| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 4,526 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting the rules: Quote:
If the box set cover contains a listing of contents with brief descriptions of each, enter it directly into the Overview field. If there is no overview on the cover, an overview from an included booklet may be substituted. Otherwise, enter an itemized listing of the contents only, without descriptions. Does this mean that if there is an overview, but it does not list the contents, this overview should not be used, but instead just a listing of the contents without descriptions? | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
|
| Registered: May 26, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 2,877 |
| | Posted: | | | | I certainly wouldn't read it that way. Each sentence modifies the one before it. You enter what's from the cover, then if there isn't anything on the cover you enter from the booklet, and then if there isn't anything on the cover and there isn't a booklet, then you just enter a list of the contents.
You don't write your own overview, which is allowed for movies that have none. | | | If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world.
-- Thorin Oakenshield |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,526 |
| | Posted: | | | | Well, that is certainly what I would like the rule to say.
However, your interpretation makes the entire first sentence superfluous. By your reading of the rule, if there is an overview it should be entered as is, regardless of if it contains a listing of the contents or not.
I have a feeling that Ken may have meant it the way you read it, but he complicated it and made it ambiguous. | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
|
| Registered: March 18, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 1,601 |
| | Posted: | | | | Agree with Danae Cassandra on this. Don't read to much into it, GSyren. |
|
| Registered: September 6, 2008 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 120 |
| | Posted: | | | | Agree with Danae Cassandra on this. Don't read to much into it, GSyren. |
|
| Registered: May 26, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,877 |
| | Posted: | | | | Since each sentence modifies the previous one, you could also read it as if the overview didn't have individual descriptions on the cover but had something else instead, you'd just enter nothing at all.
And nobody wants that.
Since Ken will never be available to modify the rules again, we have to operate on what makes the most logical sense. | | | If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world.
-- Thorin Oakenshield |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,526 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Danae Cassandra: Quote:
Since Ken will never be available to modify the rules again, we have to operate on what makes the most logical sense. I totally agree. The reason for my question was that I was about to make a contribution where I replaced an incorrect overview with the overview from the back cover of the boxset (which did not include a list of the contents). Then I checked the rules and I became uncertain of how others interpreted the rule. So I thought I'd check here. Now it seems that my original interpretation is in fact what you all also think, so I can go ahead with my correction. Thanks! | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
|
| Registered: October 22, 2015 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 260 |
| | Posted: | | | | The box set overview rule is an addendum to the standard rule for overviews (re: "The following Clarifications to the standard Rules need to be used:"). The first sentence is not superfluous because the standard rule only covered a simple listing of the collection contents.
The correct process is use the overview from the cover (standard rule), followed by, if applicable, the box set rule.
The end result is what Danae Cassandra described. |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,526 |
| |
| Registered: March 18, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,601 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Danae Cassandra: Quote:
Since Ken will never be available to modify the rules again, we have to operate on what makes the most logical sense. Why would he never be able to modify the rules again? Not saying that he would, but why can't he? |
|
| Registered: April 6, 2007 | | Posts: 442 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting rdodolak: Quote:
Quoting Danae Cassandra:
Quote:
Since Ken will never be available to modify the rules again, we have to operate on what makes the most logical sense.
Why would he never be able to modify the rules again? Not saying that he would, but why can't he? I had the same thought? Not being around is not dead. |
|
| Registered: May 26, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,877 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Fingerlakes Dave: Quote:
Quoting rdodolak:
Quote:
Quoting Danae Cassandra:
Quote:
Since Ken will never be available to modify the rules again, we have to operate on what makes the most logical sense.
Why would he never be able to modify the rules again? Not saying that he would, but why can't he?
I had the same thought? Not being around is not dead. I'm believe Ken is now completely hands off. That he pays the bills and that's it. I worded it poorly, but never being around means he is never available. Sure, he could modify the rules, but that would require him to be here. Until anything points otherwise, I will operate under the hypothesis with the most evidence - Ken will never be available. It's the same thing I tell callers at my work who ask to speak to the owner. They will never speak to the owner. I've worked for the company for 20 years; I've never met him. He's completely hands off. Sure, he could get involved; he's not dead. But everything for 20 years of my job says he's not going to. | | | If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world.
-- Thorin Oakenshield | | | | Last edited: by Danae Cassandra |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,198 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting ObiKen: Quote:
The box set overview rule is an addendum to the standard rule for overviews (re: "The following Clarifications to the standard Rules need to be used:"). The first sentence is not superfluous because the standard rule only covered a simple listing of the collection contents.
The correct process is use the overview from the cover (standard rule), followed by, if applicable, the box set rule.
The end result is what Danae Cassandra described. It's been a while but I seem to remember that this is correct. These rules were written not as a replacement, but as an addendum...meaning, follow the normal rules as well as these rules. If I remember correctly, they were added specifically to allow the additional items because they were not allowed by the regular rules. | | | 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 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,311 |
| | Posted: | | | | That is correct. It is even covered in the rules. If you look at the Introduction to the rules it has it there...
Note: The standard rules do apply for these special cases; the sections clarify specific ways the rules apply to box sets and television series on DVD. | | | | Pete | | | | Last edited: by Addicted2DVD |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,526 |
| | Posted: | | | | I think that Ken intended for standard rules to apply. I think we should apply standard rules. That said, I don't think that the rules make that clear. Let me explain:
If the box set cover contains a listing of contents with brief descriptions of each, enter it directly into the Overview field.
Now, if standard rules do indeed apply, then this sentence is superfluous. Such a listing should have been used for the overview anyway. So the inclusion of this sentence seems to imply that standard rules do not apply. It may not make much sense, but then again it's not the only thing in the rules that doesn't make sense. | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,311 |
| | Posted: | | | | not sure how you say the rules don't make that clear with the quote from the rules I provided. It is in the introduction of the rules themself. Just confused by that statement because the rules makes that exact statement... "Note: The standard rules do apply for these special cases; the sections clarify specific ways the rules apply to box sets and television series on DVD." | | | | Pete |
|