# Discussion of rules in Game of Thrones threads **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [April 1, 2012, 5:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448 "2012-04-01T05:54:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/81 "2012-04-05T02:24:07Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > No one is going to admit to being a “hysterical” type, so your question is pre-loaded with the answer you want. So far as I am concerned, the rules are working the way they are supposed to. Sure, the no spoilers thread has spoilers, since just about anything could be a spoiler. It also has sillyness like posters being afraid to mention what a characters name is. Oh, and it’s boring as day old shit. So, if that’s that \* way they are supposed to\* then victory!:dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/82 "2012-04-05T02:50:18Z")
If it bores you then go to the non-boring thread. Why do we have to keep going around and around on this? Why do you want to force us to play by your rules and your rules only? There is a thread out there that fits your preference. Just go to it and stop bullying those of us who don’t want to be spoiled. ---
**Author:** ![quixotic78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/3ab097/32.png) [@quixotic78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/quixotic78)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/83 "2012-04-05T02:56:19Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > So far as I am concerned, the rules are working the way they are supposed to. The non-spoiler thread is working rather nicely, but it’s clearly working well _despite_ the rules (which have been flouted **nine** times, by my count), not because of them. If all the garbage in the OP about zero tolerance, no outside information, etc. – which isn’t being followed anyways – were to be removed, I’d say it’s just about the perfect, one-size-fits-all thread: spoilers are mostly in links and therefore must be clicked on, everyone is free to post, and no one is whining or bullying. I’d say that thread’s success illustrates that everyone can indeed post in the same place, and three stickied threads are superfluous. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/84 "2012-04-05T04:13:32Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > If it bores you then go to the non-boring thread. Why do we have to keep going around and around on this? Why do you want to force us to play by your rules and your rules only? There is a thread out there that fits your preference. Just go to it and stop bullying those of us who don’t want to be spoiled. I have. But this is like saying “well this new rule shouldn’t bother you because you don’t want to do that”. The point is- \*\*we don’t like new rules. \*\* I don’t want anyone to play by my rules, and I don’t want to play by **Irishman** s rules either. I want to play by the SDMB rules. And, that thread, with it special one of a kind rules is outside the SDMB rules. And we sure as fuck don’t like dudes saying we’re BULLYING people because after all, we’re doing _EXACTLY_ what **Irishman** asked- complain \*here. \* How the fucking hell is that _bullying?_ ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/85 "2012-04-05T04:28:30Z")
> [@quixotic78](#): > > I’m done with you, **SenorBeef** , because you’re not arguing in good faith and you’re clearly not interested in having a discussion. Anyone who disagrees with you is lying, trolling, and cannot possibly believe what they say. You believe that those who disagree with you are deliberately causing havoc and trainwrecks, and couldn’t possibly be acting for benign reasons. Not at all. I don’t think **Mtgman** is trolling whatsoever, nor is he deliberately trying to cause trouble. Others are. Can you seriously not see the difference between what he’s said and saying “HAHA YOU SAID YOU HOPED THE BUDGET WAS BIGGER!!! THAT’S OUTSIDE THE SHOW!!! HOISTED BY YOUR OWN PETARD, HYPOCRITE!!!”? > [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > I was dead serious. As to your post, I believed it was an answer, in direct response the question at the end the preceding post: Really? So when you posted that I had violated the thread rules by hoping for a bigger budget, you weren’t at all trying to mock the strictness of the rules by trying to demonstrate the ridiculous levels they can be taken to? You actually thought I’d committed a spoiler, and that other people would read what I said and the story would be spoiled for them? I appreciate that you guys are making the case for me, about how childish you are in these matters. > [@](#): > > And I didn’t appreciate being told to “shut up” by the guy who’s set the rules, already broken one of them and allowed someone else to break them without comment. Which is why I won’t be playing in that sandbox. I told you to shut up because you took a big turd in the punchbowl. The idea that stretching “I hope the budgets are bigger” into “SPOILER! SPOILER!!! NOW THE STORY IS RUINED!!! YOU VIOLATED YOUR OWN RULES!” is fucking absurd, and it’s exactly the sort of thing that ruins the discussion. > [@Mtgman](#): > > If people would accept personal responsibility for shielding themselves from content they may not wish to