Is the meaning of that phrase unclear? I guess I thought it was understood that it meant open spoilers for the ep named in the thread title. If not, if Fever really did not know what it meant, then I apologize for calling her a troll. A fucking idiot for not knowing what common terminology means around here, but OK. Now I feel like a fucking idiot too because I thought that was accepted, understood terminology around here. I’ll be much more clear if I ever start a thread about a TV show again.
Making a mistake and owning up to it doesn’t mean you are guaranteed a Mod warning-and repeatedly posting Pit worthy material outside of The BBQ Pit, after being here long enough to have over 9000 posts, doesn’t excuse you from getting one, either. I guess reading and following the rules is just for the newbies, right?
I thought you were okay with that?
If you’re going to allow one ill fated sentence to reduce your enjoyment of the show to “almost zero,” I gotta say…that’s more on you than it is on Fever. Who, I gotta say, female or no, showed tremendous cojones by showing up and risking another flaming to apologize yet again. And you didn’t just symathize; you ranted.
Or, y’know, clasp it to their bosom like a long-lost child and foster it for the rest of the rest of their lives. One or the other.
No, the meaning of “open spoilers” is very clear, it’s just not the meaning you want.
If you’re interested in a more nuanced set of rules, then look at this OP.
So now we have special ‘topic specific’ spoiler rules? No, we have board rules on spoilers. If you want special rules for a thread, (like a game thread) then those rules are posted in the OP.
I’m not suprised at how mad some people are over this but Trunk was told to take it to the Pit and he repeated ignored the instruction that he damn well knew was the board rule. Trunk was being a jerk. If Trunk came here and pitted the newbie and said all kinds of mean nasty stuff, that would be fine.
I didn’t ask why Trunk got a warning. I understand why he did. I wouldn’t have done it, though I felt the same anger. I didn’t understand why Fever didn’t… but I guess it was my fault. I thought I knew what OPEN SPOILERS meant. Spoilers for the currently discussed show, not YouTube clips with footage from the end of the show. Is this really that much of a gray area?
I don’t even know what Season Spoiler is supposed to mean. I do want the board rules to be followed. I don’t think they were. This was a clip from an ep not yet aired. That’s not even legal to post, is it?
I will use the Lost OP disclaimers from now on. I apologize to the posters in The Wire thread if my ambiguous use of OPEN SPOILERS was the reason for the ending of the show getting ruined.
I personally would interpret the name of a specific show and episode joined together with “open spoilers” as allowing spoilers for that episode of that show, not the show as a whole. If it was just the show name and “open spoilers” then that would be different. However, that’s my personal interpretation, and I wouldn’t expect everyone else to know or understand that. That’s generally the reason for boilerplate OPs in threads on shows like Lost or BSG, to make sure everyone posting in the thread (because there may always be new people who want to participate) is very clear on what is or isn’t allowed.
Having said that, I get why Trunk is pissed. And I think he had a right to be. And to ask for the post in question to be deleted rather than just spoilered. But… he didn’t have a right to do that in CS. Open a Pit thread (as he eventually did, obviously) calling the new poster an asshole? Fine. Doing it in CS? Not cool and completely deserving of the warning.
I believe you’re sincere in your apology and, since you’re obviously into The Wire, would like to invite you back to participate in that thread (and future ones), keeping in mind, discussing anything beyond what’s in an episode generally available Sunday nights, 9:00pm, EST, 8:00 Central, is pretty much frowned upon. 
And only half of that’s deserved.
Seriously, why don’t you calm down for a second and look at what you’re writing. I’ve been here for more than eight YEARS longer than fever, and if I saw “open spoilers” in a thread title, I would expect it to contain, guess what, open spoilers! I certainly wouldn’t know it only meant open spoilers for that episode specifically (maybe if it said “episode spoilers”).
If there’s some special convention that fans of your show are using and I or someone else who hasn’t followed your threads is unaware of it (i.e. it’s not a board-wide standard, and few things around here are), I’d certainly expect someone who signed up, literally, today to be unaware of it as well. And calling them a “fucking idiot” for that is pretty, well, fucking idiotic.
You’re right – there’s really nothing else you can do but what you’ve already done. I can’t imagine you’ll make the same error again, so move on, stick around and enjoy the boards. I wish for everyone’s sake that your introduction here hadn’t been so controversial.
Honestly, would you expect it to contain footage from unaired eps? I wouldn’t. I didn’t think we were allowed to post that. It was a descriptor before a link to YouTube. I don’t think anyone would think that was OK to post here.
It’s not a special convention of fans of The Wire. It seems to be a convention of the boards. Also, I’ve already apologized for the ambiguity AND for calling Fever a troll. I think I’ve taken my share of the responsibility for what happened.
Fever didn’t get a warning because she made an honest mistake. I see no evidence that she came in to deliberately spoil anyone’s fun, but I did see her apologize for it a few posts later. Her actions, while lamentable to those who read her post before it was put behind spoiler tags (and you, of course, who inadvertently read it in a notification e-mail), were not mean-spirited.
After this question, I will let the whole thing go… is it legal/allowed to post YouTube clips of TV shows that haven’t been aired yet? It’s obviously bootleg footage. Would a member get a warning for that?
Way to “let the whole thing go”, Rubystreak. :rolleyes:
I think it’s a legitimate question. Can you please answer it? It’s a question about board rules, and also, I want to understand how far the term “open spoilers” goes so I know for future reference. How bad was my fuck-up here in using that term? Thanks so much.
Most of YouTube seems to be filled with illegally-shared copyrighted content, and to the best of my knowledge no one has been warned for linking to any those videos. I’m not currently aware of any prohibition against direct links to any YouTube video with the exception of the NSFW videos (and even then links can be posted with the “two-click” rule followed).
No dog in this fight (I just opened the thread to see what the hell it was doing with Trunk as the OP), but I agree that this is a legitimate question. I’m guessing that the answer is, it’s certainly allowed; I see nothing in the rules against it, and the only penumbra issue I can imagine is the board’s general frown on copyright violation, but I think I remember hearing somewhere that the board had no interesting in policing violation on third-party sites. If memory serves me, then, the board has no firm objections to linking to copyright violations, even if it doesn’t make the perfect master all giggly inside.
Daniel
Thank you for the straight answer. Consider the whole thing now let go from at least my end of things.
How are the mods and admins supposed to differentiate between clips that are stolen from the producer (since it is unreleased, I cannot think of another way it could get on YouTube), and legitamate promotional clips that are frequenbtly released by the producers to generate buzz about a show?
I don’t think there is anyway to tell, short of contacting the producer.
Actually, that’s an interesting legal question, too. My first guess is that the clip would be covered under fair use, assuming it was short enough. I’m not sure what law would have been broken, otherwise, assuming the person who posted the footage didn’t break into the studio and steal it out of a safe, or something.