 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1... 8 9 10 11 12 13  Previous Next
|
|
Unrated, part 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: January 11, 2008 |  Posts: 168 |
| | Posted: | | | | Thanks Martian
Kind of my point, how could anyone have thought of NR as the highest, as NR has been in the profiler for longer than Unrated DVDs have been on the market.
As I posted before in this topic, I have never seen a DVD with an Unrated title with less than PG-13 content. But have lots of NR DVDs that have G to PG content. |
| | Registered: December 10, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 3,004 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TheMadMartian: Quote:
Quoting Romzarah:
Quote:
Ya have them all at the highest rating.... At least from what I see that you want in your posts... NR has been around for quite some time now, Can anyone find out when the 1st Unrated DVDs came out?
The oldest unrated release in my collection is Leathal Weapon: Director's Cut, released in 1999. It did not, however, use the term 'Unrated'. It just didn't have a rating on the case.
The oldest release, in my collection, that did use the Unrated rating, is Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle: Unrated Special Edition, released in 2003. Barb Wire was the first unrated release, I believe. It came out in January 1999. IIRC, Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle was the first PG-13 to release an unrated edition. |
| | Registered: January 11, 2008 | | Posts: 168 |
| | Posted: | | | | Yes and Barb Wire in the Unrated is at least R content... Point being that anything I have seen as Unrated has content not good for kids, and NR has for as long as it has been in the DVDP, used for films and TV stuff with much softer content. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Romzarah: Quote:
Thanks Martian
Kind of my point, how could anyone have thought of NR as the highest, as NR has been in the profiler for longer than Unrated DVDs have been on the market.
As I posted before in this topic, I have never seen a DVD with an Unrated title with less than PG-13 content. But have lots of NR DVDs that have G to PG content. Completely irrelevant smoke screen. See any of mm prior explanations on this issue. AND further see any of my several suggestions as to how to handle bot Unrated and Not rated as being the highest ratings. You came late to this party Rom, there have been at least THREE separate threads on the topic the last several days, go read ALL of them FIRST. There are answers already provided, I am in no mood to repeat myself endlessly. | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: January 11, 2008 | | Posts: 168 |
| | Posted: | | | | Wake up, I have posted in at least 2 of the 3 threads if not all 3. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 13,201 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Prof. Kingsfield: Quote:
Completely irrelevant smoke screen. See any of mm prior explanations on this issue. AND further see any of my several suggestions as to how to handle bot Unrated and Not rated as being the highest ratings. You came late to this party Rom, there have been at least THREE separate threads on the topic the last several days, go read ALL of them FIRST. There are answers already provided, I am in no mood to repeat myself endlessly. Unfortunately, your answer is contrary to what Ken has stated. Unless I misunderstood, NR will not be changed and will remain the lowest Profiler rating. It is the new 'Unrated' rating that will be the higher than 'R' rating. | | | 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: January 11, 2008 | | Posts: 168 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TheMadMartian: Quote:
Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:
Quote:
Completely irrelevant smoke screen. See any of mm prior explanations on this issue. AND further see any of my several suggestions as to how to handle bot Unrated and Not rated as being the highest ratings. You came late to this party Rom, there have been at least THREE separate threads on the topic the last several days, go read ALL of them FIRST. There are answers already provided, I am in no mood to repeat myself endlessly.
Unfortunately, your answer is contrary to what Ken has stated. Unless I misunderstood, NR will not be changed and will remain the lowest Profiler rating. It is the new 'Unrated' rating that will be the higher than 'R' rating. Now that is what I thought Ken was saying. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TheMadMartian: Quote:
Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:
Quote:
Completely irrelevant smoke screen. See any of mm prior explanations on this issue. AND further see any of my several suggestions as to how to handle bot Unrated and Not rated as being the highest ratings. You came late to this party Rom, there have been at least THREE separate threads on the topic the last several days, go read ALL of them FIRST. There are answers already provided, I am in no mood to repeat myself endlessly.
