Kristen? s'your phrase - i know what it is, but I cyan't define it...
Who wants to be a millionaire--one of the options for help was to Phone A Friend. Another was to Poll the Audience.
Dawn: Are you kidding? Dr. Keiser: I never kid about my amazing surgical skills.
'Bring On The Night'
Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!
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!
esse - Jul 29, 2003 3:43:17 am PDT #2761 of 10289
S to the A -- using they/them pronouns!
Cindy - Jul 29, 2003 3:53:20 am PDT #2762 of 10289
Nobody
SA - I think Jim is looking for a quick and easy definition of 'upfront presentations' as used in:
That major casting spoilers (to the main cast only, not recurring or guest), which are being advertised by Fox or the WB at their annual upfront presentation to advertisers
Jim - Instead of using that, how about using:
That major casting spoilers (to the main cast only, not recurring or guest), which are being advertised by Fox or the WB when they announce their show line-up and show casts for the upcoming television season.
Does that say the same thing to everyone else, only not using industry jargon, or is there a distinction I'm missing?
amych - Jul 29, 2003 3:54:56 am PDT #2763 of 10289
Now let us crush something soft and watch it fountain blood. That is a girlish thing to want to do, yes?
Does that say the same thing to everyone else, only not using industry jargon, or is there a distinction I'm missing?
That's what I understood the upfront thing to mean, yeah.
esse - Jul 29, 2003 4:02:07 am PDT #2764 of 10289
S to the A -- using they/them pronouns!
I think Jim is looking for a quick and easy definition of 'upfront presentations' as used in:
Oh.
Heh.
Cindy - Jul 29, 2003 4:04:02 am PDT #2765 of 10289
Nobody
Oh but Jim, I modified the wrong version of your proposal. I didn't take the newer version, which specifies the 4 weeks. I do think the 4 weeks should be in there though.
Cindy - Jul 29, 2003 4:07:49 am PDT #2766 of 10289
Nobody
Jim - Trying again...
Unless someone like Kristen says otherwise, how about taking:
That major casting spoilers (to the main cast only, not recurring or guest), which are being advertised by Fox or the WB at their annual upfront presentation to advertisers, are no longer considered spoilers and may be discussed, within their respective show threads only, from 4 weeks after the Annual Upfront Presentation or 4 weeks after the previous season finale, whichever is the later. This only includes cast additions or departures that occur over summer hiatus only (not midseason) . Any plot points related to the character's (not the actor's) arrival or departure are to be treated as spoilers. The Main Cast are those characters who appear in the opening credits."
(underlined portions above are the sections we're discussing changing)
and making it:
That major casting spoilers (to the main cast only, not recurring or guest), which are being advertised by Fox or the WB when they announce their show line-up and show casts for the upcoming television season, are no longer considered spoilers and may be discussed, within their respective show threads only, from 4 weeks after the announcements or 4 weeks after the previous season finale, whichever is the later. This only includes cast additions or departures that occur over summer hiatus only (not midseason) . Any plot points related to the character's (not the actor's) arrival or departure are to be treated as spoilers. The Main Cast are those characters who appear in the opening credits."
(suggested changes in red font)
edited to include the whole proposal, so that nobody will get the impression the last bit should be left off.
Sorry.
Jim - Jul 29, 2003 4:36:32 am PDT #2767 of 10289
Ficht nicht mit Der Raketemensch!
Yes. THis. So, the final final final final proposition is:
"That major casting spoilers (to the main cast only, not recurring or guest), which are being advertised by Fox or the WB when they announce their show line-up and show casts for the upcoming television season, are no longer considered spoilers and may be discussed, within their respective show threads only, from 4 weeks after the announcements or 4 weeks after the previous season finale, whichever is the later. This only includes cast additions or departures that occur over summer hiatus only (not midseason) . Any plot points related to the character's (not the actor's) arrival or departure are to be treated as spoilers. The Main Cast are those characters who appear in the opening credits."
§ ita § - Jul 29, 2003 4:39:56 am PDT #2768 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Thread's closed, proposal's final, IIRC Jess is counting votes, so I'll point votes at buffistas.org to her profile address.
Steph L. - Aug 18, 2003 3:27:57 pm PDT #2769 of 10289
I look more rad than Lutheranism
Does Raquel post her proposal here first, so we know what we're talking about?
Sean K - Aug 18, 2003 3:32:54 pm PDT #2770 of 10289
You can't leave me to my own devices; my devices are Nap and Eat. -Zenkitty
(We kind of have to refresh ourselves on the process every time, don't we?)
I think the discussion would be best served by Raquel submitting a formal proposal. I would take this opportunity to again recommend NOT using whitefont in the thread - open discussion of anything aired, peeps who haven't seen just need to deal - but that rec may just be due to my strong bias that any whitefont language will ultimately be removed after discussion anyway.