It looks like I upset you, Cindy, and I didn't mean to.
No, really you didn't. Or at worst, I was upset when I started but got interrupted so many times, I wasn't by the time I was finished. I'm sorry it came across in my post. Mostly though, I "WOW"d at you, because I thought I upset you and didn't mean to. I thought that admittedly, because I took the pref. voting thing as a dig, but I understand now that it wasn't. Apologies not necessary, ita.
The point I was going for was that it keeps (and those were just the two cites that popped up while I was at lunch, both from the same POV) being mentioned how other people feel. But I think we just have to take Elena/Jess/whoever's word for it, if they say they like/need/disdain the HSQ, and where they find the HSQ lives.
I agree we have to take people's word on that. I'm just not getting where that there is an actual one wrt major casting changes, given that it's already accepted we'll talk about this stuff once promos air. I feel like (and I could be very wrong) this is as much about resisting a change, as it is about a true worry about being spoiled, because it seems to me, all that happens is the subject is open yes - sooner - but still before an episode ever airs.
And I have to admit, I'm confused by the idea that one person can be a regular on two shows at once, but there you go.
Me, too.
As for vector=method - well then, I think I answered the question, but I went on so long, I don't know how much my answer answered.
"Officially published by the network."
That is clear and simple.
"officially published by the netword or the production company".
still clear and simple.
How do you know the info is slim before you search, though?
I hate to say it, but I think you may be overthinking this one. I really don't see the vagueness in the original proposal.
I suppose it depends on how you define "press advertising." I was defining it as "someone official says something to the press, knowing perfectly well they'll be quoted."
Wouldn't that be a *major* change to our spoiler policy? So far, interviews with spoily info are noted as such, at least in Spoilage Lite, which is the only place I'm willing to tread for spoiler confirmation.
I would define "press advertising" as an advertisement.
I think you may be overthinking this one.
Except for the part where I don't know if the rest of the casting news I know qualifies for discussion or not. How is that overthinking?
Wouldn't that be a *major* change to our spoiler policy? So far, interviews with spoily info are noted as such, at least in Spoilage Lite, which is the only place I'm willing to tread for spoiler confirmation.
Well, but it's only for a) changes in the regular cast that b) are announced between-seasons.
So we could still have discussed Giles' departure, since that was officially announced over the summer, but we couldn't have discussed Angel's until after Graduation Day... oh wait. Never mind, that's not true, different example. We couldn't have discussed Riley's departure until after Into the Woods aired, because that wasn't officially announced over the summer.
"officially published by the netword or the production company".
What, in the WB Times? It isn't clear at all.
"That was an un-named source" "That was from a fansite!" etc. And we'd already be spoiled.
I personally like the promo limitation because it's so clear and easy to follow, you know? There's no grey area. Promo has been shown including X fact or it hasn't. Plus, it's the rule I "grew up with" when I went spoilerfree after S4 Buffy, so it's what I'm used to.
Yes. This.
Forget about the anit-spoiler drift etc. If we give up this as a policy a bunch of people are going to have to unsub massively.