be exposed to, instead of demanding all such content be suppressed, this would shift the burden to where it belongs. Don’t want to have even the slightest possibility of being spoiled? Unilateral abstinence is guaranteed to produce the result you want. Don’t read the threads. Okay, so we have two scenarios. In one, the people who want to discuss the show openly including spoilers from book knowledge can do so in the spoiler thread. The people who want to discuss the show without spoilers can do so in their non-spoiler thread. In two, the people who want to discuss the threads with spoilers from the books can do so, and people who don’t want to be spoilered just simply cannot ever discuss the show. How in the world is the former better than the latter? The people who do not want to see spoilers **ARE NOT TRYING TO PREVENT YOU FROM PARTICIPATING IN YOUR OWN DISCUSSION** , however, you guys are doing precisely that. It’s not that you’re fighting to have your own discussion - you have that. You’re fighting to make sure that we can’t have our discussion. Why? Because you’re so upset at the idea of people having a non-spoiler discussion that you will, in your case, tell people just never to discuss the show, and in the case of others deliberately try to hijack and ruin those threads? What do you gain here? Why is your way superior? It sucks in theory. It sucks in practice. We tried both methods last year, and the seperate discussions was far more successful. So not only do you want to stamp out our discussion, you’re actually willing to degrade the quality of your discussion to do so. Who wins in this scenario? > [@quixotic78](#): > > I notice that in the zero tolerance, no spoilers, no outside content thread, we currently have links to (or mention of): the budget (post [55](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14908970&postcount=55), [56](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14908974&postcount=56)), Entertainment Weekly (post [59](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14909211&postcount=59)), CNN (post [78](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14919619&postcount=78)), HBO (post [107](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14927236&postcount=107)), the Season 1 DVD commentary (post [121](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14928871&postcount=121)), IMDB (post [129](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14930653&postcount=129)), Hollywood Reporter (post [130](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14931110&postcount=130)), and Wikipedia (post [154](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14934723&postcount=154)). Amazingly, no comments have been made by the moderators, the OP, or the offenderati. The lack of enforcement of the OP’s rules leads me to believe that **Mtgman** is right: zero-tolerance policies just don’t work. No moderator has issued any warnings or even non-warning notices, obviously because few if any of these links are actual _spoilers_ and so they don’t want to appear needlessly heavy-handed, even if the OP’s rules are in fact being violated. > > It also makes me wonder if the hysterical types overreacting in previous threads have left the board, are no longer watching the series, or have now read the books and are thus no longer so paranoid – perhaps we’re at a point where three separate, stickied threads are overkill, and we can all go back to acting like adults, respecting one another’s judgment like in every other thread? You simply cannot be serious. You cannot be making this argument in good faith. Again, I’m not saying this just because I disagree with you. I disagree with **Mtgman** , but he’s not making ridiculous, childish arguments. Nothing you linked to is a spoiler. It does not spoil the story for anyone. No reasonable person would say so. And you know this. You are only trying to act as if the rules are so strict and so ridiculous that you could then reduce those arguments to the absurd. However, the actual rules are nothing like you are contending. You are essentially being a brat - in the same way a 10 year old might, if he were at a museum with delicate objects, and his mother told him not to touch anything, and he said “I guess I can’t let my feet touch the floor! I can’t blow my nose! I can’t use this water fountain because you said not to touch anything!” - you clearly know what was meant, and what any reasonable person would take it to mean, but making your childish point is far more important. Spoilers are things that reveal things about the future of the story. If I were to say “I ate pizza while I watched the show last night”, it would be pretty fucking ridiculous to say “pizza wasn’t on the show, why are you bringing up outside information!? hypocrite!” And yet you probably would, given your examples above. The most deliciously ironic point of your entire post is when you were calling for us to go back and act like adults. Read your own posts. ---
