# Rules about Spoiler Threads **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [May 22, 2011, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rules-about-spoiler-threads/582757 "2011-05-22T04:48:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 18
**Author:** ![voltaire](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voltaire/32/313_2.png) [@voltaire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/voltaire)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2011, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rules-about-spoiler-threads/582757/18 "2011-05-24T05:21:40Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > I hear what you’re saying, but there’s two objections I have: > > 1. Less importantly, there are going to be people like me who, excite by the show, have just reread the books, I find it hard to remember which things were in the episode and which were in the books. If someone makes a mistake, it’s not the end of the world. > 2. More importantly, cutting people some slack leads to a better world. Zero-tolerance never ever leads to good results, even though in theory it maybe ought to. Rather than have a “bright line,” rather than argue that the lack of a bright line leads to a slippery slope, I suggest people always, no matter what the rules say, use good judgment. If someone slips up in a minor way, everyone will be happier if folks let it go. I think the “pretend the books don’t exist” edict is the way to go, otherwise I believe it _is_ a slippery slope. Now I’m going to point out the latest example, not because I’m upset by it, but just to use as a case-in-point: > [@Game of Thrones, A Golden Crown, 5/22/11](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/game-of-thrones-a-golden-crown-5-22-11/582824/96): > > Oh, hey…cool…just noticed this reference…wasn’t paying enough attention to the Wildling scene, as I was getting food, but…Tena actually looks very much like how I pictured Osha when reading the book. Prettier, yeah, but ‘like Natalia Tena, but rather more hard ridden’ is a good description of how I imagined her. Awesome that they cast her. Yes, it’s very minor and nothing to really get riled up about, but it’s a good example of how easy it is to unintentionally let spoilers slip when not following the “pretend the books don’t exist” rule. In this case, a comparison of how **Tengu** pictured a character from the book to how they appeared in the show led to us prematurely knowing the name and the apparent continuity of this new character. This time, no harm, no foul. But I think the spoilers will be constant if people don’t pretend the books don’t exist. Usually, they’ll probably be minor like this one, but if it continues unabated, the occasional whopper is bound to slip out periodically. In my opinion, even though there is an ongoing “open spoiler” thread for the book readers, I think there should be **two** threads for each episode. The strict PTBDE thread where there should be no spoilers and no references to the book at all, and another thread for the book readers, where they can post whatever they want and refer to the books as often as they like. For obvious reasons, I haven’t read the ongoing “open spoiler” thread, so I don’t know how things are in there. But it just seems to me that the book readers (and indirectly, the non-book readers) might benefit from having an episodic spoiler thread. The ongoing spoiler thread could go on without being constrained to talking about specific episodes, and then with an episodic spoiler thread, there will be a better outlet for the sort of comments inappropriate for the “no books” thread. --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rules-about-spoiler-threads/582757)._