Is it THAT difficult to be sensitive to the people that don’t want to be spoiled? This goes on all the time in ‘The Office’ threads. It drives me nuts!
Some people want to be surprised. A friend of mine is a fan of the show, and he doesn’t like to know anything going in an episode. Of course I don’t spoil anything to him… I know he’s one of MANY who don’t LIKE that.
Someone should be able to know if they are in for potential spoilers to the show by the thread titles… Is that so wrong to ask?
No one is arguing that it should be okay to post spoilers in thread titles. We’re arguing that casting is not something which qualifies as a “surprise that is spoiled by knowing in advance of seeing the show in which this actor first appears in their new role.”
I don’t think it’s a spoiler. You don’t think it’s a spoiler. But for fuck sake some people do think it’s a spoiler because it spoils some of their fun. I’ll never understand why people can’t be polite enough to be sensitive to that.
I don’t have a problem with people using the word “fuck” in Cafe Society. You don’t have a problem with people using the word “fuck” in Cafe Society. But for fuck sake some people do think it’s bad form to use “fuck” in Cafe Society because it means they might get in trouble for reading it from work. I’ll never understand why people can’t be polite enough to be sensitive to that.
We know nothing of the sort. He might be named manager and then get promoted. He might be named manager, quit, and then get re-hired in Kathy Bates’ old position. He might be the third choice for manager, and get the job after the first two die. The deal for Spader might fall through, and we’ll never see him on the show again.
That is exactly my point. It’s self-evident to you that casting information would be considered a spoiler, but many in this thread had no idea. Seriously. So your amazement that people aren’t more sensitive about sharing casting information is just as misplaced as my (faux) amazement about your profanity.
Of course I can be and am polite enough to be sensitive to that…if said people can be polite enough not to expect me to appreciate their point of view* in advance of being notified of what it is, thereby entitling them in their own minds to give me shit about failing to *anticipatetheir *feelings and expecations. *
Such a situation would have looked very much like my hypothetical above, in which the spoiled parties arrive in the thread all whiny, but still taking responsibility for their expectations, at which point I am sympathetic. Had such been the case I would have readily asked the powers that be to change the title of the thread.
But as we know, that’s not how it went down, and I find myself unmoved by people who start from a premise of “You should have been considering all possibilities, no matter how unfamiliar and unestablished they may be to the culture you are operating in, and because you didn’t, you are the jerk.” There, I’m not so much with the worrying about being “sensitive”.
Absolutely but that wasn’t exactly my point. I can totally understand Stoid originally titling the thread the way she did not knowing that it would upset some people because it isn’t really self evident. What I don’t get is she and others, after having been told that people don’t like it, essentially saying, “too bad. I don’t think that it’s a spoiler so therefore it isn’t one and I will continue to do this.”
It seems like, more often than not, the weekly Office threads turn into an argument about whether the “scenes from next week” need to be in spoiler boxes. A lot of the Office regulars feel that way but other Office regulars refuse to comply and that baffles me. My amazement wouldn’t be directed towards a newbie who posted something like that.
I’m probably one of those “too bad” folks (in my head, even if I haven’t made it explicit on the board). It’s not a question of being rude; it’s a question of you (general you, not hajaro) trying to curtail what seems to me a perfectly legitimate activity just because you don’t like it. I don’t think casting information spoils anything, and so it just seems capricious for someone to expect me to play by their rules rather than my own. To me, it’d be like if I didn’t like the letter “z” and demanded that everyone respect my wishes to put all words with said offensive letter behind spoiler boxes.
I guess I have a stricter (by which I mean “right” and “correct,” naturally) definition of “spoiler” than some. To me, a spoiler is more than just future information – after all, “Hey, the new season of the Office starts on September XX” is future information, but nothing is ruined.* A spoiler has to actually, you know, spoil one’s viewing pleasure, and I cannot wrap my head around the fact that someone would insist that it does.
[sub]* Although I suppose a start date in September is different from a start date in December, so one could infer that the writing was super-complicated or there was a cast struggle and so OMG SPOILER ALERT![/sub]
Here’s the problem with revealing casting stuff for future episodes of a TV show. You have no idea if said casting info reveals a plot point or not. Sure, maybe they reveal the very first second of the show that James Spader is the new head of Sabre. But maybe they don’t. Maybe they don’t imply at all that Kathy is leaving the show and Spader gets hired as the manager of Dunder-Mifflin. And maybe they make it seem permanent. Well now everyone that read this topic now knows that he won’t be the permanent manager and he will eventually replace Jo. We have no idea.
Chances are, this news won’t spoil anything for anyone. But seeing as how it’s so easy to put a spoiler warning in the topic title, isn’t it worth erring on the side of caution?
Doesn’t change the thing I’m objecting to, which is the idea that I should have known in advance and I did someting manifestly selfish and thoughtless by failing to do so in the first place. I shouldn’t, and I didn’t.
