So if it's not widely discussed (and what's your definition of widely?) then it is a spoiler? Because that needs to be reflected in the proposal.

I agree with ita. I've been asking a similar question all day.

I think this is a key point. Isn't the proposal limited to discussion of between-season casting spoilers that are being actively promoted by either the network or ME?

Yes.

Spoilers, you mean? Or changes? I didn't think these issues had come up before.

I meant spoilers.

. Isn't the proposal limited to discussion of between-season casting spoilers that are being actively promoted by either the network or ME?

Which I think is a reasonable definition of "widely".

Except as I remember it has to be a "major" casting spoiler - which I dimly remember as as involving a regular (every episode) cast member being added or deleted.

Does someone wan't to repost the full-text with amendments that were accepted?

In which case, I personally know of 3 spoilers, only two of which, in my mind, would meet this criteria.

Oh, my god. I only know two. Are they the two that Burrell thinks meet the criteria and would be openly discussed if this proposal passes or is there another one that will be discussed that I don't know about.

See, this is the problem. And this is why we needed to have guidelines about when something is considered to be widely known and not a spoiler. Which is how we developed our current spoiler policy.

Huh. So how do we decide if Amy Acker's departure is promoted enough? Joss said it at Comic Con? Time Out NY mentioned it too?

Can I then talk about it in Bitches?

That's a very wobbly line.

The BCS? Very clear. Any others to which I may be privy? I have no idea and no idea how to find out.

Shouldn't part of the spoiler definition mean it will tell you something about the upcoming plot.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not with Sean on all casting spoilers. I get why people don't want to know them, even though they don't generally spoil things for me. I got a nice HSQ moment when Darla stood up pregnant at the end of the S3 opener, and when Angel went to see Faith at the end of the S2 opener.

But if someone is leaving the show, between the seasons, I still don't think it spoils anyone for anything that is going to happen on the show. The only specific thing it tells you is that they either will or will not address it, but it doesn't tell you how, if they do. Lookit Giles - he was missing for months and they were having him come back, and they still seldom addressed him missing anything, even Xander and Anya's wedding.

People are presuming that knowing about a departure or arrival tells them something about the plot. At the very worst, it tells them there may be something to speculate about. That's it.

ita, here's the proposal we're voting on:

"That major casting spoilers (to the main cast only, not recurring or guest), which are being advertised by Fox, the WB or ME in press advertising or their official website, are no longer spoilers, and should be discussed in the show threads. This includes cast additions or departures. The Main Cast are those characters who appear in the opening credits."

Huh, I'd thought there was an over-the-summer thing caveat, and there isn't. Interesting. So basically, as soon as Fox, the WB, or ME said either on their website or in press that Amy Acker was leaving, we could talk about it. So no on Comicon, yes on Time Out, as I read the proposal.

People are presuming that knowing about a departure or arrival tells them something about the plot. At the very worst, it tells them there may be something to speculate about. That's it.

"Giles isn't going to be in Sunnydale" is a plot point, though.

they still seldom addressed him missing anything, even Xander and Anya's wedding.

To be fair, they addressed this in the shooting script and t was cut for time. But I know what you mean.

I had the impression that "between seasons" was part of the proposal also. Just shows my memory is bad because it is not in any version I can find.