18 years after the conclusion of Shenmue II, Yu Suzuki returns with the long-awaited crowdfunded sequel - decades in the making.
Shenmue III Review - Party Like its 1999
We sit down with Game Director Jeff Kaplan and Lead Designer Geoff Goodman to discuss story versus PvP, sound design, Push, and the game’s interesting launch plans.
Overwatch 2 – The Big Interview
We've run Red Dead Redemption 2 through its PC paces as the series finally lands on the Desktop platform!
Red Dead Redemption 2 is Finally on PC - How Does it Fare?
We've taken to Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order like a Womprat to sand. But how does it hold up?
Light or Dark? Our In-Depth Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order Review
Post by Steve Farrelly @ 09:58am 15/07/11 | 9 Comments
Last week we set out to remind everyone the Australian Law Reform Commission still hadn't received a serious number of submissions for public stance on the Classification Review scheme and thankfully managed to light a fire up under it with submissions in the public manifest currently sitting at just under 1000 (not sure how many private submissions there are).

We're back again today to remind you that at close of business today, Friday July 15, the ALRC will not be taking any more submissions, so you have all day to have your voice heard, or remind anyone else who hasn't yet, to partake in the submission process. It really doesn't take too long and you're not required to answer everything in full, just voice you opinion on what you feel matters in the scheme.

Click here to access the online submission form.



classification reviewalrcr18+australia





Latest Comments
ALRC Web Manager
Posted 10:15am 15/7/11
Today is the closing date for submissions to the Issues Paper, however this is only the first stage of the public consultation process. We will release a more detailed Discussion Paper with proposals for reform of the Classification Scheme in September and will again ask for public feedback. To keep track of what’s happening with the ALRC Classification Review, subscribe to e-news: http://www.alrc.gov.au/inquiries/classification/subscribe-e-news
Nerfington
Posted 01:05pm 15/7/11
Not going to get time to do this by the looks of things. :(
Hogfather
Posted 01:48pm 15/7/11
Not going to get time to do this by the looks of things. :(

Start timesheeting your QGL essays dude ... !
Mitchum
Posted 01:59pm 15/7/11
Not going to get time to do this by the looks of things. :(


Bhahahahhaha!
Nerfington
Posted 02:44pm 15/7/11
Got it done, not sure if it's very good.


Start timesheeting your QGL essays dude ... !

Har har. Do you go out of your way to jump in conversations and mock often, or just on QGL?

The clear descriptors are apparently necessary when people continually misrepresent an argument, and then attack over that misrepresentation (I can only presume that they're misunderstandings, surely not because you guys would go out of your way to respond to and attack over a point which was specifically highlighted as not the point. several times).
Door
Posted 03:05pm 15/7/11
You have 3 options to combat your 'attackers'.

a) Laugh it off briefly and leave the thread unfazed.
b) Tell them to piss off briefly and leave the thread unfazed.
c) Explain yourself in novelistic detail, repetitively touching on the same points.

Hint: One option involves a shovel.
Nerfington
Posted 03:09pm 15/7/11
Or I could call people out on their s***.

--

Going OT now, thanks to somebody else once again. Only a few hours left for submission.
bLaZe
Posted 05:37pm 15/7/11
so much bulls*** with politicians, how many times do we have to say we want an 18+ rating for games.
Nerfington
Posted 06:36pm 15/7/11
I like to think that I submitted a flawless argument explaining that censorship is not very neighbourly, hence there should only be advisory labels and an illegal category.

Naturally, I expect any super pro-censorship type who reads my argument to behave as visualised in the first panel here:


Flawless plan.
Commenting has been locked for this item.
9 Comments
Show