TiVoCommunity.com
(c)opyright 1995-2005 All rights reserved
indexcheckTC
This area is a static history of posts in the TiVo Community Forum Archive.
This archive history was made for the simple indexing of search sites like
Google.
Pages:1
24 and Preview Spoilers
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
Posted by: justapixel
Vote here and we'll go with the majority for next week's thread.
Do we want to spoilerize anything to do with the previews of coming episodes in the thread, or do you think that the spoiler in the title is good enough?
Posted by: pmyers
Well here is the problem: The only "solution" would be to have 2 seperate threads going on...because, if you look at this week's thread a lot of the posts are in referene to the preview for this coming week. That would mean that the majority of the post would all have to be in spoilors. That seems like it would be really annoying to have post after post all in spoilers.
how come this only seems to be an issue with this show? I haven't heard anybody in the Survivor spoilers thread complain about anybody mentioning something from an upcoming preview.
Posted by: Hunter Green
Dang, I misunderstood the question. I should have voted yes but I voted no by accident and I don't think I can change it.
pmeyers: I don't see any need for separate threads. (Though I haven't read this week's thread yet, and now I'm wondering if I shouldn't.) The spoiler tag takes care of this explicitly.
In a thread titled "24 3-4pm" anything that happened between 3 and 4pm in the show is fair game in the clear. But anything that will happen after 4pm should be spoiler-tagged, regardless of how you know about it (having watched the next episode, reading TV Guide spoilers, watching the next week preview, etc.). Seems quite simple and straightforward, and it lets everyone read the thread for the show they just watched as soon as possible, but no one has to get spoiled. I don't see the problem.
Posted by: tonyoci
This should be all threads that feature previews for next weeks show.
T
Posted by: tonyoci
This has come up in other threads, especially the Shield. There are very few shows with an ongoing story line that is intended to be suspensful.
I fail to understand why people are outright refusing to adhere to the requests of others. I see why you might not agree with it but if others have asked you to do something then why are you unwilling to compromise.
T
Posted by: atreyu
quote:
Originally posted by pmyers
The only "solution" would be to have 2 seperate threads going on...because, if you look at this week's thread a lot of the posts are in referene to the preview for this coming week.
(shrugs) This week's thread was an anomaly. I think preview chat should be ok (but in spoilers) in the interests of including everybody and of keeping the thread count down... but technically, I think such chat is rather off-topic! I mean, the title is "9:00p-10:00p," not "9:00p or later," right?
quote:
That seems like it would be really annoying to have post after post all in spoilers.
(shrugs again) I think the inconvenience of this is minimal, especially given how rarely the threads focus on the previews. Just press Ctrl-A (shortcut for Edit->Select All) -- highlights the whole thread, and exposes all the spoilers, so you can just read away!
quote:
I haven't heard anybody in the Survivor spoilers thread complain about anybody mentioning something from an upcoming preview.
I don't remember seeing non-spoilerized preview references in the Survivor threads. I for one don't care about Survivor spoilers as much as I do about 24 spoilers, and I've always had to highlight to read them (ex. the whole "what did the women find in the box" mystery discussed a couple of weeks back).
I think this would be made an issue of if it happened in other threads, and would be willing to bet it has been.
Posted by: zaknafein
I hope I voted right. I don't like the spoilers, so I voted no...
Posted by: atreyu
quote:
Originally posted by zaknafein
I hope I voted right. I don't like the spoilers, so I voted no...
Your answer should be "yes" if you *don't* want spoilers. Justapixel... maybe a change in the poll title is in order? Seems to be causing confusion.
Posted by: tonyoci
Now I am confused, I voted YES because I do NOT like to see the spoilers untagged. It seems that zaknafein voted NO but has the same as me (or does he).
The problem with spoiler tags is that people will still forget them. A thread to discuss next weeks show might be easier.
I think we need to redo this poll
T
Posted by: pmyers
how on earth is talking about something that was shown in a preview a spoiler? /boggle
I respect your choice to not watch them, but just don't be so suprised when people want to discuss them when discussing the show and what they think will happen in the future. I mean really....I've seen a ton of threads where people will discuss something they saw on the preview, especially survivor and other reality shows. Nobody gets upset with those.
This isn't like the old Big Brother threads were somebody knew something ahead of time because of the internet feed......we are discussing something that was shown on tv regarding the show and will continue to be shown throughout the week until the show airs next week.
Posted by: CraigEagle
Why not just start nexts weeks episode thread a week early
1. It doesnt add extra threads
2. People who want to discuss next weeks show, based on knowledge from the previews and other sources) can read the thread
3. People who dont want to know about the next show can wait until next week to read it
JMHO
- Craig
Posted by: atreyu
quote:
Originally posted by CraigEagle
Why not just start nexts weeks episode thread a week early
'tis the voice of reason! That makes total sense. Keep 9p-10p topics in the 9p-10p thread, 10p-11p topics in the 10p-11p thread.
Posted by: okleydokley
quote:
Originally posted by CraigEagle
Why not just start nexts weeks episode thread a week early
- Craig
This sounds like a good compromise.
