within the jurisdiction of the United States and their territories from ratifying, implementing or enforcing certain kinds of policies, and the United States' court of last resort, the Supreme Court of the United States, is empowered to order released and exonerate anybody convicted of violating any statute/treaty found to be in contradiction with the Constitution of the United States, likewise with statutes/treaties pursuant to the Constitution but which have been enforced contrary to its provisions, and the courts are empowered to find in favor of persons suing a body in/under the command of the government of the United States for violations of law. These limitations upon governments in the United States are covered primarily in the amendments to the Constitution of the United States, but additional limitations apply specifically to the Unite States government (federal), by the ninth section of the first article of the Constitution, whereas other limitations apply to every State part of the United States, by the tenth section of the first article of the Constitution. The first amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

While there had, like anything, always been room for interpretation, the forms of expression subject to being criminalized are rather few, and even the constitutionality of many of those are subject to being questioned, especially if the minimum judicial remedies for committing the "crimes" are too harsh. One of the important things to remember is that the United States were founded on anti-government rhetoric, even that of the manipulative and disingenuous variety.

The problems according to the United States capitol could have been stopped in advance, if hounding was forbidden? I'm not sure that I understand. In the context of law, what is hounding? The riot at and within the capitol building on evening of the 6th of January, 2021, was motivated by a crowd of people's interest in attempting to force Mike Pence to do the opposite of fulfilling his duties as the President of the Senate of the United States:

The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.

I don't understand how a censorious statute could've prevented a crowd of United States citizens from being motivated to travel to the United States capitol and storm the building of the seat of government, basically in the name of attempting to keep the president of the United States (their preferred candidate for president) in that very office of president. The person, bureau or agency responsible for protecting the capitol building from intrusion is where the failure lay. Also, there wound up being only three or so fatalities, and the election results were certified as supposed to be on the same day. Another aspect of failure was the fact that law enforcement failed to arrest the crowd, instead opting to exploit the opportunity to be picky about whom and whom not to later track down and haul before the courts.

Boiling up the masses with false information? Which information? Surely everybody realizes that certain information is only considered false because of a lack of proof of what is being alleged? So, are we to expect prosecutors' offices to go around indicting or seeking arrest warrants for people who've made public statements about things they sincerely believe to be true but which they cannot prove? Seriously?

Which false information? What about "They stole the election!". I guess he still has no evidence for that. Short after that the capitol was illegaly entered by the people who follow him. No evidence in that position = false information. Just watch some documentations.

One of the best documentation on another subject is 'Trumps Deutsche Bank | WDR Doku - YouTube'

It tells about his real estate business. Some bankers told about the circumstances which shows another image of that guy. He pretended very much highered worth of his real estates to gain bigger credits at the Deutsche Bank credit institute after no other credt institute wanted to do anymore business with him. When it came to taxes he pretended lower worth of his real estates. I guess that will drop on his feet now. Not to forget that there were found high confidential documents at his domicil Mar-a-Lago (According to German TV-Broadcast news), which is illegal to do in America.

I guess I know why he is so scared about going to jail. There are so many black people he ranted on. I guess he would face a big party.

Why is my last posting marked as private?

Well, the post is probably marked as private because the Qanon filter cannot distinguish between expressing something forbidden and quoting something forbidden. I know this isn't a laughing matter, I do find this idea kind of hilarious.

I was having the same problem earlier on this page, and I was posting something relevant to the poll suggestion that had nothing whatsoever to do with Qanon.

Supposedly the filter only catches spam and anything that resembling it, but I don't have much experience with it, as I've only ever had one post marked as private, the status lasting no longer than three days, if I recall correctly. No hyperlinks were in the post, but there were multiple references to various streaming services, e.g. Tubi and Plex.

That negates that only right wing commentaries are censored. But they shout the loudest.

