Giles: I'm sure we're all perfectly safe. Dawn: We're safe. Right. And Spike built a robot Buffy to play checkers with. Tara: It sounded convincing when I thought it.

'Dirty Girls'


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!


Cindy - Jul 25, 2003 8:37:17 am PDT #1877 of 10289
Nobody

No, it wouldn't be just one thread. It would be in NAFDA.

Even though i was thinking 'one thread,' to me, NAFDA makes the most sense, because what we're doing is widening the definition of promo, really.


Steph L. - Jul 25, 2003 8:37:37 am PDT #1878 of 10289
I look more rad than Lutheranism

There was a Joss interview in a major Boston morning newspaper last week. I can't remember specifics, but does that count as mainstream?

There was an article in my paper with The Big Spoiler the morning "Chosen" aired. I figured that meant it was pretty widely known.


JohnSweden - Jul 25, 2003 8:37:38 am PDT #1879 of 10289
I can't even.

(Now, guys, would that send you running to console the widow, or running away? I'm just curious...)

I'd take my chances ...


P.M. Marc - Jul 25, 2003 8:38:03 am PDT #1880 of 10289
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear

I was assuming the one thread, as well. The proposer needs to address this in the proposal before it goes to a vote.

I'm not sure he will. I mean, the proposal was to amend the spoiler definition. Which means that the NAFDA threads would be fair game. I really, really dislike the idea of a thread-specific amendment, because again, what if something like this comes up again?


Sean K - Jul 25, 2003 8:38:21 am PDT #1881 of 10289
You can't leave me to my own devices; my devices are Nap and Eat. -Zenkitty

(In reference to my own last post:)

However, I don't know what I'm contributing to this discussion. It's been released in official WB and ME promotional material, and Joss talks about it all the time in interviews.

To me, that says it's fair game to talk about.

I know some people don't know, haven't seen promotional material, and avaoid interviews, but I very strongly feel that this meets the spirit of the spoiler policy, if not the letter.

We had to draw the line somewhere, and we decided that "an on-air promo" was common knowledge enough, even if you never see the promo

I guess my position then becomes that I feel WB/ME promotional material, Jossian interviews, and entertainment media magazines/programs should be exactly equivalent to on-air promos.

You may not have read/seen the posters/interviews, but you may miss/volutarily avoid the promo anyway.


Cindy - Jul 25, 2003 8:39:18 am PDT #1882 of 10289
Nobody

I'm not sure he will. I mean, the proposal was to amend the spoiler definition. Which means that the NAFDA threads would be fair game. I really, really dislike the idea of a thread-specific amendment, because again, what if something like this comes up again?

We're getting all cross-posty. I agree with your line of thinking wrt to making this a NAFDA rule.


Elena - Jul 25, 2003 8:39:22 am PDT #1883 of 10289
Thanks for all the fish.

There was a Joss interview in a major Boston morning newspaper last week. I can't remember specifics, but does that count as mainstream?

Not to me, I don't live in Boston. Is it a major market? Will the story get picked up and distributed widely? Did Joss talk about the casting?


§ ita § - Jul 25, 2003 8:39:39 am PDT #1884 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

Which means, then, that the minority would be majorly inconvenienced, if they had to stay out of that many threads -- and remember, there are at least two casting spoilers that may fall under this rule -- that would put me against a yes.


§ ita § - Jul 25, 2003 8:40:44 am PDT #1885 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

ISTR it was also mentioned in TV Guide. If I'm not hallucinating, then that's definitely US mainstream.


Steph L. - Jul 25, 2003 8:41:25 am PDT #1886 of 10289
I look more rad than Lutheranism

There was a Joss interview in a major Boston morning newspaper last week. I can't remember specifics, but does that count as mainstream?

Not to me, I don't live in Boston. Is it a major market?

Elena, you're riding this really hard. Would any newspaper qualify, in your eyes? And I don't mean that in a snarky way; I'm genuinely wondering. Because it sounds like no.