| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 13,199 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Prof. Kingsfield: Quote:
Quoting lyonsden5:
Quote:
Ken, you can't honestly expect us to believe there is life in DVDP land outside of these forums! 
 Rick is saying, in a round about way, that Ken gathers his information from sources other than the forums. Just because it wasn't an issue here, doesn't mean it wasn't an issue. I knew, based on contributions, votes cast and PMs, that there was some confusion here. I am quite sure that Ken had, at the very least, those same sources. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | The problem remains that we now have a problem where there was not the appearance of a serious issue before, amigo.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,199 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Prof. Kingsfield: Quote:
The problem remains that we now have a problem where there was not the appearance of a serious issue before, amigo. Appearances can be deceiving. As I said, I knew it was an issue, so I trust Ken when he says it was significant enough to make a change...he just went the wrong way with that change. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar | | | | Last edited: by TheMadMartian |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Agreed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: July 22, 2007 | | Posts: 332 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Ken Cole: Quote:
Newly clarified. Here's the latest:
Use the Rating shown on the DVD cover. When there is no rating indicated or no rated version of the film on the disc, use the NR rating.
So:
Case says Rated R but disc has both a rated and unrated version = R
Case says "Unrated Extended Super Gross-out Version Too Extreme For Theaters", disc has both rated and unrated version = Unrated. Your "So" part contradicts the rule. The rule says that if there is a no-rated version of the film then the NR rating is used. It OVERRIDES the use the rating listed on the case. The "or" is what is tripping you up. In order for the rating on the cover to be used, the "when" portion needs to use "and" instead of the "or". IMHO, like a few others, the new rule sucks. The main purpose of a release with a non-rated version IS the non-rated version. So what if there is an R rated version in the package as well. It seems that these releases need to be profiled like TV shows with multiple discs. I know, sometimes it is a dual sided disc, but so are some TV shows. | | | Mr Video Productions
If it isn't Unix, it isn't an OS :-) |
|
| Registered: December 10, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 3,004 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TheMadMartian: Quote:
While I won't say it doesn't happen, I don't think I have ever seen an "also includes unrated version" release. Most, if not all, of the ones I have seen are some kind of edition (unrated, special, director's, etc.) that also include the theatrical version. I will have to peruse my collection to make sure. I Am Legend is like this. | | | | Last edited: by Ace_of_Sevens |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Posts: 366 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting MrVideo: Quote:
Your "So" part contradicts the rule. The rule says that if there is a no-rated version of the film then the NR rating is used. It OVERRIDES the use the rating listed on the case.
The "or" is what is tripping you up. In order for the rating on the cover to be used, the "when" portion needs to use "and" instead of the "or".
IMHO, like a few others, the new rule sucks. The main purpose of a release with a non-rated version IS the non-rated version. So what if there is an R rated version in the package as well.
It seems that these releases need to be profiled like TV shows with multiple discs. I know, sometimes it is a dual sided disc, but so are some TV shows. I can see the confusion. It depends on how you parse it. "When there is no rating indicated or no rated version of the film on the disc, use the NR rating." It could be parsed two ways depending on how one reads it.... and they are in conflict In context, does "no rated" mean absence of a rated version or does it mean presence of an unrated version? "When there is no rating indicated or there is an unrated version of the film on the disc, use the NR rating." "When there is no rating indicated or does not include a rated version of the film on the disc, use the NR rating." |
|
| Registered: July 22, 2007 | | Posts: 332 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting nolesrule: Quote:
I can see the confusion. It depends on how you parse it. It is very badly worded, period. The English language can easily result in more than one interpretation. The use of "or" in the rule just out-and-out screws up the rule. The pole thread currently is 75% for using the NR for dual packaged releases. That said, as I've mentioned in responses, the better fix is to parent/child these releases, one profile for the rated and one profile for the unrated. Fixes issues with report generation as well. | | | Mr Video Productions
If it isn't Unix, it isn't an OS :-) |
|
| Registered: July 22, 2007 | | Posts: 332 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting nolesrule: Quote:
I can see the confusion. It depends on how you parse it. Here is another way of putting the rule, in terms of a Unix shell script: if [ "no rating listed on DVD cover" = true -or "release contains a no rated version" = true ]; then RATING=NR else RATING=rating shown on DVD cover fi The above is NOT what Ken clarified it to be. | | | Mr Video Productions
If it isn't Unix, it isn't an OS :-) |
|
| Registered: March 10, 2007 | | Posts: 4,282 |
| | Posted: | | | | As nolesrule indicated, I believe you are misreading: "or no rated version of the film on the disc" as "or a NR version of the film is on the disc".
