A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.
Current Stompy Feet: ita, Jon B, DXMachina, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych
This is an interesting post from Angel 3 by PMoon. FTR, It was posted on May 17th, and Tim first mentioned that Fred would be in S3 on the thread on May 20th.
Since Tim already confirmed Fred's addition to the cast, what I just whited out really isn't a spoiler anymore. But for people who want proof above Tim's word, check out IMDB's "Angel" page which has the cast list, including Amy Acker now second billed!
I've been suffering under the delusion that once joss mentions something, it's not a spoiler, for if the PTB want us to know, it can be widely known. That seems to be true previously, as above, but the spoiler def. on the ettiquette page says that Joss and Tim interviews go in spoilage lite.
So I created the spoiler policy? Huh. Who knew?
I feel safe saying that I was just summing up the "common law" I'd seen applied on the threads up til then. I wasn't thinking about every possible type of spoiler, or about if Joss was announcing a casting change that got printed on the front page of the New York Times, would that count? It was just a general statement.
So count me in with those who are disturbed that we might not vote on this issue because of a post I made over three years ago.
And for the record: to those who were saying that everyone for the proposal was against using the GFC in this case and vice versa, I'm not sure yet which way I'll vote. I didn't know Angel was coming back in S3 of Buffy, and I'm glad I didn't know. OTOH, he didn't show up until Ep.3 of that season. Do we know for sure that the casting spoilers for Angel 5 will be made clear before Ep 1 airs?
Do we know for sure that the casting spoilers for Angel 5 will be made clear before Ep 1 airs?
We've seen the official posters that are going to be released, so I think it is certain that the media blitz will go into effect before Ep 1 airs.
I can answer that question, Jon, but it would be spoilery ;)
Do we know for sure that the casting spoilers for Angel 5 will be made clear before Ep 1 airs?
Given that one of them was a requirement for renewing the show, and the promo posters they've been circulating as a result (ass-ugly, BTW), I would have to say that additive casting spoilers will, at the very least, be made so clear as to be understood by naked mole rats.
Good point about the official posters. And you're right Sue -- I don't want to be spoiled about that.
Anyway, I didn't want to make a big post about
why
I'm uncertain about how I'll vote. That belongs in Lightbulbs. I just wanted to make the point that not everyone who's against using the GFC is also for the proposal.
So, to clarify what is messed up in my head, if Joss showed up in the Angel thread and said, "I am SO stoked about Orlando Bloom joining the cast of Angel," would it be deleted, whitefonted, or accepted by all and speculated upon with ruthless passion?
Dude, we'd issue the man a warning.
He's too good for rules? We don't need him.
So, to clarify what is messed up in my head, if Joss showed up in the Angel thread and said, "I am SO stoked about Orlando Bloom joining the cast of Angel," would it be deleted, whitefonted, or accepted by all and speculated upon with ruthless passion?
Didn't Tim kinda do that once? As I recall, he got slathered in whitefont, but there wasn't any warning.
I think that right there is a good enough reason to suspend any grandfathering legislation, whether it applies or not.
84% of the people who voted want policies left in place until a certain date. Shall we chuck their opinion whenever we feel like it? Why do we vote if we're going to have a whole new form of concensus?
If the policy is grandfatherable that should be honored.
