A report on the movie, in thread like Hey, anyone catch that Charisma is going to be in See Jane Date on Sunday? should not need tagging or white font. To be clear.

ITA on this. Have you seen something like this? (Not snarking, an honest question.) But that's a start in getting some things identified that we are in agreement on.

I have been reading the spoiler thread. Much discussion of coriander, basil, and cilantro. There is frustration, but I wouldn't say contempt - at all.

Sadly, I don't agree, and I find it both upsetting and mystifying.

I’d appreciate it if you could find a solution overnight because it is the hour for me to retire to bed with book and sake. I have 4 kids here tonight and I need to get them settled down. Night all.

by letter of the law

OK - this can't help but be unpleasant, but which law? If it's the Phoenix FAQ, or other board law, from what I saw (and I lurked a LONG time before I posted) then that was the bullshit consensus law. Which is WHAT THIS VOTE IS TRYING TO CHANGE. Sorry for the asscaps, but, ya know, get the votes and put the question down. Why is that an issue?

Can I be confident in extrapolating that not only is the definition of spoiler an issue here, but how far this will extend? That Trudy, for instance, won't be comfortable in Bitchy Fic or Bitches under the new definition?

Yes.

If people are discussing non-broadcasted content in Bitches I don't know that I would hang out there.

Here is our policy as-is:

Q. What do you guys consider a spoiler?

A. Anything that hasn't been broadcast. So anything from the show and the preview trailers is okay, anything from TV Guide or anywhere else is a spoiler, including casting news, episode titles and plot twists. No white fonting. Spoilers should only be posted in the spoiler thread.

What, specifically, is objectionable to various people?

Since the rule has stood since early Table Talk, I think declaring it the bullshit consensus law is inaccurate.

All laws before voting are "bullshit consensus" laws, though, aren't they? It's just the definition I've been using for "bullshit consensus" -- which isn't functioning as a judgment on said rules, just a marker in time.

I'm all for letting the vote decide after hearing viewpoints

Kind of where I'm at. I'll note that I got off the main threads and put most of my show-response writing in Spoilers because I got tired of keeping track of the spoiler-line. I wanted to talk about events on both shows and that became impossible. I wanted to speculate about the new season with cast changes and that became impossible. So, I've already left the show threads to accomodate a heightened spoiler sensitivity which has not always been the defining standard on our boards.

It's too constricting as it is now. My opinion. I'll be voting to ease it up because I'd rather be able to discuss Angel on the Angel thread. If the current proposal gets shot down I'll just stick to the Spoiler thread.

David, let's eliminate "drift".

What do you object to in the rule as it is now worded?

OK - this can't help but be unpleasant, but which law? If it's the Phoenix FAQ, or other board law, from what I saw (and I lurked a LONG time before I posted) then that was the bullshit consensus law. Which is WHAT THIS VOTE IS TRYING TO CHANGE.

Actually Ken, you bring up an interesting point. To wit:

Result: 84% of those voters with a preference have decided that

Pre-vote decisions are NOT open for discussion and change until September 20, 2003.

ETA - That said, I do think it's worthwhile hammering out some of the points of agreement and finding out where we really are. But this has gone beyond unpleasant - there has got to be a better way.

Sadly, I don't agree, and I find it both upsetting and mystifying.

It's very upsetting to me, too, brenda.