**Author:** ![Gukumatz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/74df32/32.png) [@Gukumatz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gukumatz)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 11:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/86 "2012-04-05T11:41:39Z")
> [@Irishman](#): > > - Yes, **Gukumatz** is not a full time mod, but he’s officially sanctioned for the GoT threads, so he’s a “Real Mod” in those threads. Just to clarify this point, I am a full-time moderator, but in the Game Room and IMHO. So I’m a “Real Mod” in every sense, but CS isn’t my responsibility - I’m just stepping in for the Game of Thrones threads. (And yes, FWIW, I do keep up on this thread. I also welcome anyone who has specific questions to PM me.) ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/87 "2012-04-05T12:57:32Z")
> [@Gukumatz](#): > > Just to clarify this point, I am a full-time moderator, but in the Game Room and IMHO. So I’m a “Real Mod” in every sense, but CS isn’t my responsibility - I’m just stepping in for the Game of Thrones threads. > > (And yes, FWIW, I do keep up on this thread. I also welcome anyone who has specific questions to PM me.) Thank you. And you’re doing a excellent job. I think you made a bad call here, however. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/88 "2012-04-05T13:51:08Z")
> [@Gukumatz](#): > > Just to clarify this point, I am a full-time moderator, but in the Game Room and IMHO. So I’m a “Real Mod” in every sense, but CS isn’t my responsibility - I’m just stepping in for the Game of Thrones threads. Sorry, thanks for the clarification. ---
**Author:** ![quixotic78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/3ab097/32.png) [@quixotic78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/quixotic78)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/89 "2012-04-05T14:07:22Z")
**Gukumatz** , the OP of the no spoilers thread [has stated](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14936404&postcount=85) that he considers comparisons to the book, such as found [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14934723&postcount=154) > [@](#): > > As the second season covers mostly A Clash of Kings, the second book of the series, the first episode adapts the material from the first chapters of the book including the Prologue, Sansa I, Tyrion I, Bran I, Catelyn I, Davos I, the first half of Daenerys I and Jon III (chapters 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 11, 13, and 24). Two chapters from the beginning of the book had already been included in season 1’s finale, and Jon Snow’s story is being pushed forward. The main differences between the books and the show include the exclusion of the Frey wards from Bran’s storyline (they have not been cast), the order of the events in Dragonstone (the books have Maester Cressen die before the burning of the Seven) and the name change of the Lannister cousin (Cleos Frey has been named Alton Lannister to avoid confusing viewers with the intricacies of the Lannister household marriages). The main scenes created for the show are Robb and Jaime’s confrontation at the cell, Cersei and Littlefinger’s debate about the root of power, and Joffrey’s defiance to his mother at the throne room. to be non-spoilers. Moreover, he also doesn’t consider generally vague notes about future events to be spoilers, such as found [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14919619&postcount=78) > [@](#): > > Epic battles (largely kept off screen because of cost concerns in season 1) will unfold before our eyes. Even more characters will emerge as players (or pawns) in the so-called War of the Five Kings, and the world will get bigger as key characters travel throughout the kingdom of Westeros and beyond… [Robb Stark] finds himself turned off by the political machinations that come with his new title, not the least of which being the promise of an arranged marriage… New characters also will appear thoughout the season, notably Brienne of Tarth (a warrior woman and arguably one of the tale’s most sympathetic characters) and Melisandre of Asshai (a priestess of far more dubious motivations). I find myself in agreement with the former being decidedly non-spoiler material, and the latter I consider to be minor spoilers at best (worst?). Given this agreement between myself and **SenorBeef** , who are generally diametrically opposed on such issues, as well as the lack of uproar in the current thread when this information was posted, does it make sense to amend next week’s episodic thread to explicitly allow such book comparisons and minor spoilers? Or is the policy to remain unwritten that book comparisons and minor spoilers are allowed? Or, most sensibly in my opinion, can you combine the so-called “ZERO SPOILERS” and “CLOSED SPOILERS” thread into a single weekly thread, especially given that the latter has only 14 posts and none since Monday, but using the closed spoilers verbiage instead of the zero tolerance language? ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/90 "2012-04-05T14:39:50Z")
Yeah, good work. After you linking to a bunch of stuff like people mentioning the show budget, or mentioning that they like one of the actors, I just dismissed it all out of hand without reading every detail of every link you posted. Everyone is super impressed by your nitpicky GOTCHA YA. Book comparisons are stuff that belong in the spoiler threads. I do think the closed spoiler thread may be a little redundant - last year it was more of a “ask for specific background information about the show without necesarily being spoiled on everything” type thread, so if it goes in that direction it may be more useful. But I don’t really care if there are a thousand spoiler threads - my only concern is that people who don’t want spoilers have somewhere to go. