|
Author |
Rating system for scripts (currently 2166 views) |
R.E._Freak |
Posted: February 17th, 2005, 12:36pm |
|
|
Guest User
|
We could come up with a universal system, a set of parameters to help writers rate their script. |
|
Logged |
|
|
|
Reply: 15 - 28 |
|
|
Shonagh |
Posted: February 18th, 2005, 9:18am |
|
|
LocationBolton, England Posts83 Posts Per Day 0.01 |
Universal as in international, because those classifications don't mean anything to me - we have U, PG, 15 or 18 and I'm not sure which ratings are equivalent. |
|
|
|
Reply: 16 - 28 |
|
|
R.E._Freak |
Posted: February 18th, 2005, 12:32pm |
|
|
Guest User
|
Exactly. For people from different countries/regions, it would be hard for them to choose acurrately. If we had an actual set of specific guidelines as to the content of a script, it would pretty much eliminate that. |
|
Logged |
|
|
|
Reply: 17 - 28 |
|
|
Higgonaitor |
Posted: February 19th, 2005, 12:00am |
|
|
Been Around
Location(40.717261, -73.600087) Posts934 Posts Per Day 0.13 |
people who read the scripts could post what they think it should be rated. and we could even do a numerical system like 1-10 1 being the most child friendly and ten being like gruesomly adult. |
| |
|
Logged |
|
|
|
|
Antemasque |
Posted: March 27th, 2005, 1:04pm |
|
|
Been Around the ocean floor is hidden from your viewing lens
LocationBaltimore, MD Posts558 Posts Per Day 0.08 |
Yeah. I think the rating system thing would be a good idea. I do it for all my scripts. Most of them get an R rating tho lol.
Andrew |
|
|
|
Reply: 19 - 28 |
|
|
the goose |
Posted: March 27th, 2005, 2:06pm |
|
|
New Yippie-kay-ay.
LocationLondon Posts297 Posts Per Day 0.04 |
Yeah that would be pretty good. |
| "We don't make movies for critics, since they don't pay to see them anyhow."
-- Charles Bronson. |
|
|
|
Reply: 20 - 28 |
|
|
DisGuy |
Posted: March 27th, 2005, 3:13pm |
|
|
New
Posts34 Posts Per Day 0.00 |
I agree, that would help people get a sense of what they're getting involved in. Don't think there should too many ratings, maybe like 4 or 5. |
|
|
|
Reply: 21 - 28 |
|
|
Old Time Wesley |
Posted: March 27th, 2005, 3:42pm |
|
|
LocationOntario, Canada Posts2908 Posts Per Day 0.38 |
People should add there own rating at the end of there synopsis when sending it in or in extras comments because that would help Don a lot more than him having to do it all himself. |
| Practice safe lunch: Use a condiment. |
|
|
|
Reply: 22 - 28 |
|
|
Don |
Posted: March 27th, 2005, 6:56pm |
|
|
AdministratorAdministrator So, what are you writing?
LocationVirginia Posts16431 Posts Per Day 1.94 |
I agree with Wesley. It would be easier to begin with folks just adding after their synopsis their rating. I do have in mind, for future releases, adding content rating to the submission form. However, you all know how long it takes for me to implement new functionality to the site.
Don
|
| Visit SimplyScripts.com for what is new on the site.
------------- You will miss 100% of the shots you don't take. - Wayne Gretzky
|
|
|
|
Reply: 23 - 28 |
|
|
Alan_Holman |
Posted: March 28th, 2005, 2:19am |
|
|
Guest User
|
Oftentimes, you'll apologise because something "took too long" at times when no one complained.
I think a lot of people are just glad that the site's up, and that it's updated. It doesn't matter how long it takes, as long as the site is still active in one way or another, it's better than a lot of similar sites who've tried in the past, and failed to do what you've accomplished.
You deserve a round of applause.
*claps* |
|
Logged |
|
|
|
Reply: 24 - 28 |
|
|
R.E._Freak |
Posted: March 28th, 2005, 12:42pm |
|
|
Guest User
|
Quoted from Alan_Holman You deserve a round of applause. |
I second that. A site that changes slowly (but is updated constantly) is far better than a site that remains stagnant. You've put a lot of time and effort into making Simply Scripts work, and even if you never add any new features I don't think it would make the site lose any of it's value. |
|
Logged |
|
|
|
Reply: 25 - 28 |
|
|
Gaara |
Posted: March 28th, 2005, 12:47pm |
|
|
New I had an itch on my face...so I scratched it
LocationSunderland, England Posts161 Posts Per Day 0.02 |
Why not make the rating system simple
Youngsters - 0 - 5 Kids 6 - 10 Young Teens - 11 - 15 Teens - 16 - 17 Young Adult - 18 - 20 Adult - 21 +
XXX - Not hard to figure this one out.
Or something like that |
| |
|
|
|
Reply: 26 - 28 |
|
|
Old Time Wesley |
Posted: March 28th, 2005, 1:52pm |
|
|
LocationOntario, Canada Posts2908 Posts Per Day 0.38 |
Why not just have
E - Everyone which entails kids and grown ups PG - Mild language for 13 and up R - For mature audiences only X - Which is basically porn but since there aren't any of those or they aren't aloud.
Because nobody writes scripts specifically for 5 and under, it would have to be a pop up script |
| Practice safe lunch: Use a condiment. |
|
|
|
Reply: 27 - 28 |
|
|
DisGuy |
Posted: March 28th, 2005, 1:59pm |
|
|
New
Posts34 Posts Per Day 0.00 |
I agree with Wesley, a rating system like that is simple and would not be hard for people to know where their scripts fit. |
|
|
|
Reply: 28 - 28 |
|
|