Who knows? Maybe only left wing commentaries are guaranteed protection from the filtering system, leaving centrist commentaries at the same risk as right wing commentaries. To be fair, we don't really know where the Sprinklr company's biases lay, and it is not clear that IMDb as a client of Sprinklr is responsible for managing the spam filter, especially given the idea that machine learning is involved.

Okay. So, the post you made that was marked as private became publicly visible some dozens of hours ago, Breumaster. I get the feeling that you and I are just barely succeeding at comprehending each other's words across the somewhat obvious language barrier. I joked earlier about you quoting Qanon (being that part of your blocked messaged was visible in my notifications menu on Sprinklr), but I'm not entirely sure whom exactly you're quoting, regarding the disputation of the votes (popular and electoral) leading to the outcome of the United States presidential election of 2020, so I'd have to assume that you're paraphrasing Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani or one of the other leaders of the contemporary MAGA movement. Who else could it be, right? Again, I'm unfamiliar with this concept of "hounding", but it sounds like a behavior that can only be undertaken by folks who actually have access to the bully pulpit or the equivalent, in some capacity. I doubt you've even heard of Robert Barnes, Brandon Tatum, Jake Angeli or the millions of other Trump sycophants (or borderline such), so you're probably not referring to any of them, unless painting Trump supporters and Trump voters with a broad brush.

"Just watch some documentaries."

Yeah, I've seen many documentaries, and I'm still not quite sure that I understand. You did provide something of an example documentary, one that you claim is one of the best documentaries: Trumps Deutsche Bank, by Westdeutscher Rundfunk Dokumentationen (WDR Doku). I'm afraid that I didn't learn much from this hit piece apart from the names Felix Sater, Tim Wiswell, Viktor Khrapunov, Mukhtar Ablyazov and Natalia_Veselnitskaya, along with a small bit of information about them and their respective relationships with Trump organizations, the Trump family or Trump Senior himself. I ought to point out that I had to circumvent YouTube's region filter in order to even be able to watch the video online at the hyperlink provided by you, and on top of that nearly the whole thing is voiced over and has open captioning in the German language. Do you think that just because my name contains "Euler" that I'm some kind of native speaker/listener of the German language? Ha! Why would you post a hyperlink like that on this English-speaking forum? Did you do that merely for the purpose of citing the source of your information about Trump shady finances? If so, then alright, good on you.

You also mentioned something about the supposedly-classified (or supposedly-illegally-declassified) documents found at Mar-a-Lago and how it was illegal for this to have happened. The situation has always struck me baffling, but apparently some things are only illegal in the United States if they are prosecutable, and yet no known indictment has been made alleging a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 793 (section DCCXCIII of title XVIII of the United States Code), which codifies criminal behaviors of espionage against the federal agencies of certain types, or alleging a violation of anything found in the eighteenth title of the Code. I do wonder if the matter of proving intent beyond a reasonable doubt may be the "obstacle" in this. Some folks have argued that the president of the United States has the power to declassify anything and everything under the purview of the executive branch, even without filling out the proper paperwork, but I don't see how even that would excuse the deprivation of United States government physical property from its rightful owner, whereby transferal of such property can only be commenced in a manner according to law.

