Harold
On 1/11/06,
Harold Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
David,
Why not make it <content:rating>Rating</content:rating>, so that all content -- podcasts, vlogs, even text -- might have this system?
HaroldOn 1/10/06, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Well this may or may not be over the top but ...
What if we just defined a real quick RSS extension that allowed
vloggers to put a *voluntary * and *optional* rating on their work.
Something like <vlog:rating>Rating</vlog:rating>
Aggregators could honor the rating, and state in their user agreements
that vlogs without a voluntary rating may be subject to things like
alternate thumbnals, or even moderation etc.
All we'd need is a list of defined ratings.
Ratings could be something like: Kids/General/Mature/Adult
Kids - Most parents would find this program suitable for all ages.
Although this rating does not signify a program designed specifically
for children, most parents may let younger children watch this program
unattended. It contains little or no violence, no strong language and
little or no sexual dialogue or situations. (This would be *similar*
to the MPAA's G and TVG ratings)
General - Content is considered appropriate for the general public.
This content generally does not contain nudity and is generally free
from extremely strong language. While this content may contain some
strong language and may mention mature themes in passing it's
relatively mild and not central to the content itself. The general
rating is considered 'work environment friendly'. (This would be
*similar* to the MPAA's PG and PG-13 ratings)
Mature - May be unsuitable for children. Mature content may contain
one or more of the following: intense violence, intense sexual
situations, strong coarse language, or intensely suggestive dialogue.
Content marked as 'mature' may deal specifically with mature themes
and have prolific use of strong language. Although mature content may
contain no nudity, it still may not be the sort of thing you want to
have playing on computer at work. (This would be *similar* to the
MPAA's TVMA rating)
Adult - This content is designed for adult viewers only and may
contain one or more of the following: graphic violence, explicit
sexual activity, or crude indecent language. (This would be *similar*
to the MPAA's R or NC-17 ratings)
*shrug*
This wouldn't solve all the issues, but at least it puts some
control/responsability on the content creator instead of the directory
manager. In the long run, it's not a bad idea to have a voluntary
system in place anyway ... it tends to deflect any efforts to try and
mandate one.
- Dave
On 1/10/06, Devlon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> Let's talk.> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> It's a hot topic right now since our (Mefeedia) site chose one method
> to make the site 'safe for work' etc.
>
> Disclaimer: I want to talk as an individual, not as someone affiliated
> with Mefeedia. That being said...
>
> There is a post on the Mefeedia blog that pointed out how content that
> might not be safe for work is handled. The author of the post picked
> the first feed that they came across, it was never meant to single out
> anyone. Apologies for singling out anyone that was not the intent at
> all.
>
> I've spent the morning listening to Richard's podcast. And he's
> asking questions...I have some answers, as an individual, not as a
> spokesperson of mefeedia.
>
> Why do we need do cover up images like a vagina smoking a cigarette
> (for example)? Personally, I know that kids will find porn online,
> that's not why I feel some images need to be categorized or 'covered
> up'. I feel it is important for browsing at work or something like
> that, maybe over at my parent's places, etc. So here I am browsing
> around and I get explicit images on the screen, my boss comes in my
> office and thinks I am browsing porn.
>
> I have no problem with porn, trust me...you should see my
> collection...It has nothing to do with monetization, etc. It's about
> having a site that everyone can use anywhere, in a school, in a
> library, etc.
>
> Freedom of speech is thrown around right and left, but if a review of
> someone's feed isn't appreciated, then it's 'a bad' review, or
> un-fair. How does that work?
>
> I have questions. How do the other sites handle content? How do we
> as a community make sites that everyone, anyone can watch anywhere?
>
> There are several feeds that have been flagged as potential adult
> content, not just the one, there are 25 of them. But I agree that
> there should be some dialog with the producers of the feeds before
> they get flagged, that's where Mefeedia did go wrong, agreed. The
> process is being refined. It's not the content of the video that I
> feel needs to be indentified, it's the thumbnails.
>
>
> --
> ~Devlon
> Blog: <http://devlond.blogspot.com>
> Vlog: <http://8bitme.blogspot.com>
>
> <http://mefeedia.com> -OR- < http://mefeedia.com/blog>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
http://www.DavidMeade.com
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service .
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
