I think the proposal is an attempt to clarify the spoiler definition, not change it.

identifying what is and is not acceptable (casting changes that have been advertized and promoted by the network and the production company in print, online, or on tv)

The policy is: information that has been broadcast on the network, either in episodes, promos, or commercials. The policy would be: information that has either been broadcast on the network, published on the network's website, or appeared in print advertisements. How is that not a change?

I think the attempts to squelch this discussion via the grandfather proposal are on a par with gerrymandering.

I find that really offensive. Please explain to me why citing the grandfather policy that we just ratified a couple of months ago is so out of line. Because I really don't get it. In what circumstances would it be appropriate? Any?

I've said it before. I do agree that there are serious issues here that need to be discussed. It's very clear that people are coming from very different places on this. But there are two separate issues here - one, the current casting related topics that people who know about them really want to discuss, and two, the broader issues of whether the spoiler policy is being observed in a way that's fair to everyone, and how we can clarify and revise it to both protect the unspoiled and allow for the fullest discussion among others. I understand better where the spoiled are coming from after a post of Plei's last night, and I'm much more sympathetic than I was. But so far, we haven't come up with many ideas that get beyone one side or the other getting its way. I think we can do better. But only with thoughtful, extended discussion.

The first issue, the casting spoilers, was the proximate cause for this proposal, and there is a certain urgency to it for its supporters. I agree with the need to come to some resolution on this in a timely manner. But the other issue goes beyond any one topic of discussion into the realm of board culture and relationships, and I think it deserves, even requires, fuller discussion without a vote hanging over our heads. Voting works very well for hammering out a final draft of a position, and for deciding yes/no issues. This issue is larger than that, and I think we're making a mistake by jumping on it without giving it fuller consideration. We need more discussion on this, not less, or we're never going to come out of this without bad feelings all around.

Which is weird, because I've certainly seen it on thewb.com, but this time, just clicking on "Angel" from the front page? Nada. It's time warped to the beginning of S3.

Yeah. They actually have two Angel pages. One on the Fall Schedule 2003 section, one on the shows section. They obviously have slow monkeys running the site. Which, come to think of it, explains a lot.

Please explain to me why citing the grandfather policy that we just ratified a couple of months ago is so out of line.

Probably because it's been applied only to the letter, and not to the past interpretations? And because some, but not all, of its proponants brought it up in a manner that felt highly offensive. Which, of course, is where your issue number two comes up. Casting information, at this point, is really just the catalyst for the second issue. You wouldn't be wrong to think that this has been brewing for a long time. It's been brewing for months, among spoiled, not really spoiled, and pretty much unspoiled alike. It seems symptomatic of a larger and distressing cutural shift on the board as a whole.

The policy is: information that has been broadcast on the network, either in episodes, promos, or commercials. The policy would be: information that has either been broadcast on the network, published on the network's website, or appeared in print advertisements. How is that not a change?

I think that for a lot of the folks who are in favor, it's not a change because they feel it will allow a return to the traditional spoiler policy on the board. They see the strict enforcement of the FAQ-included policy as the change. Is that a fair summary?

I think that for a lot of the folks who are in favor, it's not a change because they feel it will allow a return to the traditional spoiler policy on the board. They see the strict enforcement of the FAQ-included policy as the change. Is that a fair summary?

Yes, that's a fair summary, I think.

The policy is: information that has been broadcast on the network, either in episodes, promos, or commercials. The policy would be: information that has either been broadcast on the network, published on the network's website, or appeared in print advertisements. How is that not a change?

As has been stated numerous times already, there is a well-established precedent for the looser interpretation. So although the wording would be changed slightly, I don’t think the actual policy is being changed *substantially,* instead, it is being changed to reflect what was the actual practice in previous seasons.

I find that really offensive. Please explain to me why citing the grandfather policy that we just ratified a couple of months ago is so out of line. Because I really don't get it. In what circumstances would it be appropriate? Any?

Is this addressed to me or to Cindy? I didn’t use the word “gerrymandering,” I was simply using her words as an opener for why *I* don’t think this falls under the grandfather clause (see above). You disagree with my reasoning, but that is a separate issue.

[edited for unnecessary snippiness]

It seems symptomatic of a larger and distressing cutural shift on the board as a whole.

That's the issue that seems to me to need more consideration.

You wouldn't be wrong to think that this has been brewing for a long time.

Can you understand that this is part of why some of the people who weren't in on these discussion are reacting so strongly and defensively? On the one side, the issues have been discussed and hashed out and vented on. But we weren't a part of that, and it feels like being hit with a sudden attack.

Is this addressed to me or to Cindy?

Sorry for not being clear. It was the statement you quoted, along with some other nastiness thrown my way last night, that bothers me. We disagree on what the "policy" is, that's fine, and can probably worked out. But I don't like being accused of trying to subvert the process by referring back to a decision made by this board that seemed to me to apply.

I think that for a lot of the folks who are in favor, it's not a change because they feel it will allow a return to the traditional spoiler policy on the board. They see the strict enforcement of the FAQ-included policy as the change. Is that a fair summary?

Yes, that's a fair summary, I think.

Yes, exactly.

And I'd be entirely in favor of the casting changes only being kosher for discussion in the specific show's thread, and not in Bitches, other show threads, etc.

And I'm sorry again for losing it last night.

I think the problem here is the use of the word "Gerrymander". Actual gerrymandering is always done deliberately. where I'm sure the atempt to use the grandfather clause was made in good faith. But to most of us the attempted use of the grandfather clause makes no sense in this context - because as Cindy pointed out last time the FAQ has changed since the Grandfather clause was passed - and thus the FAQ are not frozen in stone. So it as invalid an application of the rules as gerrymandering, even though the intent is not same.

Can you understand that this is part of why some of the people who weren't in on these discussion are reacting so strongly and defensively? On the one side, the issues have been discussed and hashed out and vented on. But we weren't a part of that, and it feels like being hit with a sudden attack.

The funny part is, both sides feel this way. And it really doesn't have anything to do with things you might have read in spoilers recently.

If WX is ever up again, or you feel like reading the spoiler archives from way back, you'll find that griping and flipping shit is a deep, deep part of the culture. Shocked the fuck out of me to read the WX spoilers after season six to find what appeared to be hitherto unknown seething resentment towards the virtuous unspoiled (and I had been one of them, so it felt like a slap to read). Eventually, though, I realized that it was just the way of their people, and when I was assimilated (there was vodka involved), I came to learn and love the language.

Do NOT, I stress, take things said there without a bottle of salt.