Can we Define "Spoiler" Please?

[coolbyrne]

Originally Posted by AuntiePam

West Coasters should be aware of the risks, just like folks in other countries. It's only a couple of hours, and I assume that West Coasters are spending that time arranging platters of crudites and decanting the appropriate wine.

It's more likely they're sitting in the thread, refreshing every five minutes after the episode airs on the East coast because, while they don't want to be entirely spoiled, they can't resist reading early reactions of the episode. Then, when an East coast viewer has the temerity to be more specific in their reaction, it's all "Thanks for spoiling it for me!!! "

If it's aired somewhere, I think it's fair game, whether that means a four hour advantage for East coast viewers or a 12 month advantage for UK viewers. The onus should be on the viewer who doesn't want to be spoiled, not on the viewers lucky enough to see it first. The former creates one action- don't enter the thread. The latter creates all sorts of actions- do you talk about previews and risk raising the ire of some people? Do you mention an actor's interview you just saw and risk "spoiling" viewers who don't want to know a single solitary bit of info? Do you speculate and then be accused of having already read the book and purposely spoiling future plots?

And where is the time line drawn? As others have said, do we stop mentioning the end of "Titanic" despite 1. The movie being over 10 years old and 2. Most people knowing the history of the ship sinking?

If you don't want to be spoiled, know that quest might be thwarted when you enter a thread.

[ZenBeam]

I'm one of the people who avoids previews from next weeks show. The argument that it is "planned and approved by the director, producers, etc" falls flat for me. First, I don't know that that's true. I suspect it's often some low paid intern or something who puts it together. Second, the purpose of previews is to get you to watch the show, not to maximize the enjoyment for the viewer. Those goals can be at odds, and I don't trust whoever puts the preview together to avoid spoiling the show.

I agree that what to put in a spoiler box can be a hard line to draw sometimes, but previews, to me, clearly belong on the "put it in a spoiler box" side of the line.

West Coasters, I think, have to suck it up, and avoid a thread on a current show for three hours each week if they want to avoid spoilers.

Movies are harder to define, and perhaps the thread starter needs specify in that case.

[C K Dexter Haven]

It's all hard to define, and we ultimately rely on common courtesy: posters should be sensitive to the needs of others, and use spoiler tags if they think there's a reasonable chance that someone might not have seen it. And readers who don't want something spoiled should be sensitive and not read threads that they think might have exposed spoilers.

[Acsenray]

I am fine with all that, C.K., but I notice you left out an OP's ability to set spoiler rules for a particular thread. Is that not kosher in your view?

[elfkin477]

Originally Posted by Munch

First off, it's clearly not sufficient, since the issue arises time after time after time. Saying that it's sufficient doesn't make it so.

It only arises time and time again because people open episode threads before they've watched the episodes. I don't understand why people do this at all: I try to remain as spoiler-free as possible for shows I haven't seen yet (that aren't based on books I've read), which is why I'm currently avoiding trolling the internet for threads about the second season of the Borgias given I won't see the episodes until they're on Amazon Instant or DVD.

What the hell is so hard about waiting to read an episode-oriented thread until you've seen the episode/waiting to revisit a season-long thread until you've seen the latest episode? If people didn't wander into threads when they haven't seen something yet, it'd eliminate 90%+ of the problems unrelated to people posting genuine spoilers about stuff that hasn't aired yet (not cross-show contamination as someone mentioned, but I think we can agree that's pretty rare), so why isn't the onus on those trying to remain spoiler-free to use some common sense about which threads they open?

[twickster]

Originally Posted by Acsenray

I am fine with all that, C.K., but I notice you left out an OP's ability to set spoiler rules for a particular thread. Is that not kosher in your view?

Dex (though both respected and beloved) is not currently actively moderating in Cafe Society.

For the answer to this from a current CS moderator, again, see my post #27:

Originally Posted by twickster

It's hard enough policing all of this without having "loose," "comfy," "snug," "tight," and "supertight" versions of the rules in effect in different threads.

....

[W]e've set up the superstrict rules for Game of Thrones, and it's been a complete pain in the ass, and sustainable only because Gukumatz, og bless him, has been willing to help out in those threads. We will continue to allow it for that show/those books, but it's way more trouble for the mods than it's worth....

twickster, Cafe Society moderator

You may request particular standards in a thread that you start, but as with any thread started in any forum, the OP doesn't "own" the thread or have a privileged relationship in controlling the direction the thread goes or the participation of other people. Thus you should not expect the mods to enforce whatever special rules you want to set up.

This is not a special rule about CS threads with spoilers; this is Board-wide policy.

twickster, Cafe Society moderator

[CarnalK]

I think the best solution is to make multiple threads for all shows, with various levels of spoiler allowed, sticky them all and then assign an expert moderator to monitor all spoiler activity. Then after a week or two, everyone will have learned the spoiler rules. Problem solved.

[ugly ripe tomato]

And maybe make CarnalK an honorary mod just to ride herd on the 96,301 TV show threads

[CarnalK]

Originally Posted by ugly ripe tomato

And maybe make CarnalK an honorary mod just to ride herd on the 96,301 TV show threads

Sounds good.

BTW, Dumbledore is Luke's father.

[ugly ripe tomato]

Originally Posted by CarnalK

Sounds good.

BTW, Dumbledore is Luke's father.

you monster! Just don't tell anyone that Princess Leia is Harry Potter's sister oh shoot

[Acsenray]

No, no, no. Darth Vader was gay for the guy who stole his wandsabre.

[Steophan]

Originally Posted by Acsenray

No, no, no. Darth Vader was gay for the guy who stole his wandsabre.