You wrote, "I guess I know why he is so scared about going to jail. There are so many black people he ranted on. I guess he would face a big party." While you may be joking here, you're also exhibiting an extreme lack of understanding of United States federal jail, the rights of the accused, Trump and Americans of Black descent. Surely you understand that the actual worst part of being in jail is not being able to leave such a housing on a whim to participate in business, charity or recreation, right? The place itself may or may not be worse than one's own home. In the case of anybody over a certain (very low) amount of wealth, jail is most certainly worse than home. For those small amount of others, it constitutes housing free of charge. You do also understand that jail isn't the same as the penitentiary or a penal colony, right? Some aspects of jail are worse than actual prison, whereas some aspects are much better, like the nice folks (rightly or wrongly accused of criminal behaviors) being able to detained away from inmates who've been proved to be dangerously violent. By the way, although not a majority, a lot of Black people adore Trump and have his back. Anyway, let's delve in to the ways of penitentiaries in the United States. Surely you've heard that inmates are organized into racially-chauvinistic gangs, rights? When a Caucasian man is shipped off to the penitentiary, he will be goaded or coerced into joining one of the infamous White supremacist groups, unless he is so badass (dangerous) that most inmates are unsafe around him, or his presence is so taboo that he has to be kept in protective custody. When a Black man is shipped off to the penitentiary, he will be goaded or coerced into joining one of the Black urban-style crime syndicates, a Black Islamic organization or some prison-specific Black people protection racket, unless he is too dangerous or recognizably too targeted. It's the same story with every other racial/ethnic group, and I'm not even sure how former high-level state actors (like presidents of the United States) are handled, because they're going to be knowledgeable of things that the government doesn't want ordinary inmates to ever know. People like Clinton and Trump, if ever convicted would almost assuredly have be to imprisoned either in their own respective homes or in isolation at an above-supermax facility, maybe the United States naval base at Guantanamo Bay, where it would be nearly impossible for their fans to break them out and elevate them to the status of warlord.

Back to the subject of investigative reporting, I should bring up BlazeTV's insight into Hunter Biden's overseas financial connections:

This ol' thing that streamed live back in late 2019 couldn't have aged better.

jeorj, I only named that documentary to show up how the businessman Trump works and how he nearly crashed the Deutsche Bank credit institute. It was the wealthiest credit institute in the world at that time stamp. It's a pitty you can't understand the German language, but maybe there is a subtitle version somewhere. I didn't expect you to be a German, because of Euler. There are other countries' residents, that use similar sounding vocabulary or names. Often they are emigrants, but not necessarily.

For the jail or prison thing: Yes, I'm not an expert in American prisoning or jailing, but I even saw some (I guess it was) BBC documentations about different groups in prisons like the Ayrian Brotherhood and guys like that. That wouldn't make Trump better. For me as an European I better like Biden as a president than Trump, after Trump clearly stated that he will leave from helping Europe in future conflicts. And Trump was or at least seemed to be a good friend of Putin.

I don't see America as perfect. No country is, Germany surely also not. But we have to stick together for coping with the situation. I think Europe can be glad for having Biden as the American president. That's my personal view as a single German.

And sorry, but Trump was not showing a real leader's face in the Corona-crisis by telling people injecting desinfection fluid could be a good idea and things like that, while the dead people stacked in New York, being killed by Corona. They even forgot a cooling truck with corpses until it stank too much.

I still know that Trump was a daily subject over a long time-span in my neighborhood in a not positive way. And that was not because some comedians joked about him, but because of what he said was so obviously wrong. Just look at Queen Elisabeth II, which was a very conservative monarch. Trump snubbed the Queen by disregarding the protocoll in a rough way, while the Obamas gained the heart of Queen Elisabeth II.

Trump said: "I have German in my blood." for generating sympathy in Germans, while Merkel was just baffled and amused about that silly comment. Trump didn't get how he was perceived as a silly man. German comedians made jokes about it on several shows. It's not that he created such a historic time-stamp-event like Kennedy, when he said: "Ich bin ein Berliner."

Never forget! ♥

Again marked as "private".  So only right wing people got "censored"? I welcome routines that sort out critical comments for checking if there is dangerous content. It's better to check a comment and make it public later, than let someone light a fire you can't extinguish later.

Looks like the spam filter did somebody dirty again. I see in my notifications a post reading, "I only named that documentary to show up how the businessman Trump works and how he nearly crashed the Deutsche Bank credit institute. It was the wealthiest credit institute in the world at..."

