I wanted to answer this:

What if an ME had been arrested for some crime, which then affected said actor's ability to be on the show. How would that situation be defined?

I think it would quickly become an Elephant in the Room -- even if it wasn't major news on entertainment sites, we'd probably find out fairly quickly. Like any other life event (e.g., CC becoming pregnant) it wouldn't be a spoiler, though plot points based on it (e.g., Cordy's coma and the birth of Jasmine) would be.

I'm still not 100% sure that this is an extension of the rule. I consider it to be within the actual spoiler guideline.

I don't want to play semantics. What value is there to forbidding printed and electronic promos, when we don't forbid televised promos?

I don't know. I know we're being abstract, but can you give me a for instance? Because right now, all I can think of is the previews, in which the WB does tell us things the writers would rather they don't, but still, we allow discussion of the previews in NAFDA.

If the WB gives away stuff on it's website above and beyond what's in the previews, I don't know about it.

Not ita, but Lorne's decapitated head is the most egregious example of this.

If the WB gives away stuff on it's website above and beyond what's in the previews

They do -- I consider Lorne's decapitation and the upcoming cast to both fall into that category. So "but it's on the WB website!" doesn't strike me as a sound argument, because I suspect most people consider the decapitation a spoiler.

I'm just trying to iron that out.

Because, to me, the argument "It's on the website, in major city morning papers, TV Guide, and many web interviews with Joss" says inevitability, which is the only thing that leads me to a yes (but not in all threads).

Not ita, but Lorne's decapitated head is the most egregious example of this.

I was unspoiled for Lorne's decapitation. I know this is an obvious question, but because this is the first I've heard of it, I'm asking anyhow. Did they reveal Lorne's decapitation before that episode aired?

And if so, even though we're being abstract about this, why are we being abstract. That's a plot spoiler. We're not talking about plot spoilers. We're talking about off-season casting changes to the regular contracted cast. This very much feels like a red-herring argument, abstract or not.

Ok again - somethiing I can't prove but:

1)I think the particular kind of "spoiler" being legalized is something the overwhelming majority (not everybody but a really overwhelming majority) won't be bothered by.

2)A really tiny minority will be bothered by the passage of this proposal.

3)A much larger miniority will be equally bothered by the non-passage of this proposal.

4)And this proposal is really the compromise that frustrate the fewest people and unfrustrates the most - compared to the current system.

OK now I can't expect those opposed to the proposal to accept the above four premises. But I hope it is easy to see that support for it does follow from them, and that they are not obviously irrational or self-evidently wrong.

I know this is an obvious question, but because this is the first I've heard of it, I'm asking anyhow. Did they reveal Lorne's decapitation before that episode aired?

Yes. They had pictures.

Did they reveal Lorne's decapitation before that episode aired?

They showed his head on a plate.

I'm being abstract because we're not voting to take the covers off this one elephant in this one room. If we tailor the discussion too tightly about this one thing, then we are just making an exception.

The language has to be solid, but not too specific.

"It's on the website, in major city morning papers, TV Guide, and many web interviews with Joss" says inevitability, which is the only thing that leads me to a yes (but not in all threads).

It's on the wb website, as I used it, I believe I used as part of my point that I too think it's inevitable that this will be allowable in NAFDA before 1 minute of an episode airs. I think it's inevitable not only because it's all of those places, but because if they've posted an official announcement that Bubba is joining the cast and Lloyd is leaving the cast, that is going to be reflected in their (eventual) broadcast promos, which are already fair game.

Ok again - somethiing I can't prove but:

Gar, we really have no idea about the kind of percentages we're looking at here.

OK now I can't expect those opposed to the proposal to accept the above four premises.

Why should anyone accept them? Where is the basis in fact for them?

But I hope it is easy to see that support for it does follow from them, and that they are not obviously irrational or self-evidently wrong.

Um. Huh?