Cindy speaks for me, too.

If AD leaves Angel after episode 5, I'll watch 5 episodes braced for it, and react to however it happens by going "Oh, so that's how they did it." And then have emotions about the plot.

As opposed to going "FUCK. Wow."

I mean, if I'd known GQ was leaving Angel, I'd have seen his death coming way earlier in the ep, instead of being startled and saddened and in denial.

Which is how I like it.

However, if Joss or the WB wants to scream from the rooftops that AD is leaving, so be it. I'll probably hear. But I completely understand not wanting -- I'm caving to the inevitability, not the lack of impact.

If AD leaves Angel after episode 5, I'll watch 5 episodes braced for it, and react to however it happens by going "Oh, so that's how they did it." And then have emotions about the plot.

This change to the rules wouldn't allow you to be spoiled for that. This change to the rules is only stuff that happens over the summer. We can be more specific if you're concerned that sort of thing would happen.

But that's not even the issue. We're saying that when, between seasons, someone joins or leaves the cast of series regulars, that information is widely available, and fairly hard to avoid (albeit not impossible), for a very long time. In the end, it's information that is made available by the writers, by the network and by the actors themselves, before the episodes ever air. It is information that is invariably spilled in beginning of season promos. According to current policy, we will be allowing it before anyone actually sees an episode, so why the pretense?

To be completely honest, I guess I'm just feeling like y'all think I'm a moron for thinking that this *is* a spoiler, by my definition of spoiler, whether or not I think it's worth trying to hide. I don't personally find it difficult or painful or irritating not to discuss The Big Spoiler in the main topic, but I'm fine with yielding to the majority's comfort level on that.

I don't think it's worth trying to hide here, because that hasn't been the tradition here - as you pointed out, the Giles spoiler was discussed over the summer. I personally prefer a very hard-core spoiler policy just because I find it much easier to manage - black and white, you know? Also it's what I expect, having first been introduced to the concept of spoilerfreeness by a hardline policy at MBTV.

But, if AD is not a regular cast member next year, I brace myself for exactly the same thing. Worse yet if he appears in the opening ep -- then it's all "dies? takes a wrong turn? runs off with Sahjahn? WHAT??!?!?"

Now, I'll probably vote yes to the proposal. But the idea that knowing ahead of time doesn't significantly alter how I'll watch up to the point where it's revealed onscreen that he won't -- false in my case.

It *is* a spoiler. Is it an avoidable one? Probably not.

Yeah, ita's explaining it better than I did, I think. (Er, and adding on to the end of my last post - that's my personal preference but I wouldn't try to implement it here because it wouldn't fit the culture. Didn't finish that sentence like I meant to.)

To be completely honest, I guess I'm just feeling like y'all think I'm a moron for thinking that this *is* a spoiler, by my definition of spoiler, whether or not I think it's worth trying to hide.

I don't want you to feel like a moron, Katie. My utter lack of being able to think of casting news as a spoiler is probably just as alien to you as your desire to remain casting news free is to me.

As frustrating as it is to me to not be able to discuss something that's actually old news in my office, it must be terribly frustrating for you to have people virtually glare at you for keeping us from talking about it.

Not that I think any of us have glared or been terribly mean about it, but you get what I'm trying to say...

I think. Not that I'm sure I'm really saying anything with this post.

I'm sorry, I'll go now.

Katie - I do see some casting news as spoilers. With regard to the elephant in the living room one, I see it as inevitable - but still a spoiler. I don't think we're that far off there. I don't think, if an actor decides to leave the series or is let go or whatever in the off season, that it should be treated a spoiler to the level where when someone mentions the actor has another project, we need to delete or white out his posts.

The elephant in the living room one? I get it's a spoiler. That Mary Tyler Moore isn't on the series? Not so much. I don't think you're a moron. I don't think that we can't discuss former ME actors and their careers, although we can discuss former ME writers and their careers makes any sense at all.

Now if one of those actors were to come to/come back to Angel for a guest spot, we couldn't discuss that, so you wouldn't be spoiled.

But, if AD is not a regular cast member next year, I brace myself for exactly the same thing. Worse yet if he appears in the opening ep -- then it's all "dies? takes a wrong turn? runs off with Sahjahn? WHAT??!?!?"

Do you want an exception to protect against that sort of thing, so that if a regular changes to recurring status, we can't discuss that? I get that's a spoiler and I get why that would spoil your moment. I didn't think it was what was being discussed here, but I don't see why it's a base we can't suggest the proposer cover.

Cindy, I'm only against the assertion that "casting news isn't plot info". I'd like the point to be argued merely on inevitability.

Which I fully concede to ... there's no way to protect me against what I fear -- which is why I dived into the spoiler thread early on. To stop flinching away from possible sources of such news.

Thanks, Sean and Cindy - I appreciate you listening. Got it off my chest, 'sall good.