Not only did we discuss her, we put an animated icon of her with her bloody fist on the board.
Oh, yeah!
(Now I know what icon I want to see....)
You guys had a riot? On account of me? A real riot?
Jayne ,'Jaynestown'
Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!
We open it up, we talks the talk, we votes, we shuts it down. This thread is to free up Bureaucracy for daily details as we hammer out the Big Issues towards a vote. Open only when a proposal has been made and seconded according to Buffista policy (Which we voted on!). If this thread is closed, hie thee to Bureaucracy instead!
Steph L. - Jul 24, 2003 11:55:15 am PDT #1656 of 10289
I look more rad than Lutheranism
§ ita § - Jul 24, 2003 11:57:13 am PDT #1657 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
we put an animated icon of her with her bloody fist on the board
As the person who created the icon, I can safely say it had nothing to do with her regular status-to-be, so I'm not sure that's relelvant.
Didn't Tim come by and tell us, anyway?
Java cat - Jul 24, 2003 12:03:24 pm PDT #1658 of 10289
Not javachik
Just weighing in on the side of, if it's been aired somewhere in promos, it's no longer a spoiler.
§ ita § - Jul 24, 2003 12:16:47 pm PDT #1659 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
if it's been aired somewhere in promos, it's no longer a spoiler.
Which is the standard position. The suggestion is that regular cast changes which have been promoted by the network or creative team are also no longer a spoiler.
Vortex - Jul 24, 2003 12:29:10 pm PDT #1660 of 10289
"Cry havoc and let slip the boobs of war!" -- Miracleman
Thanks for those who were kind enough to see my point, and then DISAGREE WITH ME!!! :)
Someone said that they felt like this proposal was about BCS, and I can see their point (ha!) I think that we should grant a one time exception to BCS (because _everybody_ knows about it), and keep the rest of the casting spoilers to Spoilage Lite.
The problem, as I see it, would be that we would talk about BCS, someone would inevitably say "how do you think that it will happen", and someone may inadvertently throw a spoiler in there, thinking that now that the BCS is out of the bag, it's open season. But, I am willing to trust in the integrity of the Buffistas.
Laura - Jul 24, 2003 12:34:46 pm PDT #1661 of 10289
Our wings are not tired.
Jumping to the end because I am not really here. I'm really working.
If the network and/or creative team tell me something I do not consider it spoils. Also, it adds to my discussion pleasure to include speculation in the show threads on how casting changes might be handled.
Outta here again.
Jessica - Jul 24, 2003 12:35:09 pm PDT #1662 of 10289
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
We all know what's driving this particular proposal, and I think we should greenlight this spoiler without restructuring the spoiler policy.
Except, it's not just the one thing. It's things like news about BtVS actors' other gigs being considered "anti-spoilers" because being on another show would limit their availability for guest spots / recurring roles. Off the top of my head, I can think of (more than one, but under our current phobic rules, even saying a number here might be considered spoilery) casting changes for next season that would be de-spoilerified by the current proposal.
To be honest, the Big One is the least of my worries.
Wolfram - Jul 24, 2003 12:37:22 pm PDT #1663 of 10289
Visilurking
The problem, as I see it, would be that we would talk about BCS, someone would inevitably say "how do you think that it will happen", and someone may inadvertently throw a spoiler in there, thinking that now that the BCS is out of the bag, it's open season. But, I am willing to trust in the integrity of the Buffistas.
The speculation versus possible spoiler is always out there, but spoilage hos have been pretty good about not speculating with information they already have.
§ ita § - Jul 24, 2003 12:40:52 pm PDT #1664 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
But Vortex, we disagree with you because you're wrong ...
Facetiousness aside, the spoiled already watch what they say (with human error, of course). I don't think we'd be opening a bigger avenue.
That X will/will not be in the cast is allowed, facts about how are verboten. Seems viable to me.
Katie M - Jul 24, 2003 1:25:53 pm PDT #1665 of 10289
I was charmed (albeit somewhat perplexed) by the fannish sensibility of many of the music choices -- it's like the director was trying to vid Canada. --loligo on the Olympic Opening Ceremonies
I'll either vote for or neutral on this proposal, because it's obviously driving people nuts and I don't like to see people driven nuts. Plus I've given up on avoiding press spoilers, though I still don't read interviews so as to avoid the spoilers there.
That said, I'd like to defend against the point Cindy made here:
When that happens, the actor is not going to be playing a character on the show, and so it is not spoiling the show in any way.
If Alexis Denisof were not returning to Angel next year, that would have a major plot impact on the show. That's a spoiler that "something is going to happen to Wesley." Everyone now knows a big fact about the show - it won't include Wesley. (Or they're recasting Wesley, and there's going to be a fannish riot.) "It's not worth the cost to the board as a whole to try to conceal it" is fine, actually I agree, but I don't think it's silly to think of that as a spoiler.