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2012, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/91 "2012-04-07T22:50:21Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > … > Really? So when you posted that I had violated the thread rules by hoping for a bigger budget, you weren’t at all trying to mock the strictness of the rules by trying to demonstrate the ridiculous levels they can be taken to? You actually thought I’d committed a spoiler, and that other people would read what I said and the story would be spoiled for them? > … I understand your frustration now, and I feel your pain. I hadn’t realized you are illiterate. Good luck! ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2012, 7:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/92 "2012-04-08T07:03:02Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > I understand your frustration now, and I feel your pain. I hadn’t realized you are illiterate. > > Good luck! I feel sorry for him, too, but only because he’s having to deal with people making the most ridiculous arguments I’ve ever seen. Let’s boil this down: what is your end goal here? Why do you want the rules rescinded? Because the usual reason for wanting a rule rescinded is to be able to do what the rule forbids. Assuming that is the case, why should you be allowed to go in a thread and tell people things they don’t want to know about a show, i.e., spoil them? Why should the mods permit you to be a jerk like that and stir up a bunch of crap? Come on, we all know that wanting something to just be a courtesy means you want to be able to violate that courtesy. Why would the mods want to do that, when that’s what caused the problems last year? I feel sorry for **SenorBeef** , too, but only because he’s having to put up with such a stupid argument. You even know it’s stupid, or you wouldn’t be trying to trick him or, worse, insult him into doing what you want. You guys know this won’t work: you’re just badgering him because you didn’t get your way. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2012, 12:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/93 "2012-04-08T12:58:24Z")
Honestly I don’t care what the rules are, as I won’t be participating in the thread. The reason I won’t be participating I can’t say in this forum. He’s acting at junior moderator, applying the rules arbitrarily, and responds with derision and insults when it’s pointed out to him. And apparently assumes that any criticism is based on personal animosity. I didn’t have personal animosity toward him before, but I’ve gained it in these exchanges, because he’s earned it. ---
**Author:** ![quixotic78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/3ab097/32.png) [@quixotic78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/quixotic78)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2012, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/94 "2012-04-08T14:12:51Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Let’s boil this down: what is your end goal here? Why do you want the rules rescinded? What an original question! I wish all those objecting to **SenorBeef** had even attempted to answer this question! _clears throat_ > [@DigitalC](#): > > It’s not trolling, you just refuse to understand what a pain in the ass participating in those threads was with the constant unjustified spoiler accusations… I doubt anyone has a problem with the actual rules, but they were a big warning sign that the paranoia that ruled the threads last year was going to make a comeback. > [@Suburban\_Plankton](#): > > I think the cause of most of the problems this time around is the fact that there are three stickied threads for a show that hasn’t even started airing yet… But still, the fact that every visit to the forum means “GAME OF THRONES” hits you smack in the face does tend to beg the question “What’s so special about \*this \*show and \*it’s \*fans? Why can’t I have **three** sticky threads for my favorite TV show/book/movie/etc.? How come these people are so much more deserving than _me_?” > [@Tengu](#): > > By the standards that brought us the multiple threads, no. I got accused of ‘spoilers’ for mentioning Osha’s name last season. Rather put me off the discussion threads, since the choice was ‘risk real spoilers by going into the spoiler thread’ or ‘get told off for non-spoilers’. > [@Snickers](#): > > So people still don’t know that this character has a name. A freaking name. But I’m certain that if someone does reveal her name, heads will roll in that thread. It’s beyond ridiculous. > [@Mtgman](#): > > Add in the appointment of a special mod post to screen what is and what isn’t spoilers and it leads to a reasonable conclusion that the apparatus of the board’s authority structure is in force… I have a problem with the whole situation. There were no “spoiler/speculation free” threads for the Harry Potter film series. There were no such