Wash ,'Jaynestown'
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!
Does it make a difference if the spoiler affects what we'll see in the first ep or if it's something with longer implications? If so-and-so is slated to leave mid season, and it's in WB press during the summer, that counts? Because that would really interfere with how I would watch the episodes until that happened.
I think it does, and that that should be worded in the proposal.
This is not at all clear. In fact, based on today's discussion I would NOT mention it at all in the Angel thread for fear of setting off someone's spoiler sense.
And you would be right not to. But at some point the information reaches a zeitgeist (huh, am I spelling that at all right?) and it's so widely diseminated that it really is almost impossible to avoid. For me, with SMG leaving after season 7, it was when CNN reported it. I mean, CNN, how much more mainstream can you get? Has the BCS reached that point? Will it? I don't know. But it is a possibility that should be considered. And, in fact, might warrant investigation.
For me, with SMG leaving after season 7, it was when CNN reported it. I mean, CNN, how much more mainstream can you get?
USA Today and NY Times, both of which have mentioned it.
Meanwhile, the phobes have determined board policy as to what can be discussed where.
No, no, no. Some version of "not unless aired" has existed for a very long time. Hence, the creation of the spoiler threads.
I hate this us vs. them shit, but I also hate screaming "fuck you" at my computer and it keeps happening.
This may be the sort of animosity Elena was referring to...
Meanwhile, the phobes have determined board policy as to what can be discussed where.
We have? Because I always thought that it was our policy to be considerate of people who don't want to know spoilers (under our current definition). It may be a more sensitive barometer than some people need, but spoiling people is what we have always tried to avoid.
Do you mean now or after the proposed change?
I mean now. I can only go by now. For all I know, by morning a much more satisfactory compromise will have been worked out, but right now, I am not seeing any possible compromise being granted.
Seriously, unless someone disproves the validity of the FAQ this should be tabled until September 20th.
It may be a more sensitive barometer than some people need, but spoiling people is what we have always tried to avoid.
Except that precendent says otherwise about THIS SPECIFIC sort of situation.
USA Today and NY Times, both of which have mentioned it.
I have asked, repeatedly, if the BCS has been widely disseminated and this is the first answer I've gotten that seems like it has been.
Perhaps this discussion should be - has the BCS been mainstreamed to the point where it is no longer reasonable to call it a spoiler?
Perhaps this discussion should be - has the BCS been mainstreamed to the point where it is no longer reasonable to call it a spoiler?
Well, yes, but that's not the seconded proposal.
ALL the casting spoilers for the season regulars went out to major media as a press release, and most of them published it. I know my local paper did.