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.
Thank you. The second comment, the one about RSL, was mine. I deliberately said only that to avoid any spoilage. I have tried to be sensitive to those who don’t like spoilers, and I really can’t see how remarking that a televised preview shows that a lead actor on a drama show is going to do some dramatic acting.
I think that if I had put that information in a spoiler box, as in
It looks as if we’ll get to see some powerhouse acting from Robert Sean Leonard!
it would have just looked foolish. He’s a dramatic actor on a drama show, and he’s going to appear and do some dramatic acting. What have I spoiled?
Honestly, I can’t see why you can’t just go with a policy to only discuss what is in the current or previous episodes. it’s just as arbitrary as a line at whatever’s been aired, and it offends fewer people. It’s a very obvious line.
And as for moderation, I thought we already delegated that out: the Dopers who know the show report spoilers, and then the mods assume they are correct and go in and spoiler box them.
OK, so I’m one of the people who doesn’t watch previews at the end of episodes, unsubscribed from the Doctor Who Twitter feed very upset that they spoiled their own show, etc., etc.
I think it would be great to have threads where shows could be discussed without reference to anything that wasn’t in-between the opening and closing credits.
BUT, I realize that most people would rather include stuff like trailers, IMDB, interviews with the director, and stuff like that. So, I just don’t read any threads about shows that I really like, with occasional exceptions.
My take, then, is that it would probably be best to define spoilers in a certan way (it sounds like a lot of people are in favor of including everything that has aired as non-spoiler, and putting other stuff in boxes) and then make sure it’s reasonably well communicated and enforced.
In addition, I think mods should be supportive of posters who want to set up a thread with tighter rules, such as “in between the credits.”
I would consider myself in the minority in terms of what I like, so I don’t expect the overall board rules to cater to me - but I think that there are enough people who are irked by even minor spoilers that having some super-non-spoilage-plus threads might make sense.
Not so obvious. I got ripped once for discussing an episode after it had aired on the East Coast, but before it was shown in the Pacific Time Zone. I understand that was too soon, but I’ve seen other posters get angry because the show had aired, but they had recorded it and hadn’t played it back yet.
As far as I’m concerned, the preview is part of the episode.
I know that it never actually gets past the “that’s a great idea, let’s do that!” phase, but every time this crops up, I look back to the solution that was brought up several years ago:
We’re in the “Whatever Show, 4/10” thread. That’s for discussing things from the 4/10 episode and back. If you want to talk about next week’s episode, then start the “Whatever Show, 4/17” thread. It’s not like you’re going to be starting a thread that wouldn’t be started anyway, you can talk to your heart’s content and people who don’t like spoilers (which previews undoubtedly are) don’t have to see them.
It’s simple, it shows common courtesy, and it’ll certainly get ignored…again.
You think we should be, perhaps, but you’d be wrong. 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.
In general, we treat anything that has been broadcast, including previews to next week’s show, as open knowledge – with the proviso that East Coast folks should be sensitive to West Coast folks.
Beyond that, we’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 – in my opinion. (I am here speaking as a mod, but as one of three mods who covers that forum full-time.)
For those who are especially sensitive to spoilers, again, we recommend that you not subscribe to those threads with email updates, because those emails show the spoilers openly. You can still subscribe to the thread without email updates (I believe you can change your default setting to/from “yes, email updates” as you sign up for new threads) to make it easier to find, but you will not risk getting material you don’t want to see via email.
Overall comment: we’re not going to make a new set of rules about spoilers. We ask that people use their common sense, we ask that people be courteous – and we ask that people remember there is no hard and fast rule that will solve every conflict in every possible situation.
I am not a moderator that has to deal with a lot of these situations but I do think you have to come down on the side of common sense here.
And mostly that’s what we do – but it’s not our responsibility to make sure that someone who wants everything in the show to be a total surprise is insulated from every comment and discussion. It’s also incumbent upon the person wanting to be under the Cone of Silence to stay out of situations where they might see something they don’t want to know yet.
Our current policy in this regard should be sufficient, it’s been hashed out over time and experience and covers most eventualities.
