Author |
Message |
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 1,946 |
| Posted: | | | | Hello all,
I have a different point of view as one of our fellow contributors regarding the production year of a boxset.
The rules state to take the original production year of a movie, even for re-releases.
The way I interprete this for boxsets is to take the production year of a boxset. Since it is just a placeholder for multiple movies, I do not see a relation between the production year of the movies and that of the boxset.
The other user wants to change the production year to the production year of the oldest movie.
So what do you guys think?
Regards, Chris | | | View my collection at http://www.chriskepolis.be/home/dvd.htm
Chris | | | Last edited: by cvermeylen |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 13,202 |
| Posted: | | | | In my opinion, the production year for the box set should be the year the set was released. The rules, however, do not agree with that opinion. According to the rules, "Production Year for a Box Set should be the year of the earliest feature release in the set." | | | 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: July 31, 2008 | Reputation: | Posts: 2,506 |
| Posted: | | | | It's in the boxset rules - "Production Year for a Box Set should be the year of the earliest feature release in the set." Edit: So for something like the Alien saga it would be 1979. | | | Last edited: by Ardos |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 1,946 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Forget_the_Rest: Quote: It's in the boxset rules - "Production Year for a Box Set should be the year of the earliest feature release in the set." Overlooked that one. I'll update my vote on the concerned contribution, and lock my local profile. I personally feel this rule doesn't make much sense, but we can only follow the rules | | | View my collection at http://www.chriskepolis.be/home/dvd.htm
Chris |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 3,197 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote: In my opinion, the production year for the box set should be the year the set was released. That information is already available in the release date. IMO, the production year, as well as the CoO, should be left blank for box sets. But I follow the rules of course... | | | First registered: February 15, 2002 |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 21,610 |
| Posted: | | | | i sss its now academic
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!! CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it. Outta here
Billy Video | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 5,494 |
| Posted: | | | | ...and my 2007 Stanley Kubrick Directors Series Boxset is.... 1968 .. ., and No I am not a big fan of this rule either .. | | | In the 60's, People took Acid to make the world Weird. Now the World is weird and People take Prozac to make it Normal.
Terry |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 736 |
| Posted: | | | | I personally remove the box set year from my local database. |
|
Registered: May 18, 2007 | Posts: 232 |
| Posted: | | | | I would prefer the year to be either the box production year, or the production year of the last produced film/DVD in the box. | | | Last edited: by Gemini76 |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 21,610 |
| Posted: | | | | And you are free to do so locally, Gemini. There was quite a bit of back and forth on this topic at the time, with supporters on both sides. Just as with anythiing, any given answer in the Rules is not going to please EVERYONE, it's impossible. But the beauty of our system is that with the local database concept none of us are married to the Online data exactly as it is handled.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!! CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it. Outta here
Billy Video | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 2,694 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr Pavlov: Quote: And you are free to do so locally, Gemini. There was quite a bit of back and forth on this topic at the time, with supporters on both sides.
Skip Of course, nobody ever said logic had anything to do with what rules get put in place. | | | John
"Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice!" Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964 Make America Great Again! |
|
Registered: May 18, 2007 | Posts: 232 |
| Posted: | | | | I know Doctor, but I was only trying to add to the discussion. What I can do locally isn't really the issue here, and since I'm contributing, I'd rather keep to the rules. |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 21,610 |
| Posted: | | | | BUT Gemini, we can't just keep changing the Rules based on whatever the prevailing interest at any given time.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!! CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it. Outta here
Billy Video |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 21,610 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Rifter: Quote: Quoting Dr Pavlov:
Quote: And you are free to do so locally, Gemini. There was quite a bit of back and forth on this topic at the time, with supporters on both sides.
Skip
Of course, nobody ever said logic had anything to do with what rules get put in place. Now, now John. There was logic involved, whether you agree with the logic or neither validates nor invalidates the logic. Personally, I don't recall if I took a position on this myself, I do remember that I could (and still can) see both sides of the argument. . Gemini, I have no idea how bifg your library is, btut mine is sizable and no where near the largest. For anyone to expect users to go back and change what they have been doing per the rules, which would involve thousands of new edits simply due to a "new"-user whim is not realistic and for those of us with large collections downright insulting (in a sense). Edit and re-editing the same data field repeatedly simply due to the interests of the moment is of absolutely no interest to this user. This week this way, next week the other way, and then back again, no thanks. I am trying to respectful and reasonable but this one where I will say it is what it is, anything else is fine locally. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!! CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it. Outta here
Billy Video |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 5,635 |
| Posted: | | | | I like that a box set production year matches the production year of the oldest film (or TV show) in it. I cannot imagine the Star Wars box set being filed under either the year of the third film or the release of the DVD box set. I sort my DVD Profiler under Production Year anyway -- with the stuff from the 19th Century first and the 21st Century last. I almost wish I could sort by month and day as well, so years with many releases aren't sorted alphabetically within those years. | | | If it wasn't for bad taste, I wouldn't have no taste at all.
Cliff |
|
| T!M | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 8,736 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Patsa: Quote: Quoting Unicus69:
Quote: In my opinion, the production year for the box set should be the year the set was released. That information is already available in the release date. That is indeed the key to this whole thing. We already HAVE the production year for the box set listed in the profile - there really is no point in listing it twice... |
|