By the way, I still haven't voted because I don't know if I should vote yes or no, (and I am afraid of hanging chads).
I want to vote that preview details should not be allowed or should be tagged.
Posted by: atreyu
...then you should vote "yes," i.e. "I believe we should 'spoilerize' (put spoiler tags around) discussions of the previews in 24."
Posted by: tonyoci
quote:
Originally posted by CraigEagle
Why not just start nexts weeks episode thread a week early
1. It doesnt add extra threads
2. People who want to discuss next weeks show, based on knowledge from the previews and other sources) can read the thread
3. People who dont want to know about the next show can wait until next week to read it
JMHO
- Craig
I love it, but it does seem that some people are taking this on as a matter of principle.
I like to get involved in threads that discuss this weeks show but I do not want to know about next weeks show so spoiler tags or a new thread works great. It's pretty simple really.
T
Posted by: justapixel
It seems clear to me. Should we use spoiler tags in the 24 thread. Yes or No....
I'll change spoilerize though, maybe that word is confusing people.
Posted by: dcheesi
quote:
Originally posted by CraigEagle
Why not just start nexts weeks episode thread a week early
1. It doesnt add extra threads
2. People who want to discuss next weeks show, based on knowledge from the previews and other sources) can read the thread
3. People who dont want to know about the next show can wait until next week to read it
JMHO
- Craig
I was going to suggest this, but then I realized it would cause other problems. What happens when certain people see the show early (sat feed, internet, etc.)? Then the preview people will come in still expecting preview-based speculation, only to find a post about what actually happened. Eventually we'll have the same argument all over again, but with the "sat-feed" people as the bad guys.
As a compromise, I wouldn't mind seeing a watered-down spoiler approach. The traditional spoiler warning used in text-based forums (eg. "*PREVIEW SPOILERS*") would allow a preview purist to avoid reading too much, while allowing others to read through everything without lots of highlighting. If someone does catch a preview reference by mistake, well, it's no worse than forgetting to stop watching the program before the preview itself comes on. Spoilers for future episodes and other shows would still merit the full spoiler tag. BTW the only problem with this method is in enforcing the standard; it's a bit complicated, and newbies to the 24 "meta-thread" wouldn't know better.
Posted by: justapixel
Okay, I changed it. If anybody was confused and wants to change from yes to no, or vice versa, PM me and I'll change your vote for you.
Two threads discussing the same thing on a stable board might be okay, but we should try and keep the load down. We mods are merging threads that discuss the same thing, so I don't think we need to start new ones.
In any event, it's really easy to spoil things if you vote that way. While I don't think it should be necessary, I think it's the nicest thing to do for those who feel strongly about it and want to participate.
Now, go vote, it's the democratic thing to do. :)
Posted by: CraigEagle
quote:
Originally posted by justapixel
Two threads discussing the same thing...
Agreed, my suggesstion was not to create two threads, it is to start next week's thread 1 weak early. Next week you wouldnt need a new thread, it would exist already. After the first week you would only be creating ONE thread a week, it would just be for next weeks show. No extra load on the server. Also it isnt two threads discussing the same thing, one thread would be discussing this weeks show the other thread discussing next. Seems simple. I am not trying to disagree, flame or otherwise act out of turn, I am just throwing a suggestion out there.
- Craig
Posted by: Rob Helmerichs
quote:
Originally posted by atreyu
'tis the voice of reason! That makes total sense. Keep 9p-10p topics in the 9p-10p thread, 10p-11p topics in the 10p-11p thread.
But the trailer is broadcast with the 9-10 show. As far as I'm concerned, anything that airs with the 9-10 shows (in a spoiler thread) is fair game. If you don't want spoilers, don't come to the forum. Don't read TV Guide. Don't read magazines. Don't watch TV (you might see commercials). Don't go to restaurants (there might be somebody at the next table who has seen TV Guide). Just lock yourself hermetically in your room until every episode of 24 has aired.
Or maybe, just maybe, don't read spoiler threads.
Posted by: atreyu
quote:
Originally posted by Medieval Guy
But the trailer is broadcast with the 9-10 show. As far as I'm concerned, anything that airs with the 9-10 shows (in a spoiler thread) is fair game.
(throws up hands) Ok, so we agree to disagree! But putting opinions aside for a moment... consider this: using exposed preview references excludes a group of people who want to participate in these forums. "Spoilerizing" those references excludes nobody.
Disagree all you want, but why would you not still (albeit grudgingly) agree to a reasonable compromise that really doesn't affect you negatively?
Posted by: justapixel
Craig, I was talking about tonyoci's idea to have two 24 threads - one with previews spoilerized and one without.
I don't actually think it's a bad idea, but with the board crashing all the time, it'd be best if we could keep it to one thread. Plus, I'm certain we can come to an amicable resolution.
Your idea is okay too. :) I think that it'd be awkward though, to separate the mentions of the previews with discussion of the other show.
Posted by: tonyoci
atreyu, that's my point also. Regardless of what someone's opinion was before this whole debate started why would they not agree to do as others are requesting at this point.