This is just what I’m hoping for; an accepted definition, and then maybe three categories so we can say in shorthand:
“This is a category Three thread, all information from any source is free game.” or
“This is a category two thread, information from the movie and previews of the sequel are free game, but no far-ahead book/movie spoilers please.” or
“This is a category One thread, only information from the show itself is welcome, and only after it’s been fully aired.” or ???
Because typing out the rules is tedious and confusing and leaves too much open to interpretation. This way we can just name a category, add a link to the sticky or whatever, and get on with it.
The sticky can also include warnings to newbies about how spoiler boxes are sometimes defeated by the preview or e-mail subscription processes.
Because I’d feel very lonely if I couldn’t discuss the show I’m watching without having the next episode ruined, and although I’m not in that box, I do feel for my fellow Dopers. I also want to know when I’m free to prattle on at will about my guesses (half the fun for me!) and why I think they’re valid.
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.
Secondly, I understand the desire to not make any more rules.
But lastly, could moderators at least use a bit stronger of a hand when dealing with spoiler box abusers? Not that you need to be issuing warnings or threats or anything - but being a little bit more manhattanish in dealing with fixing broken spoiler boxes, misused spoiler boxes (Joey P has an excellent example above of spoiler box misuse that has been going on for years now), etc. would I think go a long way.
Yes - we **should **be using common sense. But in the meantime, could mods be a bit more vocal with those who don’t have any?
The problem with previews, as previously alluded, is that the preview creators are sometimes not the same folks writing the episodes, and they have different goals.
The writers are trying to create an interesting plot, that unfolds in a specific manner. They throw in surprises and plot twists and such to build the drama and execute at a specific pace.
The preview creators are trying to take the finished product, and summarize it in a manner to create a sense of expectation in potential viewers, maybe even people who don’t watch the show. (Thus you get “a very special episode of…” every other week.)
So I have seen plot points dropped in previews that are spoilers. Example: recently there was a commercial for a show where a woman is abducted on video. But, “is it real, or is she faking it?” comes out in the preview. Now that’s the kind of plot twist I would like to see play out in the episode, not dropped in a preview to drum up interest. If I’m a fan of the show, I don’t need a preview to make me excited for the next week’s episode. If I don’t watch the show, how likely am I to see an preview and say, “Oh, they’re going to examine the problem of internet blogs being faked and repercussions. I think I want to watch that,”? I don’t think I’m going to do that often. YMMV.
I try to forget the previews and let the show engross me, and follow along with the unfurling.
Somebody also pointed out an example where the preview aired during the run of the show revealed the killer for the show that was airing. That’s an example where next week’s plot builds on this week’s plot. That is definitely a preview that is a spoiler. Perhaps not by the time the thread is in discussion, but certainly to the person watching the show. So that shows that previews cannot be counted on to be spoiler free.
Three volunteer moderators – hell, three hundred volunteer moderators – are not going to have sufficient knowledge of every twist and turn of every show on every channel on every continent to know what is and what isn’t a spoiler. We rely on the people watching the shows to let us know when there are open spoilers that need to be hidden. We are happy to do so.
If someone is abusing spoiler boxes – and, frankly, I have no idea what that means – report the post and explain, very clearly and very specifically, what the nature of that abuse is. We deal with individual reports as we receive them. If you see someone with a pattern of such abuse, report it every time you see it so we can perceive the pattern as well. Don’t assume we’ve seen Poster X doing [whatever] and ignored it – assume we haven’t seen it.
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.
What part of Joey P’s post is unclear to you? Maybe if we can identify where your understanding of the issue is deficient, we could make just a tiny bit of progress here.
A few years ago, the question of previews was discussed here, and the ultimate decision was that anyone who was so sensitive to spoilers that they didn’t want to see previews, shouldn’t be reading the thread.
That was some time back, and current CS mods are certainly free to change it.
Remember that use of spoiler tags is a courtesy, a guideline for etiquette and good manners, but not a hard-and-fast rule.
And, regarding Joey P’s point, that spoiler tags should have some indication of what’s inside them, that’s covered in the Guidelines that are specific for Cafe Society: Guidelines We could add something to the General Guidelines, as well.
Sorry for my brain fart. I’d call those examples “using spoiler boxes badly,” rather than “abusing spoiler boxes” (not that that’s necessarily moot), and it didn’t occur to me that he was referring to something in an earlier post, since I use the “go to first unread” function in threads I’m actively involved in.