Unfortunately, your answer is contrary to what Ken has stated. Unless I misunderstood, NR will not be changed and will remain the lowest Profiler rating. It is the new 'Unrated' rating that will be the higher than 'R' rating. And this is a decision that Ken has come to in the last few days, based on a problem which he claims yet no one has ever seen come through the Forums at all, EVER. I have NEVER seen it personally, so I legitimately ask, wherein the hell did ity come from a small handful of support tickets or something. Making Not Rated the lowest setting because of Rom's theory about old movies and TV is crazy as i have detailed, like wise making a high rated Not rated film Unrated is funadmentally wrong, if the data says Not rated, then it is Not Rated, not Unrated. Do I want to see an answer to this supposed issue now that it has been brought up. Yes, absolutely, but the way we are going is flat-out WRONG. | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,480 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Prof. Kingsfield: Quote:
Making Not Rated the lowest setting because of Rom's theory about old movies and TV is crazy as i have detailed, like wise making a high rated Not rated film Unrated is funadmentally wrong, if the data says Not rated, then it is Not Rated, not Unrated. There's no "making Not Rated the lowest setting". It's always been the lowest rating. The discussion was never whether to make NR the lowest (which it already is) or the highest. The discussion has always been about how best to separate the 2 kinds of content (general and mature) that are either NR or unrated so that this content can be sorted easily. | | | ...James
"People fake a lot of human interactions, but I feel like I fake them all, and I fake them very well. That’s my burden, I guess." ~ Dexter Morgan |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | James:
Your claim is not in the Rules and until last week Ken never mentioned it before. NOT EVER. Great maybe for you it was understood to be lowest,base upon what I don't know, a vivid imagination maybe. But to others of us it did not mean that at all and never has, and I would argue that the old Rule certainly came closer to implying that it was a higher rating than it would be the lowest, because as I have explained, through examples, it is simply not rational to make it the lowest. | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: January 11, 2008 | | Posts: 168 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting m.cellophane: Quote:
Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:
Quote:
Making Not Rated the lowest setting because of Rom's theory about old movies and TV is crazy as i have detailed, like wise making a high rated Not rated film Unrated is funadmentally wrong, if the data says Not rated, then it is Not Rated, not Unrated.
There's no "making Not Rated the lowest setting". It's always been the lowest rating.
The discussion was never whether to make NR the lowest (which it already is) or the highest.
The discussion has always been about how best to separate the 2 kinds of content (general and mature) that are either NR or unrated so that this content can be sorted easily.  |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | ROFLMAO, | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Prof. Kingsfield: Quote:
James:
Your claim is not in the Rules and until last week Ken never mentioned it before. NOT EVER. Great maybe for you it was understood to be lowest,base upon what I don't know, a vivid imagination maybe. But to others of us it did not mean that at all and never has, and I would argue that the old Rule certainly came closer to implying that it was a higher rating than it would be the lowest, because as I have explained, through examples, it is simply not rational to make it the lowest. I have to admit... I always knew that NR was the lowest rating. I new this for no other reason but because that is where the program has always placed it every time I sorted by rating. It wasn't up high past the R Rated stuff... it was always below the G rated stuff. So I always knew that it was looked at as the lowest rating. | | | | Pete |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,480 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Prof. Kingsfield: Quote:
James:
Your claim is not in the Rules and until last week Ken never mentioned it before. NOT EVER. Great maybe for you it was understood to be lowest,base upon what I don't know, a vivid imagination maybe. But to others of us it did not mean that at all and never has, and I would argue that the old Rule certainly came closer to implying that it was a higher rating than it would be the lowest, because as I have explained, through examples, it is simply not rational to make it the lowest. It's based on how the program filters, not on my imagination.  | | | ...James
"People fake a lot of human interactions, but I feel like I fake them all, and I fake them very well. That’s my burden, I guess." ~ Dexter Morgan |
| | Registered: January 11, 2008 | | Posts: 168 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Prof. Kingsfield: Quote:
James:
Your claim is not in the Rules and until last week Ken never mentioned it before. NOT EVER. Great maybe for you it was understood to be lowest,base upon what I don't know, a vivid imagination maybe. But to others of us it did not mean that at all and never has, and I would argue that the old Rule certainly came closer to implying that it was a higher rating than it would be the lowest, because as I have explained, through examples, it is simply not rational to make it the lowest. For someone that has been with DVDP as long as you have, I have a hard time thinking that you would not have known this yourself. Is it that maybe you just like to argue everything? |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Where was this stated, James, in the Rules, in the forums, I never saw it before, not EVER. If one doesn't filter that way then how is one to KNOW that, james. You're the hot dog around explain that Loooocy. You know Ace, mentioned movie pick, it is well known that a lot of us don't use Movie Pick. | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1... 8 9 10 11 12 13 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |