|
|
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.
|
|
| Sunday March 09 06:04:59 2003 Re: Xena |
| >Biff
>If you do a search > on "Miss Amphipolis", you might find an interesting bit > of trivia about Karen Dior Oh NO! Not that! Kinda ruins the scene! |
| Per |
| Sunday March 09 09:29:22 2003 Re: Xena |
| Jay maybe you should consider deleting the Miss Amphipolis entry I made.
Turns out it's not a woman at all, but a male crossdresser. I was not aware if that before Biff told me. But now.....lost all value for me. |
| Per |
| Sunday March 09 12:04:10 2003 Re: [#8473] |
| "A small bamboo cage is not bondage; but I like the scene though I know many won't-same as me with handgag scenes, they are not bondage either IMO and I don't like them, but there are plenty of those in DB." "I don't know that this passes logical muster, but to me handgags are ... gags. Certainly a scene of a woman gagged but not bound makes the grade, so why not these? But is a gag "bondage"? As I've said before, the term is amorphous ... a case could be made for cages. But to me, simply being placed in a confining space doesn't fill the bill." Edits & Deletes are based upon Brian's past rulings, not our personal preferences. So what figure best here, I'll leave it be until Brian gives his opinion on it. Just looking at it, Is this entered based on the HTF website? Or you watching the episode? As perhaps something happened beforehand, and the cage part could be mentioned in bottom line. Similar to how we allow clothing mentioned there. |
| Jay L |
| kdnpr@yahoo.com |
| Sunday March 09 12:15:55 2003 Re: [#8472] |
| "If you do a search on "Miss Amphipolis", you might find an interesting bit of trivia about Karen Dior" "Jay maybe you should consider deleting the Miss Amphipolis entry I made." Okay, went through this before with [#3391], Mikela J. Mikael. So's will leave it be, unless you decide you want it ejected? |
| Jay L |
| kdnpr@yahoo.com |
| Sunday March 09 12:39:10 2003 Re: GH Scene (Database #66) |
| "I intend to revise scne # 66 along the lines of my comments on discussion. I would also like to put in information about the other three scenes in the storyline. I believe that the two of these scenes that show bondage should be completely separate entries with referebces to scene # 66." On Discussion, you said other scenes connected to the story-line. Were this going on the same time? I'd prefer editing all the info into [#66], just for decent VHS machine purposes, if the case? "As for the implied bondage scene, I am not sure if I should enter it at all, or if I do enter it, if I should merely include it with one of the other scene entries" Don't see a problem with putting it in bottom of entry. |
| Jay L |
| kdnpr@yahoo.com |
| Sunday March 09 14:06:20 2003 Re: [#8473] |
|
> I'll leave it be until Brian gives his opinion on it. Oh, ok. Cage only, no. The wrap situation, I guess I see no attempt at restraint, it's essentially a clothing-like faux bondage. I'd say no. |
| Brian R |
| Sunday March 09 14:17:06 2003 Re: [#8473] |
| > Oh, ok. Cage only, no.
Got it, [#8473] Ejected. > The wrap situation, I guess I > see no attempt at restraint, it's essentially a > clothing-like faux bondage. I'd say no. Got it, [#8472] Ejected. Thanx |
| Jay L |
| kdnpr@yahoo.com |
| Sunday March 09 14:38:04 2003 Re: [#8473] |
| >
> Oh, ok. Cage only, no. The wrap situation, I guess I > see no attempt at restraint, it's essentially a > clothing-like faux bondage. I'd say no. > I don't know that this changes its standing, but I'd say she was indeed restrained ... she was doing a "ribbon dance" and twirled herself into her predicament. Although not shown that I recall, it appeared she would have needed assistance to untangle herself. Obviously, though, she didn't intend to bind herself. As for Ms. Mikael ... she *was* a man. Karen Dior *is* male. Perhaps that makes the above moot ... for this scene, at least. But the larger question remains: Do instances in which the bindee has unintentionally restrained herself qualify for inclusion? I'd imagine an accidental cuffing passes muster, for example. What do folks think? |
| Biff |
| Sunday March 09 14:40:27 2003 Whilst Here Brian? |
|
Re: Nightmare in Columbia County (1991) Victim of Beauty TV Movie scene with Michele Abrams One poster has a solution, where rewrite the entry describing it as an audio only gag scene. Others agree with this poster: "You NEVER see her face and you never see her feet. As she lifts her legs, the scene cuts to her father looking for her. You never see if her feet are tied, if she's barefoot or not." "you hear her mmmmpfing," Apparently from both first aired & subsequent airings, cleave-gag scene dismissed as scene creep. So we have an agreement should be based on audio gag description only. Like to hear your opinion on the matter? Thanx |
| Jay L |
| kdnpr@yahoo.com |
| Sunday March 09 15:32:50 2003 Re: [#8473] |
| > Just looking at it,
> > Is this entered based on the HTF website? > > Or you watching the episode? It is based on the HtF caps only. I never saw the episode. |
| Per |
| Sunday March 09 15:46:50 2003 Re: [#8473] |
| > Oh, ok. Cage only, no. The wrap situation, I guess I
> see no attempt at restraint, it's essentially a > clothing-like faux bondage. I'd say no. Thanks a lot, NOT meant sarcastically. This is exactly what I was looking for, and the reason I raised the questions in my original posts: A clear answer. I do not even disagree, thanks Brian! (had it not turned out "Karen Dior" was a crossdresser I might have tried to argue a little more for that one, but certainly not as things are) |
| Per |
| Sunday March 09 19:01:20 2003 Re: GH Scene (Database #66) |
| > On Discussion, you said other scenes connected to the
> story-line. > > Were this going on the same time? > I'd prefer editing all the info into [#66], > just for decent VHS machine purposes, if the case? Jay, thanks for weighing in on these issues. In answer to your question the additional scenes were not at the same time as the initial scene in the storyline. They came weeks or possibly up to two months later. In addition, they are distinct from the initial capture chloro and bondage scene. Hence, I am inclined to think they should be separte entries, otherwise the scene count for the show may be off. Any thoughts from you, brian or anyone else would be appreciated. All or part of the initial scene was also shown as a flashback on a later date. I will incorporate this into fact into entry # 66. In addition, I will probably place the implied bondage scene in enrty #66 as well since it is unclear if it would count as a scene in its own right. The actresses are the same as in the initial scene |
| mornad |
| mornad4@yahoo.com |
| Sunday March 09 19:22:00 2003 Re: [#8473] |
| "It is based on the HtF caps only. I never saw the episode." Okay, thanx |
| Jay L |
| kdnpr@yahoo.com |
| Sunday March 09 19:25:59 2003 Re: GH Scene (Database #66) |
| "the additional scenes were not at the same time as the initial scene in the storyline. They came weeks or possibly up to two months later. In addition, they are distinct from the initial capture chloro and bondage scene. Hence, I am inclined to think they should be separte entries," Okay, agree then should be separate. Thanx |
| Jay L |
| kdnpr@yahoo.com |
| Sunday March 09 22:53:15 2003 Re: Whilst Here Brian? |
| > Apparently from both first aired & subsequent airings,
> cleave-gag scene dismissed as scene creep. > So we have an agreement should be based on audio gag > description only. > Like to hear your opinion on the matter? I agree to keeping it in the database as long as it is explicity noted that it is only an audio scene. |
| Rock |
|
|