The wording matches the example I gave. The rule says:
If there is no version of the film on the disc that has a rating
It does not say:
If there is a non-rated version of the film on the disc.
The discussion at hand is whether to change the ruling, and I am giving consideration to exactly that. | | | | Invelos Software, Inc. Representative | | | | Last edited: by Ken Cole |
|
| Registered: July 22, 2007 | | Posts: 332 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Ken Cole: Quote:
As nolesrule indicated, I believe you are misreading: "or no rated version of the film on the disc" as "or a NR version of the film is on the disc".
The wording matches the example I gave. The rule says:
If there is no version of the film on the disc that has a rating
It does not say:
If there is a non-rated version of the film on the disc.
The discussion at hand is whether to change the ruling, and I am giving consideration to exactly that. You wrote in an above posting: "Use the Rating shown on the DVD cover. When there is no rating indicated or no rated version of the film on the disc, use the NR rating." I stand by what I wrote, based upon what you posted. | | | Mr Video Productions
If it isn't Unix, it isn't an OS :-) |
|
| Registered: March 10, 2007 | | Posts: 4,282 |
| | Posted: | | | | Again, it's "no rated version on the disc" not "a non-rated version on the disc"
Consider a bucket of fruit with only oranges. Are there no apples in the bucket? There are no apples in the bucket. On the other hand: Are there non-apples in the bucket? Yes there are non-apples in the bucket.
Hope this helps. | | | | Invelos Software, Inc. Representative |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,372 |
| | Posted: | | | | ... not sure if it helps but it's making me hungry  |
|
| Registered: July 22, 2007 | | Posts: 332 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Ken Cole: Quote:
Again, it's "no rated version on the disc" not "a non-rated version on the disc"
Consider a bucket of fruit with only oranges. Are there no apples in the bucket? There are no apples in the bucket. On the other hand: Are there non-apples in the bucket? Yes there are non-apples in the bucket.
Hope this helps. Your analogy also fits my interpretation. A non-rated version is the SAME as a no rated version. A no-rated version is non-rated. It is also un-rated. There are several words to describe the same situation. The net result is the same. The choice of words needs to change. You are trying to make no-rating != non-rating. You can't, as they are ultimately the same. If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is a duck. We do not care why it has no rating, or why it is non-rated. The net result is that there isn't a MPAA rating. As I keep trying to put forth (seems to be ignored), make a rule to put these dual release packages in the database the same way the TV shows are handled. One disc has the profile for the rated version and the other disc has a separate profile for the no/non-rated disc, both reporting to the parent (just what SHOULD be happening with Blu-ray/DVD releases). Everyone seems to be ignoring the implications on report generation (or at least not speaking up about it). | | | Mr Video Productions
If it isn't Unix, it isn't an OS :-) |
|
| Registered: March 10, 2007 | | Posts: 4,282 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting MrVideo: Quote:
A non-rated version is the SAME as a no rated version. A no-rated version is non-rated. It is also un-rated. It's not indicating that a non-rated version exists, but that no rated version exists. Look again - the rule does not say "a no rated version" - it says "no rated version". | | | | Invelos Software, Inc. Representative |
|
| Registered: August 23, 2008 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,656 |
| | Posted: | | | | To be nerdy and nitpicky, "Not-rated" generally means it never saw a ratings board and "Unrated" means it has, but was not given a rating. (IIRC).  | | | Reviewer, HorrorTalk.com
"I also refuse to document CLT results and I pay my bills to avoid going to court." - Sam, keeping it real, yo. |
|