T
Posted by: Family
Spoiler Alert! (highlight to read)
Spoiler Alert! (highlight to read)
Next weeks 24 thread will contain comments concerning how stupid Kim is and that some poster fast forwards through her scenes
Posted by: Rob Helmerichs
quote:
Originally posted by tonyoci
Regardless of what someone's opinion was before this whole debate started why would they not agree to do as others are requesting at this point.
That's right, everything should be done your way. To hell with what anybody else thinks! :rolleyes:
Posted by: Hunter Green
I just don't understand why this has to be a big deal. People are willing to argue for hours to save typing 19 characters two or three times a week as a courtesy, even if that means kicking a whole bunch of voices out of the discussions they claim they've come to the board just to participate in, all because they, personally, like previews.
Whether you personally work this way or not, the following way of thinking is sane and consistent: I don't want to see anything about the show except seeing the show itself. I.e., the best way to learn the story is the show, that's why they make the show. The previews aren't the show, they're something an entirely different bunch of people do strictly for marketing purposes, often to the eternal annoyance of the people who make the show, who craft surprises with care only to have some idiot in Marketing steal their thunder. For what? To sell me the show? I'm already going to watch the show. See, I've got a Season Pass. The last thing I want to give up the suspense for, even if it's only one time in a hundred, is for someone else's attempt to sell me something I already bought.
You don't have to think that way to acknowledge that others do, and not pathologically, either. It doesn't have to change your viewpoint for you to accept that it makes sense, that it's internally consistent.
It's also consistent to say "anyone who thinks like that can just stay the hell out of threads about the show" (or, as a few folks are suggesting, prohibiting us from participating in the threads for show N until at least a week later when we've seen show N+1 as well). But it's not very courteous. We want to participate in threads about shows we've watched for the same reasons you do. And assuming you come to the threads to read, not just to post, you might even appreciate some of the things we contribute to the threads.
Is 19 characters really too much to pay for a generous helping of courtesy and friendliness, with a side order of our possibly-valuable participation in the thread thrown in at no extra charge? Is it really that hard to have to put less than 1% of the week's material-to-be-discussed inside spoilers (or in "next week's thread")? Why do we even have to beg for such trifling kindnesses, let alone argue for them?
Posted by: tonyoci
quote:
Originally posted by Medieval Guy
That's right, everything should be done your way. To hell with what anybody else thinks! :rolleyes:
Common courtesy to consider peoples requests is all I ask, as mentioned you presumably come here to discuss this show, so excluding a number of people makes little sense.
It's common courtesy not jump a line it's not a rule, following your logic then it would be wrong for someone to request that you not cut in line because you don't want to do it my way. People in the community have requested, quite reasonably, that spoiler tags be used, others have "refused" this request without much reasoning as to why they consider the request unreasonable.
T
Posted by: Family
This issue has become quite divided and hostile. In another thread I was called a p***k just because I attempted to put some humor into it. I can see both sides. Personally I avoid the previews, but if they become part of the discussion... I don't really care. I'd prefer to participate in a thread where the entire group is involved rather than have half reading spoilers and others unaware of what is going on. But that's just me.
This issue is not going to be resolved by vote IMO because some are bothered by the previews while others (like myself) feel the discussion is less enjoyable with partial particpation because it's clogged with spoilers.
What is wrong if the coming weeks thread begins early with a discussion of the previews? Sounds like a great compromise to me.
Posted by: Rob Helmerichs
The reasoning is quite simple. Once an episode has been broadcast, it can be discussed, without those gawdawful spoiler tags, in a spoiler thread. The trailer is part of the broadcast. It seems quite simple. But, since the "common courtesy crowd" disagrees with us, we must SHUT THE HELL UP, have thick skulls, are full of BS, are pricks, and must do things their way.
Thank God for common courtesy!
Posted by: tonyoci
I have not once been rude (at least not on purpose). Your opinion is stated in your post what I do not understand is why you are unwilling to accept that others would prefer you adopt a different approach since that approach causes no significant pain. If you can explain to me why you would not want to go with our wishes then I might understand.
My reason for prefering the spoiler tags is very simple. I do not want to know about next weeks show, if the next week stuff is untagged then I personally would choose to not read the thread and I really like reading the threads to discuss the show. Can you give me a reason why you do not want to use spoiler tags.
T
Posted by: walters
quote:
Originally posted by Family
This issue has become quite divided and hostile. In another thread I was called a p***k just because I attempted to put some humor into it.
No, I called you that because, despite my best efforts to avoid it, I read your spoiler. Even though it had been mentioned "half a dozen" times in the thread, in each case it was either in a spoiler tag (which I didn't read) or was prefaced with a phrase like "based on the preview...", which made me stop reading. Yours was not obviously a spoiler until after I read it.
Yes, I actively avoid watching the previews, reading the show description, etc. That means even fast forwarding too far into the show after a commercial break on other Fox shows to avoid being stung by the auto correction. And when I do notice a preview playing, I look away from the screen, shouting "la-la-la" until I can see from peripheral vision that it's over. I don't want to add this forum area to the things I have to avoid.