Yeah, but it was really a sled.

[amanset]

Originally Posted by Martini Enfield

I'm not a huge TV fan (due to time as much as anything else), but it's worth bearing in mind that these shows air in "other countries" as well as the US, often some time (months or years) after they aired in the US.

It's for that reason I almost never participate in TV show discussion threads here - I don't want my enjoyment of a new series spoiled before the show even gets on TV here, and by the time it does, it's old hat in the US and no-one on the boards is interested in discussing it anymore.

Now, it's clearly not reasonable to say "You can't discuss this episode until it's aired in Upper Obscurania," but the general idea (that it might be better to err on the side of caution wrt spoilers in really popular shows) was worth at least mentioning.

Originally Posted by C K Dexter Haven

Just a reminder, that this is NOT just a US time zone issue. TV shown in the US may not be shown in Europe/Asia/Australia/wherever for several months, and (importantly) vice versa. Shows released in the UK often don't get to the US for months; and many US viewers would be annoyed if that was all treated as "open knowledge."

The fact that a show has been aired (or a movie released) in one location doesn't mean that the material is "open knowledge."

At the same time, those who want to scrupulously (or obsessively) avoid spoilers should NOT READ THE THREADS about those items.

To extend upon these similar points (and the other post where someone pointed out that Dr Who works the other way), there are two points to be made:

Firstly, yes it does still happen that it can take months for a show to arrive. It also sometimes takes just a matter of days. The US saw this with Dr Who, where BBC America was showing it just a few days after it was shown in the UK. In the UK there is now a satellite channel called "Sky Atlantic" that specialises in US shows and often shows them very close to the US air date. As an example, the most popular show by far has been "Game of Thrones", for which every episode of season one was aired the day after the US:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sky_Atl...hed_programmes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...rones_episodes

It is quite possible that the people watching these shows have not been subjected to the same previews and other media that those in the US have. I find it frustrating when an American says "the previews have been on constantly" when I simply can say back to them "where you live, maybe". Do Canadians have the same problem, maybe?

Secondly, we live in a world where not everyone gets their TV via the actual television any more. There are both legal and not so legal ways to get the shows very close (if not at the same time) to when they are aired. There are people that do this exclusively and hence would not be subject to all these previews that "previews are not spoilers" people tend to say are pretty much unmissable.

I guess what I am saying is that it is very, very easy to be up to date with the shows and not have been subjected to all the previews, media interviews and whatnot. So, in my opinion, anything related to an episode that has not aired, be it a preview, interview or whatever, is a spoiler and should be treated as such.

[Guinastasia]

Originally Posted by amanset

I guess what I am saying is that it is very, very easy to be up to date with the shows and not have been subjected to all the previews, media interviews and whatnot. So, in my opinion, anything related to an episode that has not aired, be it a preview, interview or whatever, is a spoiler and should be treated as such.

Or you could, you know -- just not read the thread.

[amanset]

Originally Posted by Guinastasia

Or you could, you know -- just not read the thread.

Which, funnily enough, is something I very often end up doing. Pity really, as I wouldn't have minded discussing the show I had just watched.

[AuntiePam]

Originally Posted by amanset

Which, funnily enough, is something I very often end up doing. Pity really, as I wouldn't have minded discussing the show I had just watched.

Then jump in. I don't read every single show thread, but in the ones I do read, there's very little discussion of previews (which are misleading and useless anyway), interviews, podcasts, etc. And when there is mention of an interview or a podcast, there's generally going to be a link and no actual discussion.

You might read that the show has been renewed or cancelled, or that someone has been cast in a role, but the non-show stuff is almost never spoilery. And when a casting change might be a spoiler, it'll be in a box.

I've found 99% of posters in show threads to be very considerate, even for shows that are years old.

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by twickster

Actually, I said just this back in post #27:



Ellen Cherry and Marley23 have indicated on the mod loop that they are happy to let this be the final statement by the current Cafe Society mods.

Except didn't they just come up with a special rule for Game of Thrones?

[twickster]

Which is also addressed in post #27. We tried that as an experiment, it's been a total PITA, and we're not going to do it with any other show/book combo.

[TruCelt]

That's just what I was trying to solve. If we have a basic definition, plus 2-3 accepted levels, then the thread intro's are not so complicated and there's no misunderstanding (At least among the steady population.)

Not arguing though, Modding is a hard enough job, and if you don't think it will help then it's moot.

[AuntiePam]

Originally Posted by DrDeth

Except didn't they just come up with a special rule for Game of Thrones?

It's a special case, because the TV series is based on series of contemporary popular books. If not for the books and the books being contemporary, it wouldn't be a problem.

[TruCelt]

Originally Posted by AuntiePam

It's a special case, because the TV series is based on series of contemporary popular books. If not for the books and the books being contemporary, it wouldn't be a problem.

Well, and it's also a series uniquely suited the Geekdom that is the SDMB. LOL! But yeah, if The Hobbit weren't so old I'd expect a similar treatment.

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by AuntiePam

It's a special case, because the TV series is based on series of contemporary popular books. If not for the books and the books being contemporary, it wouldn't be a problem.

Hardly. Look, I know the first series of threads about the first few epis did degenerate into a trainwreck, but that wasn't so much about the book/series issue as it was about personalities. That can happen in any thread about just about anything around here. sbt.

I am glad that the Staff now agree that it is a PITA, and not to be repeated. Altho my hat is off to Gukumatz for the very hard work, I think we can stop that experiment already, and in fact I am not sure it was nessesary this time around.