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.

Isn't that what the proposal is about? Defining *at what point* it should be considered widely disseminated. And based on primarily your arguments and Trudy's today, I am assuming that there is no safe point from which to make that assumption.

Elena, with all due respect, does board precedent mean squat? Because what Hec brought up, and what Amych brought up, and what Nutty brought up, and what Cindy brought up, is that all of this was stuff we discussed during summer hiatus before. We have serious board precendent here. We just, you know, lacked the foresight to mention all possible contingencies when hashing things out before. See above re: assumptions. Hell, we're human.

(As for tabled discussion, recall that Jim's English, and this is his baby. It's tabled right now, AIFG. Or, you know, AIFGoing On.)

I'll be back in the morning. For now, I have to clean my kitchen and sleep. Night, y'all.

Well, yes, but that's not the seconded proposal.

But that particular proposal may not be valid under Betsy's grandfather vote. I'm trying to give us a workable compromise. If it's widely known and no longer a spoiler then we don't even have to vote.

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.

Okay, at the risk of 'riding the subject hard', mine didn't. But I don't need them to be published in every newspaper. If 'most of them' that published it includes newspapers that people would have a hard time avoiding (and, FWIT, I think that both the NY Times and USA Today count, though others may disagree) then it's widely known.

USian papers are MUCH better about important shit like TV info. (Esp. for US shows.)

Just a note, am I the only spoiled person who likes to watch the unspoiled scream with delight/horror when something I've known about for ages happens.

Honestly, it's a source of enjoyment for me. Which sort of makes me side with the spoiler virgins on things. That being said, there are points where the networks are doing everything in their power short of sending cast members door-to-door to let people know something is happening.

Which, I guess, means I don't care overly much how this issue is decided.

Carry on, then.

Okay, at the risk of 'riding the subject hard', mine didn't. But I don't need them to be published in every newspaper. If 'most of them' that published it includes newspapers that people would have a hard time avoiding (and, FWIT, I think that both the NY Times and USA Today count, though others may disagree) then it's widely known.

Point of information--it went out over the AP Wire and the Reuters wire, so nigh-every news source in the Western Hemisphere had an equal opportunity at publishing it.

(As for tabled discussion, recall that Jim's English, and this is his baby. It's tabled right now, AIFG. Or, you know, AIFGoing On.)

I don't think it's up to Jim to table the discussion. If the rule existed before the grandfathering date it's tabled until September 20th.

Victor, I like them unspoiled, though it makes me sad when they expect resolution I know ain't gonna come.

It's the particular crack-down mentality that has me irked and peeved and mad as hell.

I feel like suddenly, John Ashcroft became the spoiler police. And it makes me uncomfortable.

Really going to bed, please note both hyperbole and I statements, and assume from now on that Nutty Speaks For Me, cause she does it all rational-like.

Isn't that what the proposal is about? Defining *at what point* it should be considered widely disseminated.

Burrell, I thought that the proposal was to change our spoiler policy.

Elena, with all due respect, does board precedent mean squat? Because what Hec brought up, and what Amych brought up, and what Nutty brought up, and what Cindy brought up, is that all of this was stuff we discussed during summer hiatus before. We have serious board precendent here. We just, you know, lacked the foresight to mention all possible contingencies when hashing things out before. See above re: assumptions. Hell, we're human.

I'm sorry, PMM, but if you're talking about SMG's return after season 5, that was considered unavoidable. If you're talking about SMG's not signing on for more after season 7, that was considered unavoidable (or, if it wasn't, the point was quickly made moot by people posting about it in the show thread to such an extent that it was quickly unavoidable). If you're talking about ASH going semi-regular, I'm not 100% sure how that went, but it may either have been considered not a big enough deal to fuss about, or a case of trying to get the horse back in the barn.

Trudy, you missed the joke.

It's a tabled thing.

So, you know, my insect reflection and I will be over here still thinking it's funny.