Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
I, for one, object to the change, Ace. That is because I am always consistent. Since NR and Unrated mean the same thing there is NO real NEED to make such a change.There may be a deisre on the part of some to make  such a change, but there is not a NEED.

Well, by that argument, there's no need for a lot of things, like full cast. There may be a desire, but not a need.

Quoting Forget_the_Rest:

Quote:

It's not so much that it says that they're not acceptable, it's that (looking at the US only) they aren't available to be entered. Only the Film & TV systems are present. They certainly can't be entered in the Ratings Description as it's a Rating, not a Rating Description that's trying to be entered.

Do I think that we should be able to enter them? Yes - I think that a 3rd system needs to be added to the US locality.

Under the current system, do I think they can be entered? No

This I can agree with completely.  I wouldn't actually mind them being entered - IF they could be entered properly, which would require a program modification.  As the system stands currently, I would not support them being entered - even just as NR with the distributor rating in the details field - since it is a rating, not details that are being entered.

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
It is only to common to the product of that distributor

This is the other problem I foresee in doing this.  Not every anime distributor uses the same system.  A quick review of my collection turned up different distributors using 6 different ways of doing this.  Yes, two of those ways were more prevalent (the 'Age Up' and 'Age+' types) but those two were about even and they were not the only ones.  Also, some anime uses TV ratings, some is Film rated and some simply says "Not Rated."  Also some anime list rating details along with the ratings, while others (the majority) do not.

If we wanted to track this (which I'm not, per say, against, I would just require it to be done correctly) then I think the problem would require an open custom field, since different distributors use different styles.  I believe this would be problematic, since the field is currently a drop-down.

Quoting Alien Redrum:

Quote:

This is one of those things where I see it as:

1. The rules don't disallow for it currently.
2. The rules could be clarified/adjusted to add for these types of situations, and those that it will affect it will affect, those that won't it won't.

I agree with this.  As the rules stand I don't see disallowed. 

The only issue I see is that the rating system in the program is currently tailored to the two most common (MPAA and TV).  This would need to be addressed or it would need to be allowed in the rating details field.

Based on how the current rules as worded and the program is currently I see no problem with something like:

Rating System: TV/Movie (as is correct)
Rating: Not Rated
Rating Details: Recommend <age>+: <insert details here>

Of course replacing "Recommend <age>+" with what is appropriate for the release based on what is on the cover. 

My opinion is that the manufacture's recommended ratings are valid rating details for Unrated/Not rated content.

Tom

A number of you have asked for clarification from Ken, but as far as I can remember he prefers to be a lurker until there is some form of concensus, so (whatever it is) can be changed or added to the rules -- or to the thread of collected statements    Just observing, by the way. Anyways, I think that is a prudent approach to manage the user community of your program, so no objections to that.

As for concensus, only Skip puts in a fierce fight objecting some of the proposals. Sorry if I am overlooking anybody else on that side. He obviously has his rights to his opinions, no mistake about that. His main point, I think, boils down to the major position of the MPAA on rating in the USA would be watered down to a confusing diversity of rating options from many different distributors. Fair point.

On the other hand, as much as the MPAA ratings are already available in the program and distributor specific ratings are not, nothing in the current rules supports a stance for MPAA ratings only. And, where anime as the genre in question, has advisory ratings that should not be equated to "non-rated" which is frequently understood to be for adults only (I don't mean porn), there is a need to document these.

Those well into anime would find their way in that diversity, but as rules and program usability goes, it must be reasonably fool proof for the 'average' John Doe contributing to the online database.

Note there is the argument on principles about a diversity of ratings in a locality and the specifics on how to manage anime distributor ratings in the USA.

Has anybody some proposal that would put the diversity of distributor ratings to a more manageable set? Or am I reading too much complexity in the OP?

Quoting RHo:

Quote:
Quoting eommen:

Quote:
Sorry if I am overlooking anybody else on that side.

You are overlooking me. But since I have not yet stated my stance, I can't blame you.
For me MPAA and the TV-Ratings are more than enough. I would not even implement a difference between NR (not rated appropriate for children) and unrated (not rated and inappropriate for children).

I understand why some would not want to implement a difference between the two, but they really are two different things and probably should be separated. At the end of the day, it's not going to kill me that they aren't but it would make for a bit more accurate DB if you could check the appropriate box for what it actually is instead of just "NR".