Its that time of the year again, when the Maesters face the Unsullied in the GoT spoiler wars.
Now, considering next weeks episode I am tempted to do what I often have been tempted to do so in the past and have a thread with a spoiler in the title. So last year I wanted to put up a thread with a title called “How will they portray Robb’s death”, but discretion prevailed.
Which raises the question, how do we deal with spoilers threads and their titles. For new shows, movies, and books. For GoT type shows, is there a different policy than during the airing weeks and another in the off season?
Even if we leave out of consideration that the movie came out 11 years ago and the book almost 60, that isn’t very specific about the nature of Frodo’s failure (nor that fact that the quest itself didn’t fail). I’d hardly count that as a spoiler, any more than “Is Toto still doomed at the end of the Wizard of Oz?”
You could just as easily title such a thread “How will they portray this? (GoT spoilers)”. That lets people know who the intended audience of the thread is far better than a reference to “Robb” (there are probably many characters named that, in various works), and also avoids the spoiler problem.
Basic common sense should prevail. Which means it never will, of course. But after a year or so, you should assume that you can state things without spoiling them. Anybody who bitches about spoilers on something that old should be banned.
Am I off track here? Does “basic common sense” telly you that everyone has read every book and seen every movie that came out more than a year ago?
My common sense suggests that spoiling anything because you assume people already know (or should know) is pretty jerkish behaviour. There may be less than five exceptions out there, but even those are pretty context-dependent and somewhat questionable.
Anybody who expects the Universe to keep them pristine and unspoiled for everything for all time is ipso facto a jerk. People who feel otherwise should retreat to a cave somewhere, lest they be spoiled about something.
This doesn’t mean broadcasting endings willy-nilly, but people shouldn’t have to tread on eggshells lest someone not have seen Gone With the Wind yet.
People here thought Anne Hathaway was completely and totally in the wrong to talk in an interview about Fantine’s death in Les Mis so I don’t know what to believe any more.
I’m not going to give an official policy on this, especially since I’m not a Cafe Society mod. However, in my opinion one should err on the side of caution and courtesy to other posters. It depends in part on how famous or popular the film or source is too, I think. Spoiling the end of a new film version of Moby Dick, for example, shouldn’t be necessary.
Just based on personal opinion, I would say 5-10 years might be a good standard. A standard of one year is much too short. I’m in Panama, and I don’t see much on its first run. It may be quite a while until I can rent a copy of even a popular film.
My opinion on the Frodo thread is based in part on the fact that the “spoiler” is not very specific, and in part that the source novel is very well known and essentially a classic.
silenus, this kind of language referring to people who may have different opinions about this matter than yourself is inappropriate for ATMB. If you want to rant about the issue, take it to the Pit. No warning issued, but let’s try to have a civil discussion on this without characterizing others as jerks or ban-worthy.
From C K Dexter Haven’s Forum Rules for Café Society:
"Spoilers
This applies to books, movies, plays, TV shows… anything with a plot. “Spoiling” is when you haven’t seen a particular movie (read a book, whatever),
and you don’t want to have plot elements revealed in advance, and someone tells you that the boss is actually the double-agent. That’s “spoiled” the story/surprise for you. […]"
[bolding added]
Can the “in advance” I have bolded be altered to read something like “in advance of your having watched the show, read the book, etc.”?
It appears to me that this is what C K Dexter Haven intended. It would also seem that in a common-sense world, this meaning would be apparent to all.
However, people are using it to mean “in advance of where the show currently is”. This subverts the intent of the rule, IMO. Thank you.
The novel A Game of Thrones was published more than 20 years ago.
Intentionally spoiling something is jerkish behavior, but the panic and fear that some posters feel about possibly learning decades old plot points before they show up in the TV adaptation is absurdly overboard.
You’ve read everything that was written before 1994? If not, how the does the age of something come into play? If someone is 18 reading/watching for the first time, then what?
I guess in every circle of friends there’s the guy who likes to jump in with the punch line to a joke before whoever is telling it is finished (hey, that old joke?). I don’t understand those people.