@jeorj_euler​ 

I'm better dirty than dangerous. ;)

I was able recover the full contents of the your missing post from an e-mail notification, Breumaster, and it has left me curious to know how you feel about the recent high-profile prisoner swap between the United States and the Russian Federation. I'd imagine that a lot of people are baffled by it, seeing as how the Trump administration seemed uninterested in negotiating the release of Paul Whelan for the release of Viktor Bout, yet the Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin were on seemingly friendlier terms than Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin. To be fair, the conjecture had been floating around for a long time that Trump has been somewhat incentivized to do at least some of Putin's bidding, on account of the Moscow Project. The Western media outlets have all kinds of accusations against Viktor Bout, that he sold weapons of mass destruction to terrorists (or Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi want-to-be) who want to torture Americans, and yet Joe Biden was ever eager to release this man from United States federal custody in the hopes of recovering both Paul Whelan and Brittney Griner, ultimately settling for a one-for-one that would see Griner freed. The whole thing is suspicious on the part of all governments involved. I mean, perhaps it is utter bullshit. How can all these crimes of which Viktor Bout was accused, tried and convicted be true if the United States government is willing to release him in order to have a star athlete released? As to be expected, the only folks who question the conviction are "Putin bots" like Richard Medhurst and others affiliated with the state-sponsored media outlet Russia Today. I get the general gist that both sides are lying and have been for a very long time, which is only exacerbated by war, of which truth is always the first casualty. Well, either the Bout's trial and declined appeal were biased in favor of the prosecution, or Joe Biden is the kind of guy who follows a policy of appeasing the regime that has invaded and tormented the western Ukraine (sans Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk), appeasing in the name of trying to politically pander to fans of athletes who feel the need to protest perceived civic institutional injustices right during the interstate solidarity moment of sporting events.

I'd agree that Donald Trump, as president of the United States, didn't show the ideal spokesmanship in regards to the pandemic and therefore not ideal leadership. Yes, back before a vaccine had been developed in the United States, he did ignorantly (and against the guidance of medical experts) suggest that "maybe" or "perhaps" a "disinfectant" could be "injected", not something best sloppily paraphrased as "telling people to drink disinfection fluid could a good idea". Anybody who hasn't been trapped for a long in the echo chamber of the climate alarmist, critical theorist, social "justice" media establishment could tell that he was using the word "disinfectant" in a most unusual way, hence not referring to tabletop disinfectants or anything like that. If we really think about it, then we can see how word "disinfectant" could be construed to mean something that serves to remove an infection and only an infection (like an antibiotic) rather than damaging, decomposing or destroying organic material indiscriminately, i.e. the infectious agent and the living material that comprises the host included. Certainly still a poor choice of wording, because by long-standing common parlance, all materials (even potable 150-proof liquors) known as "disinfectants" have been substances that injure/poison not only bacteria and fungi but plants and animals (people) too, in ways more irreparable than actual medicines, hence "for external use only" as far as topical ointments go. I know that the following is a stretch, but I'm thinking it wouldn't necessarily be out of character for some of the "advisers" working for Donald Trump at that time to have gaslit him into publicly using such dangerous ignorant wording.

You seems slightly concerned with Donald Trump disregarding the protocols of surrounding the monarch of the United Kingdom and the commonwealth realms. So? (What does it matter that the office was occupied by somebody fairly "conservative"?) The man has a gigantic ego (just like Barack Obama) and he likely truly believes that the United States and the citizens thereof are the greatest nation in the world (unlike Barack Obama), thus he might with all fairness not care much for the endless nuances of the protocols surrounding the Crown, from which the United States (thirteen of them initially) were necessarily divorced. Was his interaction or lack thereof really any worse than how matters went down with Meghan Markle? (Mind you, she is also somebody far from humble and far from grace.)

Just examples. 

@Breumaster​ 

P.S.:

I don't see any need in continuing an conversation where half of my texts are banned for public. So I stop here. On the other hand I slightly remember that this is no political discussion forum and we shouldn't discuss politics. If there wasn't the start with Jalapenoman's posting, I wouldn't have had.