Posted by: Knative
If you don't want spoilers, don't come to the forum.
Well, I guess that would help the server overload. :rolleyes:
Don't read TV Guide.
Done.
Don't read magazines.
Done. Neither 'Entertainment Weekly' nor 'TV Guide' nor internet spoiler websites for me.
Don't watch TV (you might see commercials).
30 second skip enabled. Done.
Don't go to restaurants (there might be somebody at the next table who has seen TV Guide).
Hasn't happened yet in 2.5 years of TiVo ownership. I'll risk another "Done".
Just lock yourself hermetically in your room until every episode of 24 has aired.
Saran wrap & duct tape installed :p aka Done.
Or maybe, just maybe, don't read spoiler threads.
Well, that's "Done" also. I don't read the 'nPM - n+1PM' thread until I've actually watched the 'nPM - n+1PM' episode. I haven't watched the latest episode of either "The Shield" or "Smallville" yet. Thus I've avoided the Spoiler threads for those episodes (and everything else during those hours' broadcast). When I watch them, sans the previews of next week's episode/happenings, I'll read those threads.
Once an episode has been broadcast, it can be discussed, without those gawdawful spoiler tags, in a spoiler thread. The trailer is part of the broadcast
And the commercials are therefore part of a first-run movie. Fine. No one shall ever complain about commercials before a movie since they are part & parcel of whatever movie they proceed. Jeez, they begin during the prescribed start time of a movie, they must therefore be considered 'allowed' from that point forward until the start time for the next showing, right?
But, since the "common courtesy crowd" disagrees with us, we must SHUT THE HELL UP, have thick skulls, are full of BS, are pricks, and must do things their way.
Thank God for common courtesy!
I guess, as the saying goes, 'Common Courtesy' isn't so Common anymore".
And I, of course, had enough Common Courtesy not to call anyone any of the terms above.
I'm in no way trying to stifle any conjecture on anyone's part. You have an inkling that the mysterious '7th Commando' is really _________? That the 'good sister' is really going to _______? That the guy with the bomb shelter might actually be ________? Fine. Make your predictions. You won't hear a peep from me. But don't tell me what happens in the previews for next week's episode. And don't tell me what next week's (or the week after that) episode description is. I don't want to know. That's why I've avoided reading any spoilers, be they listed here Spoiler Alert! (highlight to read)
in Spoiler text,
listed in the print media, or listed on my TiVo in the program descriptions.
Posted by: Family
quote:
Originally posted by walters
No, I called you that because, despite my best efforts to avoid it, I read your spoiler. Even though it had been mentioned "half a dozen" times in the thread, in each case it was either in a spoiler tag (which I didn't read) or was prefaced with a phrase like "based on the preview...", which made me stop reading. Yours was not obviously a spoiler until after I read it.
This is why you can't judge a person's intention on the internet. Look how the thread begins...
First Poster........ "How's Jack gonna get out of this one? Can't see him really dying with the bomb going off..."
Second Poster.... "Somehow Jack is going to get out of his little jam also. There is too much time left for them to kill either of them off. So there has to be some big twist that gets Jack back on the ground safe and sound."
In other words... I THOUGHT THE MAIN DISCUSSION WITHIN THE THREAD WAS ABOUT THE PREVIEW. Since I had seen it (one of the few times I've seen a preview) and was reading from that context it never occured to me that anyone could not have known.
Also posted before my comment (after someone complained about spoilers).... "Yeah but isn't a little late for that now? There is only one thing that could be spoiled and it allready has in this thread. So what difference does it make?"
I wasn't the only one who thought this way...............
Posted by: vertigo235
quote:
Originally posted by CraigEagle
Why not just start nexts weeks episode thread a week early
1. It doesnt add extra threads
2. People who want to discuss next weeks show, based on knowledge from the previews and other sources) can read the thread
3. People who dont want to know about the next show can wait until next week to read it
JMHO
- Craig
This is a good idea, and probably the best solution I think.
Posted by: vertigo235
quote:
Originally posted by Medieval Guy
But the trailer is broadcast with the 9-10 show. As far as I'm concerned, anything that airs with the 9-10 shows (in a spoiler thread) is fair game. If you don't want spoilers, don't come to the forum. Don't read TV Guide. Don't read magazines. Don't watch TV (you might see commercials). Don't go to restaurants (there might be somebody at the next table who has seen TV Guide). Just lock yourself hermetically in your room until every episode of 24 has aired.
Or maybe, just maybe, don't read spoiler threads.
This was the thought process that I previously subscribed to, and I thought most reasonable human beings as well. But it looks like the census is pretty much split down the middle.
With that said I can respect those who think they are being "Spoiled" and I'll just refrain from speculating on the previews or even mentioning them at all.
Posted by: jlb
This whole thread is rather funny.....I cannot believe we have wasted this much time talking about spoilers when we could be talking about Spoiler Alert! (highlight to read)
is Jack really on a plane
or Spoiler Alert! (highlight to read)
they won't kill him, will they?
or Spoiler Alert! (highlight to read)
how long until Kim falls into a pond with that white tank top on?
.
