Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:
Please stop with the aggressive and frankly insulting posts, gunnar. I tried to offer you some assistance and advice and I get Bull in return, perfectly normal. I agree that the Rules should do this or that, but the fact is no Rule will ever be that clear to everyone and if you can't accept some input from someone who was intimately then please do me the favor of taking a long walk of a very short pier.

I am sorry, but GSyren is correct.  Rather than debate what the rule actually says, you want to discuss your intent.  I am sorry, but I won't play that game.  All I am willing to do is discuss the rules as they are written.  If you can't, or won't, do that, then there is no point in further discussion.

Why exactly was Skip chosen to write the rules? And is it really even true that he wrote them?

Quoting Grendell:

Quote:
Why exactly was Skip chosen to write the rules? And is it really even true that he wrote them?

Actually Grendell that is not really any of business and where was it said that Skip was chosen. Who chose you to be a PITA? I suspect no one, you just are. I grabbed the bull horns when i saw a problem and worked to correct the problem. In conjunction with another user and ken's input we developed the foundational structure that the Rules would be based upoon, simple concepts like type it as you see it, not as you think you see it or as you believe it should be and so forth. There were a few Rules that were written by my colleague and a couple which were penned specifically by myself, but generally the rules were written by a team of international users, not who agreed with me necessarily, but because i had respect for what they had to say, one never knows someone might come up with a point that hadn't been considered. It was a team of approximately 20 users that worked very hard to get an operational and it was done in 89 days, I have said it before and i will say it again kudos to the members of that team and I am very proud of their assistance in developing what I believe to be single largest positive improvement in the Program up to 2005, when the first draft was turned over to Ken for publication.

And when i say I saw a problem and grabbed the bull by the horns, that is precisely what i did. I didn't whine and complain about it in the forums. I saw a problem and started devising ways to correct it, I then contacted my colleague and we started brainstorming the foundational concept, at this stage I contacted for his approval and any additional thoughts which were numerous and were incorporated into the foundation. Then it was time to get down to the serious business of writing them based on the Foundation, and it didn't take very long to realize that a team would be the best answer. A team was assembled and the writing began. The writing took 90 days but from beginning to end the Rules took 2 years to develop the foundation.

You're next question might be why weren't you asked for example. There are two reasons for this Grendell, one of which that you were either not a member at that time or not a widely known one. rthe other reason is to simply look at your posting history and snide and snipish it consistently is, do you think that I could respect your opinions and comments, sorry, that answer is No. You are not alone ion that circle either, but i shan't go into any details, not necessary, but you asked so I am trying to give an honest reply even though I feel that your comment as are most of your comments is based in an attacking, negative and belittling form.

Quoting Ken Cole:

Quote:
Edition helps distinguish between different releases, but it does not bear the full responsibility of that differentiation.  Per the rule, use the built-in editions when applicable, but tread lightly when stepping out of those choices.  When considering non-standard edition text, make sure it both:

- Help to differentiate versions - AND-
- Is prominently displayed on the front cover.

Any other interpretation of this rule starts us down the path to things like "Avatar: The Slightly Taller Version with the Blue Sticker"

Any chance we could get that clarification into the rule because, as written, it won't be interpreted that way. 

Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
Thanks for the Clarification Ken! But I don't think we want the FRONT cover only... I have a small handful of titles where Special Edition or what have you is prominently displayed on the BACK Cover or Spine only.

As do I, which is why I liked the rule as it was written, but can live with it either way.  The only downside is the extra work to remove the, now, invalid editions.

Sorry Hal... I just don't agree. I have a few that are obviously Special Edition. Shown Prominently even in banners and such... but is no where on the front. It is on a banner on the top of the back cover. Such a thing should still be allowed to be marked as a Special Edition... Especially if there is also a bare bones/regular edition out there as well.

Quoting Ken Cole:

Quote:
I could be flexible on the "front" portion.  Thoughts?

I definitely believe we need to be able to use the entire box. As I said. I have seen this on the Back cover as well... even the spine.

Wouldn't just saying that it has to be prominently displayed on the box enough so you can use the small text and such... just the info we are looking for.  After all Prominently means "standing out so as to be seen easily". The small text on the case wouldn't work with that wording.