Right! I don't see any point either. An interesting thing here is the fact that TheOldJalapenoman has done this twice (e.g. Sprinklr comment 63992dd26bc4c47d61d96777) in just the span of a couple of days, prompted me to have a look at his posting history, and I'm left with the impression that this sort of thing is out of character for him, granted however he did (some weeks ago) inform that he had suffered (some months ago) two strokes, not to mention that perhaps desperate times call for desperate actions, or something like that. I sense that everybody has been a little on edge ever since global outbreak. I get that the election, inauguration and four-year-long reign of Donald Trump upset the world order slightly, but folks all over really started showing their true colors during the pandemic and quarantine measures, and so many rough events occurred in the year 2020. In the United States, that was both a presidential election year and a census collection year, the results of which were not to be felt until 2021. To top it off, the world has felt further disruptions due to the mass-casualty "special military operation" in Donbas commenced by the Russian federal government, and the Western institutions' wild pack mentality reactions to the matter. Now, we're left wondering how much worse things will be in 2023 will be compared to those of 2022.

I won't spill my tea over Jalapenoman. A stroke is hard to take and can even change personality. And no matter how hard we discuss ... we are approaching the mark of 8 Billion people in world population. We are tiny according to that. There is one sentence that any leader should internalize deeply: "With great power comes great responsibility!"

@Breumaster​ I note that my sharing political opinions apparently is unwanted and opened a can of worms.

Yes, it is because of the strokes.

I have found that I seem unable to control my mouth and sharing my opinion at times.  I go off on rants and tangents seemingly without reason.  Yesterday, I was going off on a friend about why Billy the Kid was a loathsome criminal and should not be heroized and worshiped as a mythical western figure.

I apologize for this.  My brain is sometimes in a different place.

@TheOldJalapenoman​ 

You're welcome.

On that side note, I agree about Billy the Kid being loathsome and unworthy of being worshiped as a hero, and I can understand being frustrated by how large numbers of people don't seem to understand certain things. When harboring a lot of nagging thoughts secretly, at some point, a person may be unable to resist letting it all out. I've been monitoring these discussion boards, for a long time, and I've observed other people sometimes go bonkers, so to speak, and rant about something (usually in cinema or television but often beyond) that has come to irritate them in some way. What is interesting is that this may occasionally happen to multiple participants of the forum with the same span of hours.

@jeorj_euler​ I am not trying to get on a soap box here, but relating a Billy the Kid story.  My family and I moved to Ruidoso, New Mexico several years ago.  I was a single father raising my kids by myself.  If you have seen Young Guns or Chisum, you have seen the story about The Lincoln County War.  This is the area where Billy the Kid was from and where he did the majority of his killing.

The town symbol for a lot of stuff was a picture of BtK (Billy the Kid).  It was even the logo for the youth sports league and was on all of the uniforms.  I thought it was ridiculous to have a criminal and murderer on children's uniforms, though I could kind of understand the town wanting to cash in on the fame of a famous former citizen in their marketing.  I politely requested of the city that they remove the image from the children's uniforms.  I was ignored.

Ruidoso is about halfway between Albuquerque, New Mexico and El Paso, Texas.  Both of those cities have over a million people in their metropolitan areas.  I contacted the newspapers in each of these towns and my fight was featured in news stories in each of these major papers.  Guess which image was removed from the uniforms for the next sports seasons?

I am an old man and have recognized that my body and my mind are both failing me.  I have had multiple strokes and am mostly bedridden and I am dying.  Please understand that sometimes I go off on rants and sometimes I cannot fully control what I am doing.    That said... you darn kids get the hell off my lawn!!!!

