|
|
Welcome to the Database Correction page. This page is for letting me or the other editors know of corrections that need to be made. Please read the posting instructions carefully.
|
|
| Tuesday March 04 10:09:10 2003 Hercules |
| New entry 8455:
Damn, I thought I could make the entries without mistakes. In this one I wrote our damsel wears a short beige skirt, period. Unfortunately she is not topless. It's a short beige dress. BTW I hope it's OK I describe the damsel's clothing as you can see I do in all the entries (they ARE pretty and dressed up in sexy ways in these series IMO), it says something about the scene, besides description of damsel looks, clothing and type of tie is almost all I can do when all I have are pics of the scene. |
| Per |
| Tuesday March 04 10:44:46 2003 Hercules and the captive women |
| Record number: 2598
The present description is OK, only it covers the last part only where the damsel is AOH tied to a stake. Before that, there's a lenghty scene where she, wearing the same old Greek-style dress (a Toga is a Roman male's clothing) is tied to a tree with leather thongs around her upper body and around the waist and her hands tied behind her back. Just wanted you to have something to do Jay :) |
| Per |
| Tuesday March 04 11:37:22 2003 Re: [#8455] Hercules |
| > It's a short beige dress.
Got it, thanx |
| Jay L |
| kdnpr@yahoo.com |
| Tuesday March 04 11:46:44 2003 Re: [#2598]-Hercules and the captive women |
| > tied to a tree with leather thongs around
> her upper body Added in, thanx for your assist here. |
| Jay L |
| kdnpr@yahoo.com |
| Tuesday March 04 12:41:40 2003 Re: Per's Post |
| "BTW I hope it's OK I describe the damsel's clothing as you can see I do in all the entries (they ARE pretty and dressed up in sexy ways in these series IMO)," The way you're doing it is fine. There's a few here with clothing preferences, and I figured clothing description in the bottom of the entry would assist them. So what you're doing will be appreciated by them. Only times really edit these, either so the bondage described first, clothing at bottom. Or if posters crack off acid about scenes that don't have their clothing preferences. Which can cause scraps on Discussion Page. BTW: In general, you've done a good job with those entries you've posted. |
| Jay L |
| kdnpr@yahoo.com |
| Tuesday March 04 14:55:38 2003 NIGHTMARE IN COLUMBIA COUNTY |
|
Jay, I agree with the anonymous poster at Discussion ... not about it being a "keeper", for me, but that it shouldn't be axed from the DB. It *is* a bondage scene ... admittedly from a strictly sonic standpoint. That should be made clear in the description, but otherwise I think it meets the criteria for inclusion. |
| Biff |
| Tuesday March 04 15:46:07 2003 Re: NIGHTMARE IN COLUMBIA COUNTY |
| > Jay, I agree with the anonymous poster at Discussion ...
I'll go look for it. Thanx |
| Jay L |
| kdnpr@yahoo.com |
| Tuesday March 04 15:58:46 2003 Re: NIGHTMARE IN COLUMBIA COUNTY |
| > Jay, I agree with the anonymous poster at Discussion ...
> that it shouldn't be axed from the DB. Okay, the delete isn't final was watching that and didn't notice any in favour of it, when decided to delete. Have no problem working on getting it back in, if in favours want it. |
| Jay L |
| kdnpr@yahoo.com |
| Tuesday March 04 16:21:59 2003 Re: NIGHTMARE IN COLUMBIA COUNTY |
| >
> Okay, the delete isn't final > was watching that and didn't notice any in favour of it, > when decided to delete. > Have no problem working on getting it back in, > if in favours want it. > This does raise an interesting question of whether a scene's a scene if you don't see the bindee. My view is that as long as that's made clear in the description, it qualifies ... of course it's a situation that won't arise too often. Or possibly ever again. (For the record, I believe someone mentioned that her feet are seen, possibly unbound.) |
| Biff |
| Tuesday March 04 16:45:19 2003 Re: NIGHTMARE IN COLUMBIA COUNTY |
| It should indeed be kept in there. Mmmmmmphing fans would enjoy it even if you can't see the damsel's face. |
| Ed |
| Tuesday March 04 18:11:43 2003 Re: NIGHTMARE IN COLUMBIA COUNTY |
| > Okay, the delete isn't final
> was watching that and didn't notice any in favour of it, > when decided to delete. > Have no problem working on getting it back in, > if in favours want it. I believe that the entry in question should be changed to specify that the damsel is never shown and that the bondage is implied. I was one of the unfortunate individuals who taped the show hoping to see a nice scene, but instead saw nothing. |
| buck henry |
| Tuesday March 04 23:21:56 2003 Re: Nightmare in Columbia County (1991) (TV) - Under Video Review |
| Going to relay this scene time info for our Video Review here: Nightmare in Columbia County (1991) (TV) "You don't see abduction, Seven looks out the window and sees empty car with doors open by the mailbox" Checked the link, couldn't find Seven? Other than that, Sound similar to what you all recall here? "There's a short scene later, but only from Michele Abrams perspective looking out back window of car. Doesn't show her, or any bondage or gags." From my delete notes, said Michele "Cleave-gagged". Now three fellas dispute this, so's if goes back in we'll have to sort gag type. |
| Jay L |
| kdnpr@yahoo.com |
|
|