Seriously, I would not mind using Spoiler Alert! (highlight to read)
spoilers
in the thread as it does not take too much time IMHO. I also would not mind Spoiler Alert! (highlight to read)
starting next week's thread early. A good idea too!
But if there is anyone out there that does not want to use spoilers because it takes up too much time but would not mind starting next week's thread early, then you are a Spoiler Alert! (highlight to read)
hypocrite
Either method works.
And seriously, the only reason this is a problem is because 24 is such a good, suspenseful show and sometimes, some of us just can't wait to see the slightest little thing about next week's episode. Realisitcally, if you don't like being spoiled, maybe you should wait until the season is over and then get the DVDs and just watch all 24 episodes over a long weekend......
Posted by: Hunter Green
One good thing about this thread is we can simply mark "ignore" on everyone who insists here on posting unguarded spoilers.
Posted by: dmaneyapanda
Wow, there are some serious cases of "pot, meet kettle" here.
I just want to go out on a limb and say that my preference is for movies to be shown in OAR. You pan 'n scan people are ruining it for everyone!
/sarcasm
Posted by: bdowell
I said it elsewhere, but I'll repeat:
IF A MESSAGE SUBJECT SAYS SPOILERS, or UNTAGGED SPOILERS, then I expect full well anything is fair game, and I will see spoilers if I read the thread - up to, and including the previews for future shows.
If you want NO UNTAGGED SPOILERS, start the thread, and say it in the title. People will honor the request, and those that don't can be banished for bad manners.
There are times when I see previews that frustrate the heck out of me, and that I know have given too much away, but I don't avoid commercials for future shows as I sit and (I know, it causes many to shudder) watch Live TV.
If I see previews for Alias (as an example), I know it's giving away part of the story to watch it. I *hope* that when the previews are put together (or teaser trailers, etc.) that they've kept a lot in reserve, and haven't revealed too much, but I don't fret and cry about having seen the preview, or about speculation about future shows that are based on the previews.
In the end it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out much of what the preview has already shown us. Anyone that doesn't realize that (again, for example) Sydney Bristow will survive all the harrowing close calls (at least until the show ends its run) is daft. The same holds for Kiefer Sutherland in 24. He's executive producer of the show. He's not gonna kill himself off, so it becomes a matter of just how he escapes close call number 365 in series 1 or series 2.
While some shows may completely throw us for a loop, for the most part Hollywood knows that the viewers are stupid and we need the Red Shirt to know who will die and who won't, or that we'll recognize the red shirt when we see it, and won't be lost watching the shows.
Posted by: bdowell
quote:
Originally posted by Knative
Or maybe, just maybe, don't read spoiler threads.
Well, that's "Done" also. I don't read the 'nPM - n+1PM' thread until I've actually watched the 'nPM - n+1PM' episode. I haven't watched the latest episode of either "The Shield" or "Smallville" yet. Thus I've avoided the Spoiler threads for those episodes (and everything else during those hours' broadcast). When I watch them, sans the previews of next week's episode/happenings, I'll read those threads.
Which is *precisely* what I do with threads on all of my currently watched shows.
I know in advance that a thread about Buffy is gonna include comments about previews, future events, and more. I don't read the threads until I have watched the episode, and since by then, I've seen the previews for next week's shows, it's not an issue.
I don't read the thread about 24, or NYPD Blue, or Enterprise, or any of a host of other shows until I've watched the show. Why? Because I'm a smart enough cookie to figure out reading the thread is gonna *spoil* what I'm watching -- MOST ESPECIALLY IF THE THREAD SAYS CLEARLY IN THE TITLE: SPOILERS.
Does including *untagged* spoilers keep some folks out of the conversation - perhaps it does, but that's their choice, and I'm not forcing them to ignore what goes on around them.
Before I forget, here's a major spoiler that can be determined without too much effort, but perhaps it's one that some folks are missing:
Spoiler Alert! (highlight to read)
In the not too distant future, U.S. troops will be involved in the elimination of Saddam Hussien as a threat to peace and stability in the world.
There will be lots of interesting pyrotechnics and eye popping special effects.
Of course, if you've read a newspaper, heard a radio, seen a TV, or just heard water-cooler talk, you've probably had this all spoiled for you, and it really must be tearing you up inside.
Oh, how nice to be worried over such trivial issues and arguing vehemently over same in a world where we have to be concerned that tomorrow could be the day that a weapon of mass destruction *really is* used within the U.S. borders
Posted by: bdowell
quote:
Originally posted by dmaneyapanda
Wow, there are some serious cases of "pot, meet kettle" here.
I just want to go out on a limb and say that my preference is for movies to be shown in OAR. You pan 'n scan people are ruining it for everyone!
/sarcasm
Now that's one I can join the fun on.
Can someone please point me towards the buyers for Safeway (for example), which insists on getting *full screen* P&S copies (and only P&S) of any DVDs they are going to stock for sale?
Or perhaps the ones for Blockbuster (who, on the one hand, offer the great deal in 'rent-it, like-it, buy-it' for movies you've already rented) who have a tendency to stock the latest and greatest in P&S when they have a choice (thank god many discs are released with both versions on the discs, so Blockbuster can't choose for me!!!)