@TheOldJalapenoman​ 

No problem for me. My mother in law was a caregiver at an old people's home. She told some stories, sometimes. In an anonymized form, of course. The weirdest story was about an old judge in his 90th who went to the forum to jerk off frequently. An old man who formerly may have convicted other guys for exact that. The management of these old people's homes even put fake bus stops in front of old people's homes to easier collect them after running away. I saw such a bus stop where no bus did ever stop. So you are even lucky to have not turned like that. That's not meant in a bad way. Hope you can still enjoy your winter, somehow. Best would be, if they invented a cure for that illness.

For more suggestions, you can also check out this webpage: https://bookriot.com/17-movies-starring-books/

@timothy_gray_el34lojg1aih1​ 

Thank you, Timothy gray. That's a lot of stuff to consider. I'll do it only the next days, but think that some of them do fit very good for the list.

@timothy_gray_el34lojg1aih1​ 

Got it earlier. Just didn't take the book in the intro of Shreck, because the book was only narrating, but wasn't a part of the story itself. Same for all the narrating Disney movie books.

@Breumaster​ Thanks. If I may, I have some minor corrections to suggest.

- It seems you have mistakenly added the video game version of Ratatouille instead of the feature film.

- For Young Frankenstein, it might help add context to include the words "by Victor Frankenstein" after the book's title.

- For The Book of Eli, the book Denzel's character carries throughout the movie is not revealed to be a bible until the ending, so you might want to put a spoiler tag on it. I realize the movie is twelve years old at this point, and I surely wouldn't put it down as one of my Top 10 twist endings of all time (it was kind of dumb, in my opinion), but it is supposed to be a surprise.

I didn't read your criteria closely enough the first time I posted. I agree that the book in Shrek is not integral to the story.

@timothy_gray_el34lojg1aih1​ 

I did the edits and think they are very good. Thank you. :D

I should point out that when I first read the post containing a hyperlink to Book Riot, an obscure website, it crossed my mind that it resembled spam, but I knew that it was unlikely to be spam because of Timothy's medium-size post count.

@timothy_gray_el34lojg1aih1​ 

Thank you. Corrected.

@Pencho15​ 

Added all. Thank you, Pencho. Great picks within, I love them.

@Jessica​ 

Thank you, Jessica. Corrected.

@dan_dassow​ 

Thank you, Dan. Thank you Buddies. :D

I suppose this to be my last poll coming online, because I'm not available anymore for suggesting polls. And won't do corrections. Thank you for the time I had, love you. Especially you, Dan, Jessica, Pencho and Peter. Also urbanemovies, leavey-2, mariojacobs, Paok-Kilkis, whos polls are great. Love it. Love to brijesh, BonaFideBOSS, ElMo, cinephile, and anyone I forgot. My time has become small. There are many things I got to do and I don't want to neglect real life. Also need some rest, because of exhausting circumstances in my job. Need more sleep, perhaps. Sorry, but got no time. Maybe later again in a few years.

@Breumaster​ ,

Thank you for letting us know that your real-life time commitments prevent you in creating and posting poll suggestions, and other poll related activities. I appreciate your contributions and your presence, and will miss your presences.

Please return occasionally when time permits.

@dan_dassow​ 

Dan, you can always contact me per mail, if you want. If there is something special, I'm there for you. At least I'll read it and do my thoughts about, even though I got no time. When the new Oscars in 2023 happened, I'll update the poll row you all allowed me to do with the new best picture winner. I'll take that time for the re-push. I wish you all a good time. Btw.: Forgot TsarStepan and I guess some more. Don't anger about. Greetings.

@Breumaster​ 

I'm sorry to hear that, but it's completely understandable to need a break. Though, I truly hope this has nothing to do with the argument you had with jeorj_euler.

Breumaster, sincerely I'm unhappy to see you go, and I also hope that the most recent argument between you and me (involving two others too) has nothing to do with your departure. I didn't realize how much of your time that my inquiries and other sentiments were eating away. My schedule is disturbingly flexible, so nothing that really goes down on the forum (apart from people deciding to leave) actually stirs a lot of emotion in me. I hope you come back when you have a lot more recreational time on your hands.