threads for the Lord of the Rings films. In no prior case I’m aware of was a subset of the community who didn’t wish to be spoiled allowed to limit the speech the rest of the community. The onus has always been on people who want to limit the information they’re exposed to, not on the people creating information. Is it fair and honest to shift that burden? What of the site’s interests of fostering an open community of posters is advanced by doing so? It hasn’t been done before, and I’m unclear on why it’s being done now. It’s very artificial and jarring in a forum which otherwise values relatively unimpeded communication. > [@DrDeth](#): > > You see, this is exactly why what _YOU_ consider spoilers is not what should be enforced. Or for what matter what I think are spoilers… No, what I want is for your thread to be just exactly like any other Café Society thread where the OP has requested “No spoilers please”. No more and no less. Never has a Mod come in and put his Mod seal of approval on having a special thread… This is not “Senor Beef gets his own private thread with his own private rules” message board. This is the fucking Straight Dope Message Board, dedicated to the fight against ignorance, not keeping people in the dark. Her name is Melisandre. Keeping that out of the thread is perpetuating ignorance, not helping people enjoy things… Like I said, you have every right to request no spoilers. And is posters get too obnoxious, the Mods can & should step in. But your precious little thread should not get special rules. > [@quixotic78](#): > > It has been asked what my preferred system would be. I’d chime in with **DrDeth** and **Mtgman** and probably dozens of others: one thread – let’s say one thread per episode, as is customary for popular shows – with spoilers behind boxes. Allow the intelligent people on this board to use their best judgment to determine what is or is not a spoiler. If it seems someone is deliberately posting spoilers, either without hiding (or even posting unrelated, monumental spoilers behind spoiler boxes), mod action is appropriate (warning, banning, post editing, etc.). So yeah, like every other show on here ever. I mean, between your post and **SenorBeef** ’s post where he couldn’t be bothered to click more than two links (but nevertheless felt more than comfortable condemning the entire lot with really over-the-top rhetoric), I think this thread should be renamed “Reading iz hard.” ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2012, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/95 "2012-04-08T17:35:41Z")
Wow, what a incredible summation! I bow in your direction, sir!🆒 ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2012, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/96 "2012-04-08T18:00:41Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Honestly I don’t care what the rules are, as I won’t be participating in the thread. > > The reason I won’t be participating I can’t say in this forum. He’s acting at junior moderator, applying the rules arbitrarily, and responds with derision and insults when it’s pointed out to him. And apparently assumes that any criticism is based on personal animosity. > > I didn’t have personal animosity toward him before, but I’ve gained it in these exchanges, because he’s earned it. I’m not applying rules arbitrarily. You guys are just being incredibly childish. Saying “someone posted that the ratings were good! that’s an outside source! spoiler! Someone posted that they hoped the budget increased! Outside source! Spoiler!” knowing full well that those things aren’t spoilers. You are creating ridiculous straw men, and then calling me a hypocrite for not freaking out over them. You are essentially demanding that we write a 400 page rule sheet for the thread and have it triple checked by lawyers just so you can’t come up with some ridiculous exception that could potentially run afoul of the rules. Everyone in their right fucking minds, including yourselves, know that someone saying “I hope the budget next year is bigger” is not a spoiler and could not reasonably interpreted as a spoiler, and yet you throw it out there as proof of my hypocrisy? And why? Because you are genuinely concerned that the people reading the thread will be spoiled by encountering such information as someone hoping for a bigger budget? Of course not. Because it violates the rules of the thread? Not really - you’d have to have an overly literal, legalistic interpretation of the vagueness of the thread, basically intentionally nitpicking we didn’t write a long legal contract. You know full well that such sentiments wouldn’t run afoul of the rules. So why then, are you pointing out this stuff? Because you’re pissed that we have a place to have a discussion, you want to enforce your will on us to make sure we don’t, and you’re going to use whatever childish tactics you can think of to point out our flaws. This is why I’m treating you like this. You’re being disingenuous brats because you’re having a tantrum over the fact that we have somewhere to discuss the show. I haven’t treated everyone who opposes me that way - as I said, I’ve not said **Mtgman** is being childish or engaging in personal hostility. I think he’s wrong, but he’s approached this subject honestly and like an adult, so I can respect that. Whereas most of the others are throwing out the most ridiculous arguments, stuff they can’t possibly believe are valid, just to try to attack us. The irony is that this proves exactly why this stuff was necesarily all along - last year the people who engaged in this behavior did so in the actual episode discussion threads, at least this year we’ve cordoned it off to ATMB. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2012, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/97 "2012-04-08T18:05:42Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > I. > > You are essentially demanding that we write a 400 page rule sheet for the thread and have it triple checked by lawyers just so you can’t come up with some ridiculous exception that could potentially run afoul of the rules. . Nope. Here are the rules: \*"Now, on the other hand, suppose you’re on the other side. You want to discuss or ask a question about a story, and you are unable to do so without revealing a vital piece of information that might ruin a surprise for those who haven’t yet experienced it, please use a spoiler warning or spoiler tags. When do you need to warn of spoilers? Obviously, if the material is new, some people will want to experience it for themselves without knowing the plot. A TV show you see on the U.S. east coast will not be seen for several hours later on the west coast. And perhaps not for weeks or months in a different country. Also, many people record shows to watch later, so just because the show have been aired doesn’t mean everyone has seen it. Although a work may have been well known for quite a while, some folks may still be unaware of particular plot points. Agatha Christie has been dead a long time, but there are still new students and others coming to her mysteries for the first time, who don’t want to know that the butler did it. On the other hand, anyone who doesn’t know that Dorothy could have gone home anytime by clicking her heels, well, the hell with ‘em. It should be evident from these examples that we can’t give hard-and-fast rules about when to use spoilers. Instead, we have guidelines that involve common sense and courtesy: if you’re revealing a major plot element that could ruin the first-timer’s experience, then please DON’T. If it’s a brand new work, be careful about revealing minor plot elements, as well. Also, please don’t put a spoiler in a thread title. “This week’s episode: Raymond dies!” is NOT a nice thing to do. " \* [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=562482](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=562482) Add in the meta-rule of “Don’t be a jerk” and those are the rules that the SDMB has operated under for years. What we **don’t** need is special rules for your precious _oh-so-special_ little thread. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2012, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/98 "2012-04-08T18:17:04Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > I’m not applying rules arbitrarily. You guys are just being incredibly childish. Saying “someone posted that the ratings were good! that’s an outside source! spoiler! Someone posted that they hoped the budget increased! Outside source! Spoiler!” knowing full well that those things aren’t spoilers. You are creating ridiculous straw men, and then calling me a hypocrite for not freaking out over them. > > You are essentially demanding that we write a 400 page rule sheet for the thread and have it triple checked by lawyers just so you can’t come up with some ridiculous exception that could potentially run afoul of the rules. Everyone in their right fucking minds, including yourselves, know that someone saying “I hope the budget next year is bigger” is not a spoiler and could not reasonably interpreted as a spoiler, and yet you throw it out there as proof of my hypocrisy? > > And why? Because you are genuinely concerned that the people reading the thread will be spoiled by encountering such information as someone hoping for a bigger budget? Of course not. Because it violates the rules of the thread? Not really - you’d have to have an overly literal, legalistic interpretation of the vagueness of the thread, basically intentionally nitpicking we didn’t write a long legal contract. You know full well that such sentiments wouldn’t run afoul of the rules. So why then, are you pointing out this stuff? Because you’re pissed that we have a place to have a discussion, you want to enforce your will on us to make sure we don’t, and you’re going to use whatever childish tactics you can think of to point out our flaws. > > This is why I’m treating you like this. You’re being disingenuous brats because you’re having a tantrum over the fact that we have somewhere to discuss the show. I haven’t treated everyone who opposes me that way - as I said, I’ve not said **Mtgman** is being childish or engaging in personal hostility. I think he’s wrong, but he’s approached this subject honestly and like an adult, so I can respect that. Whereas most of the others are throwing out the most ridiculous arguments, stuff they can’t possibly believe are valid, just to try to attack us. > > The irony is that this proves exactly why this stuff was necesarily all along - last year the people who engaged in this behavior did so in the actual episode discussion threads, at least this year we’ve cordoned it off to ATMB. In don’t know who made up the rules or where the came from, BUT THEY’RE THERE. And they’re very specific, and there there is no real wiggle room. Personally, I think they were rather stupid, but I can live with them. But when I point out that you on your self-appointed role of moderator, are not addressing posts that violate the rules, you perceive that as an attack on the rules and on yourself personally. Which you are doing here as well. And we are the babies? Me thinks thou wahwahwah too much. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2012, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/99 "2012-04-08T18:24:09Z")
Oh, and I forgot to mention, in the thread you NEVER responded to my comments about the two posts being spoilers. You immediately told me to “shut up” and accused every critic, as a group, of threadshitting. Even in this thread, when I admitted I misinterpreted one of the posts I mentioned, you just continued on with your attacks against anyone and everyone who had problems with the rules or your interpretation. You seem to have a real need to make this personal, which I don’t understand at all. This place is supposed to be fun. Lighten up, Francis! ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2012, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448/100 "2012-04-08T18:42:52Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > What we **don’t** need is special rules for your precious _oh-so-special_ little thread. We apparently do, because look at yourselves. What you’re doing here is what you did in the episode threads last year. You guys ruined the discussion, and because you’re not allowed to ruin the discussion this year, you are raging pretty hard about it. The irony is that you guys keep proving over and over again that we were right to get a handle on you right off the bat. The irony of your post is that you quoted one segment of mod rules to support your case, and then refuse to acknowledge the legitimacy of another set of mod rules, arbitrarily based on what you want to apply. In any case, “don’t be a jerk” was violated flagrantly and constantly in the episode threads last year, and in this discussion - which, without harder rules, would be in the episode thread right now rather than an ATMB thread. Your way doesn’t work and the ultimate irony of it all is that it doesn’t work exactly because you have this attitude. > [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Oh, and I forgot to mention, in the thread you NEVER responded to my comments about the two posts being spoilers. You immediately told me to “shut up” and accused every critic, as a group, of threadshitting. I did respond to your comments. Extensively. A post saying “I hope the budget is bigger next year” is not a spoiler, nor could anyone ever reasonably interpret it as one. Therefore, your interpretation of it as one is deliberately unreasonable. > [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Personally, I think they were rather stupid, but I can live with them. But when I point out that you on your self-appointed role of moderator, are not addressing posts that violate the rules, you perceive that as an attack on the rules and on yourself personally. > > Which you are doing here as well. > > And we are the babies? Me thinks thou wahwahwah too much. I’m not a moderator. I did not self appoint as a moderator. I just started the thread laying out the solution we used last year. The mod assigned to the threads because he was familiar with the material agreed with the basic gist of what I was going for, and added his own set of rules. The only thing I’ve done since then was insist that discussion about the rules go into this thread, so we don’t ruin the episode threads, and I’d imagine everyone reading the episode thread is grateful for that. How in the world am I "wahwahwah"ing too much? The only thing I’m doing is fighting back against you guys. If you guys fell off the face of the earth and never posted to any of these threads again (and by you guys, I mean the people specifically throwing a huge tantrum about it, trying to throw up whatever ridiculous argument they can, not everyone who objects to the policy), that’d be great. I’d be content to have the threads work as intended, as they worked at the end of last year, and never have to raise the issue again. You guys are the ones constantly fighting and crying that a place where we can have a spoiler-free discussion exists, and you will not be happy until it’s crushed. I’m not the one making up absurd arguments. I also don’t interpret all criticism as an attack on me purposely. How many times do I have to point out that **Mtgman** , by my view, is totally wrong, and yet has not acting like a spoiled 5 year old? Additionally, I don’t think the attacks are on me personally, so much as the group of people who’d like to read spoiler free threads, which includes me, but isn’t limited to me. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/discussion-of-rules-in-game-of-thrones-threads/617448.md?page=6)