Posted by: tonyoci
What I am not understanding is that no one is telling any of the "preview spoiling" faction that there way is wrong. We are just requesting if you could see your way to not doing it so that we as part of the community can enjoy the thread also. Up until this week I have been able to avoid preview spoilers in the 24 thread 100%, due to spoiler tags, and clearly marked comments refering that preview spoilers will follow (interestingly in some cases by people who are now speaking out against spoiler tags). This week there were some straight in your face spoilers with no warnings at all.
T
Posted by: DanT
quote:
Originally posted by jlb
Realisitcally, if you don't like being spoiled, maybe you should wait until the season is over and then get the DVDs and just watch all 24 episodes over a long weekend......
That's what I (and many others) did last year, with 24 Season 1, and guess what happened - before I had a chance to watch all the episodes I'd recorded, someone went and spoiled two major plot points in a thread that wasn't even about 24, because they assumed everyone had seen it!
If you don't want spoilers, don't come to the forum.
If preview spoilers continue to be a problem, that's exactly what I'll do. I'll avoid the TV Talk threads for at least 24, The Shield, Buffy, and Angel, and probably Smallville and others as well.
Don't read TV Guide.
Haven't read it in years.
Don't read magazines.
I don't read anything about shows I know I'll be watching. This includes magazines, spoiler-ific websites, etc. The one exception is this forum, because spoilers are SUPPOSED to be tagged.
Don't watch TV (you might see commercials).
Duh, this is the TiVo Forums. I hardly ever watch any commercials, and I NEVER watch commercials for shows I know I'm going to watch anyway. Not only is it a waste of time, but it WILL spoil things.
Don't go to restaurants (there might be somebody at the next table who has seen TV Guide).
This kind of thing happened a couple of times at work, but I just yelled out "WAIT!" and then explained why I was leaving the room. In a restaurant, I'd ask them to not discuss it, or I'd go to the bathroom for a few minutes or something. But it's really not much of a problem.
Just lock yourself hermetically in your room until every episode of 24 has aired.
Now you're just being silly.
Or maybe, just maybe, don't read spoiler threads.
I already wait until I've seen the episode in question before I read any spoiler threads. But just because the thread title says "*spoilers*" doesn't (typically) mean it's open season on ALL spoilers.
Once an episode has been broadcast, it can be discussed, without those gawdawful spoiler tags, in a spoiler thread. The trailer is part of the broadcast
No, the trailer/preview is an advertisement, which I skip/fast-forward through because I don't want to see it.
But, since the "common courtesy crowd" disagrees with us, we must SHUT THE HELL UP, have thick skulls, are full of BS, are pricks, and must do things their way.
No disagreement here. :D (Hell, probably half of those were posted by me anyway.)
Thank God for common courtesy!
Too bad you seem to refuse to use any.
I don't understand how you pro-preview-spoiler people can't see that previews for next week ARE spoilers, plain and simple. We spoiler-phobes go to great lengths to avoid them, and then get ambushed when we come here to discuss the shows. All of our hard work is for naught, and the shows are no longer as enjoyable as they would have been without the foreknowledge of certain events.
Posted by: Hunter Green
The problem with this debate, like with most debates, is that the two sides are debating about different things.
The Pro-Untagged-Preview-Spoilers (PUPS) team is essentially arguing about the definition of spoiler, and thereby, of the definition of show. They insist that the show is everything that is broadcast during the timeslot for the show, and therefore anything within that is a spoiler only for that show. This definition is logical and consistent, it makes sense, though it's arbitrary.
The Con-Untagged-Preview-Spoilers (CUPS) team uses a different definition of show. Our definition focuses more on what happens within the story. It's easiest to explain for 24: for PUPS the show is defined by an hour of our lives, and for CUPS, the show is defined by an hour of Jack's life. The CUPS definition is logical and consistent, it makes sense, though it's arbitrary.
The problem is that the PUPS argument stops here. That's really the only point they have -- that their definitions make sense. But either definition makes just as much sense as the other. Neither is so clearly better that the other one is ludicrous. PUPS wants the argument to be about the definition but for CUPS that's only the starting point, it's not the actual argument.
The CUPS team are not trying to convince the PUPS team to change their definitions. Nor to prevent them from discussing what they want. When there's a symmetrical, arbitrary pair of opposing viewpoints, the discussion, if it's to be fruitful, must focus on compromise. That is the kernel and core of the CUPS argument, and it's the part that the PUPS team never acknowledges or addresses, let alone refutes.
PUPS refuses to compromise. They insist on having the thread the way they want it, refusing even to type 19 characters, even if means taking 100% of the thread away from the other side just so they don't have to suffer that tiny inconvenience. The CUPS team proposes a balanced compromise, in which both sides suffer a tiny inconvenience, so that both sides get 99% of the benefit, 99% of what they're looking for. That is the truest definition of compromise. And it's rare when so good a compromise, that costs both sides so little and gives both sides so much, is even possible.