For anybody who is interested enough, I would open to discussing my personality. I was recently thinking about all those probing survey thread that GabrielFox was creating, and it struck me odd that he didn't inquire about something as delicate (and incomplete) yet so fun as the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) model of personality, which a lot often (and for good reason) disregarded  as junk science and the geek analogue to astrology.

As some you may know, I've only really ever clashed with the IMDb site authorities, "EJ-49" and occasionally slightly with Peter and Marco, as far as this forum (Sprinklr and previously Get Satisfaction) goes, (The ol' site-native boards of IMDb, in which flame wars erupted regularly on certain boards [except for maybe the poll board], was a whole other story.) I'd never really thought of any instance in which Breu and I openly did not quite see eye to eye as being a clash of personality, though. Who knows? Just a thought. Without a doubt, all but one of the disagreements pertained to civil/social issues in some way, and almost never were the discussion strictly between only the two of us. Think of ElMaruecan82 and TheOldJalapenoman. We've seen how they can be at times. (I ought probably give a brief glace at NYVKE too.) The one exchange of words that didn't pertain to civil/social issues was in regards to how well of a fit or not the "robotic" giant statue creature from the 1927 film Metropolis would be on the IMDb poll for "meanest artificial intelligence". I wasn't the one to suggest for inclusion the giant personage, but I seemingly obfuscated the matter by bringing all sorts of technical concepts and historical information into the discussion, while Breu was arguing with the person who suggested the giant personage for inclusion, arguing about how the giant personage wasn't intelligent. Naturally that kind of is time consuming, and thus frustrating. Breu's solution was to simply include the adjective "digital" in front of the noun "artificial intelligence", which probably wasn't necessary.

@Jessica​ 

No. I don't really care about Waldorf and Statler. ;D

I've got other points which cause me to take a break from Sprinklr. One the one hand, the day would need to last for 28 hours to cope with the stress. Our company goes through a change since the Russian war overshadows the Ukraine and Europe. We are living in times, which aren't funny. I guess it will take at least 2 years before things get better. Another point is that the polls get more and more unattractive in third row. Since some month IMDb has a new design on the German page, which simply is awkward. Naming credits "Gutschriften" is wrong as can be. A "Gutschrift" is what you would call sales slip or voucher. But the time is really the most urgent point. Sure that I don't need overhanging discussions about nothing, when I already have literally no time.

@Breumaster​ 

I see. Your decision just felt a bit sudden, hence my concern. But I hope this break is good for you and that you will return someday.

Take care, Breu.

@Breumaster​ I will miss you Breu, and I hope to see you back someday. My best wishes for all the things you're facing at work, I hope they can be solved soon.

Plot twist: Statler and Waldorf don't even like each other. (Same ex-wife or something like that.)

:P

@jeorj_euler​ 

Just came because I got a mail that my name was mentioned.

@Breumaster 

I'm sorry you're no longer enjoying your poll making experience. Be well

Incidentally jeorj I think the MBTI is quite fascinating and no model of personality can hold up to the rigors of hard sciences.

One  shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water.

(INTP here btw.)

Oh, Breu, I'm so sorry to hear that. I've missed not being around and missed you. I won't be able to be around as much as I used to but if you ever come back around, I really hope that I'm on when you are. 

Be well. 

@rubyfruit76​ 

Hi Ruby. It's long ago we wrote. I wondered why you were absent so long. Hope you are well. As I wrote, next time I'll minimize my time with IMDb, more for daily voting and things like that.

About MBTI:

I don't believe in MBTI. Categorizing people is the death of intelligence. And it's fascistic somehow. Do you remember when the Germans categorized people? Long nose and the wrong skull-form=jew. It was a lot morre primitive times ago, but it'SS the same all in all.

The world is fascistic! Wow! Who would've thought?