Also re NAFDA, who is getting (or expects to get) Wonderfalls, and where?
Oh! I know this one! 'Slaying entails certain sacrifices, blah blah blahbity blah, I'm so stuffy, gimme a scone.'
Buffy ,'Help'
Bureaucracy 3: Oh, so now you want to be part of the SOLUTION?
A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.
Current Stompy Feet: ita, Jon B, DXMachina, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych
Topic!Cindy - Jul 10, 2004 7:35:07 am PDT #1660 of 10001
What is even happening?
Stephanie - Jul 10, 2004 7:56:11 am PDT #1661 of 10001
Trust my rage
As to WF - when I was in Brazil they were starting it July 8 with one per week. I'm pretty unfamiliar with what countries we consider (all of them?), but in Brazil last week, for Angel, they were just getting to Fred's death.
DCJensen - Jul 10, 2004 11:31:29 am PDT #1662 of 10001
All is well that ends in pizza.
Do we want to NAFDA Box Set due to Stargate?
Otherwise, NAFDA will again come to the Firefly thread, next spring, I guess. And Maybe Angel if the four movies get a go. And Buffy, maybe, if we get the animated series....
Maybe not retire so much as redeployment at a later date...
Sad, really.
Sean K - Jul 10, 2004 11:36:40 am PDT #1663 of 10001
You can't leave me to my own devices; my devices are Nap and Eat. -Zenkitty
Oof.
§ ita § - Jul 10, 2004 1:51:20 pm PDT #1664 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
We're debating the definition of "Serenity spoiler" in the Firefly thread.
The current bullshit consensus is that casting info that doesn't mention anyone who appeared on the TV show (outside of the regulars) isn't actually a spoiler. As long as roles aren't being mentioned.
Sound kosher?
Lee - Jul 10, 2004 1:56:01 pm PDT #1665 of 10001
The feeling you get when your brain finally lets your heart get in its pants.
Sounds kosher to me.
JenP - Jul 10, 2004 2:18:38 pm PDT #1666 of 10001
Woah. Spoiler policyish discussion, and I think I actually understood it. Huh. I must be growing ... accustomed.
And, yes, it sounds kosher to me, is my actual point.
§ ita § - Jul 10, 2004 2:28:19 pm PDT #1667 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Saturday's the deadest day of the week, so even though we're all COMPLETELY RIGHT, it might be best (for appearance's sake) to wait a couple days before going wild and crazy and changing thread descriptions.
Or anything.
tommyrot - Jul 10, 2004 2:43:17 pm PDT #1668 of 10001
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.
It's nice when the power-mad still maintain the appearance of propriety.
Topic!Cindy - Jul 10, 2004 3:05:35 pm PDT #1669 of 10001
What is even happening?
The current bullshit consensus is that casting info that doesn't mention anyone who appeared on the TV show (outside of the regulars) isn't actually a spoiler. As long as roles aren't being mentioned.
I need an example of what this can entail. Is it a casting spoiler if someone who did not appear, is going to be in the film? Like say Cameron Diaz got a role in the film--is that a casting spoiler? Is it okay to say she's going to be in it, but (I figure) not okay to say who she'll be playing (because that would require 'splaining, and 'splaining gives away plot)?
Also, this means the regulars aren't casting spoilers, right? Are the regular characters defined as: Zoe, Wash, Cap'n Tightpants, Jayne, River, Simon, Inara, Book, and Kaylee? What about recurring characters?
(For the record, I'm not going to argue any casting spoilers. I just don't want to break the b.s. consensus, by accident.)