I've seen this debate a dozen times on a dozen forums, and I have never, not once, seen the PUPS side ever directly address this point, ever argue why this compromise is unfair, or why it asks too much of them, or otherwise take on the actual issue. They always state their definitions, argue for them, and never manage to get past that morass. I'd really like to see PUPS actually take on the real issue; and if they won't, I can only wonder if it's because they can't, if it's because there is no refutation of the compromise to be made.
Posted by: bdowell
Ok, let me argue it this way for you:
This PUP doesn't think that anyone should have to do more work (as in add spoiler tag) so that any CUP avoids (as in less work) SPOILERs, or so that the CUPS can save work by not having to work to avoid SPOILERs.
The CUPS side -- from your own argument -- is assuming that they can expect and demand a change of behavior from *everyone* which requires (according to the numbers I'm reading in the poll) roughly half the patrons to change their behavior and do extra work.
Posted by: Family
quote:
PUPS refuses to compromise. They insist on having the thread the way they want it, refusing even to type 19 characters, even if means taking 100% of the thread away from the other side just so they don't have to suffer that tiny inconvenience. The CUPS team proposes a balanced compromise, in which both sides suffer a tiny inconvenience, so that both sides get 99% of the benefit, 99% of what they're looking for. That is the truest definition of compromise. And it's rare when so good a compromise, that costs both sides so little and gives both sides so much, is even possible.
I've seen this debate a dozen times on a dozen forums, and I have never, not once, seen the PUPS side ever directly address this point, ever argue why this compromise is unfair, or why it asks too much of them, or otherwise take on the actual issue. They always state their definitions, argue for them, and never manage to get past that morass. I'd really like to see PUPS actually take on the real issue; and if they won't, I can only wonder if it's because they can't, if it's because there [I]is no refutation of the compromise to be made. [/B]
I'll address it........... A thread clogged with spoiler tags is unconfortable for me to read. Maybe I have a learning disability or perhaps others feel the same way, but I avoid threads full of spoilers because it just feels too fragmented. One tag is fine, but if half the posts contain spoilers... I just usually move on.
I don't buy the "it's compromise for both sides" to tag spoilers because that is all CUPS really want. It's like saying if you borrow $1000 from me and won't pay me back that offering $500 is a compromise. I might have to accept it, but who got what he wanted? I want a thread without spoilers and I don't really care wheither we talk about previews or not. That's why I voted no. How do you propose compromising for me?
Posted by: Rob Helmerichs
...and the PUPS side doesn't want to have two simultaneous discussions going on in the same thread, one by people who have read the whole spoiler thread and one by people who haven't.
Posted by: Hunter Green
Of course a compromise involves a change in behavior from everyone. That's the nature of compromises.
The thing about the "avoiding work" bit is that we can't avoid spoilers if you don't tag them, no amount of work will do. The only choice we have is to simply not participate. That's the whole point -- it's not a matter of who does the extra work at all.
Posted by: Hunter Green
It's a compromise for both sides because both sides suffer some inconvenience, and both sides don't get exactly what they want, but both sides get most of what they want. Family, sounds like you're only looking at one side of all three of these facts when you say it's not a compromise.
Posted by: Family
Hunter Green
It is you who is looking at one side when you say that a "yes vote" is a compromise. You are viewing this as strictly preview VS nonpreview issue. It isn't. Everyone voting "no" is not just being a jerk in "refusing to type 19 characters" as you put it. Some might actually prefer an nonspoiler thread regardless of previews or not. My compromise would be to have a no spoiler thread with no preview discussion, but that's not an option.
Right now the vote is split 50/50 and I'd be willing to bet that the "no votes" represent a coalition of people who are uncompromising and many who simply do not want spoilers in a thread. I disagree with your post that stated that the PUPS are uncompromising... just because they don't see things your way. In reality the "no voters" are probably voting as such for many reasons while the "yes crowd" has only one thing in mind.... no previews.
Posted by: Maui
Well, for the most part I have stopped reading Buffy topics on this board because of preview spoilers and other types of spoilers. It is a show I would really rather be surprised by.
I will also bow out of 24 discussions if preview spoilers become the norm. I specifically stopped watching 24 previews last year because they gave too much away. I have continued that habit this year.
I can understand both points of view but all that will be accomplished if it is decided that spoiler tags are not needed for previews is you will drive others out of the topic. No big deal if you lose me because I don't really contribute much but other posters may be missed. Personally, I don't understand why you would want to alienate people from certain topics when it could be avoided by using spoiler tags but to each their own
The best idea I think I have read so far that does not include spoiler tags is to start the topic for next weeks episode 1 week early and discuss the previews there. Even though previews are shown with this weeks episode they are technically scenes from next weeks episode.
Posted by: bdowell
quote:
Originally posted by Hunter Green
Of course a compromise involves a change in behavior from everyone. That's the nature of compromises.
The thing about the "avoiding work" bit is that we can't avoid spoilers if you don't tag them, no amount of work will do. The only choice we have is to simply not participate. That's the whole point -- it's not a matter of who does the extra work at all.
Actually absolutely NO WORK does in fact work ;)
If you skip the threads that are clearly labelled SPOILERS, you will miss any and all spoilers.
Now, what you'll do about message subjects such as: "Mr. Rogers dies to cancer", or (previously spoiled by message subject) "SMG Says No More Buffy", or "24 and Alias picked up for season 3", I'll never know....
I do seriously question though how you live when you refuse to come into contact with anything that might be a spoiler.
Posted by: Maui
quote:
Originally posted by bdowell
Now, what you'll do about message subjects such as: "Mr. Rogers dies to cancer", or (previously spoiled by message subject) "SMG Says No More Buffy", or "24 and Alias picked up for season 3", I'll never know....
Actually, I have not read either the Buffy topic you mention or the other one that has Joss mentioned in the header in the off case they do mention anything specific about the end of the season.
I think the other two examples don't really fit the discussion well at all.
Posted by: wallace
quote:
Originally posted by Hunter Green
It's a compromise for both sides because both sides suffer some inconvenience, and both sides don't get exactly what they want, but both sides get most of what they want. Family, sounds like you're only looking at one side of all three of these facts when you say it's not a compromise.
Exactly how is it a compromise for the CUPS? I have avoided jumping in this debate because it seems to be one nasty useless pissing contest, but your approach to make logic of it spurs an interesting debate. If the PUPS were to use spoiler tags, what exactly do the CUPS give up in the compromise? It seems to me that they can read the entire thread exactly the way they want it. As you know a compromise is when both parties give up something they want, and as far as I have seen with your argument (which I like your attempt to break it down logically btw) the CUPS do not give up anything at all in trying to make a deal. In fact it is quite obvious that many have stated it is an all or nothing situation for them, they either get their spoiler tags or they don't read it at all. As I think about it, there is no middle ground for the CUPS where they give something up as well, thus there will never be a compromise.
My opinion of the entire thing sides with the PUPS just so you all know, however it is not for the reasons most people have stated (the definition of show). My reason is simply that the whole idea of these threads in my opinion is to discuss the events that happened during your viewing and to guess, debate, and ponder what will happen in future episodes. This whole evaluation of what we saw and fun guessing of what to comes can be just as harmful to the CUPS as the preview for next week episode according to their fear of not wanting to know what will happen. Even if most of guesses are incorrect, it only takes a few that are close enough that you happen to read to ruin the surprise that CUPS apparently value more than life itself. This is just my own reasoning of course, and I will not be dragged into some debate on it (a.k.a. a pissing contest in this debate in general it seems) so bash away all you want.
So, based on the fact that I do not see how a compromise can be reached (CUPS don't give up a single thing to get what they want) the only solution I can see is for them to simply start there own threads. Thanks to Hunter's nice CUPS/PUPS idea he actually came up with the simple solution without realizing it. Just have people start using the CUPS and PUPS designators in the title along with *SPOILERS* so that it is absolutely clear what conversation is allowed in the thread.
Example: "24 9:00p - 10:00p - *PUPS* *SPOILERS*"
Although I wonder if there will even be debate in the CUPS thread about trying to guess what will happen in future episodes thus resulting in yet another thread split :D
Posted by: brahamt
I usually watch the spoilers anyway, but for the sake of people who don't it is only right to keep them out of the thread completely.
Posted by: tonyoci
Everyone is making this too scientific for my tastes. My point is quite simple
As a member of this community I am requesting that the nice pups could see their way to not posting spoilers from the previews for next weeks show without spoiler tags or some kind of clear warning.
I want to be able to participate in the threads, and I am politely asking if people could see their way to help me out. The radical stances are a little disconcerting
I feel that the current poll is totally flawed, I believe many people have voted for the wrong option (on both sides) so we really do not know the real numbers, plus there were not enough options. It should have been more clear and included the "start next weeks thread option" at least.
T
Posted by: Crrink
quote:
Originally posted by tonyoci
Everyone is making this too scientific for my tastes.
Logic is your friend. Embrace it. If you find that you can't support your argument, it probably means that you are wrong.
quote:
[i] My point is quite simple. As a member of this community I am requesting that the nice pups could see their way to not posting spoilers from the previews for next weeks show without spoiler tags or some kind of clear warning.
T
wallace is completely correct in that the 'compromise' asks nothing of the CUPS, so it isn't really a compromise.
THAT being said, since I'm a nice guy, I don't mind going through the extra work of either posting preview material in spoiler tags, or in an early thread for next weeks episode (the latter option being something I think might work better than seems to be expected)
One of big problems is that even IF we were all to agree to use spoiler tags for the previews, new users, infrequent users, and lazy users will inevitably forget on occasion, apparently throwing the lives of many of you into complete disarray.
I think that's what initially happened in the 24 thread in question, and I also think that the reason this has reached such fevered pitch is because the CUPS weren't very friendly in their request.
Anyway, good luck figuring it all out....you know, the only people you have to convince are the Mods, anyway, but I can't leave without one more comment - the lengths some of you guys go to in order to avoid any/all spoilers is kinda frightening. It's only a TV show, folks, it'll be o.k.
....unless, of course, the guy who said he sticks his fingers in his ears and shouts 'la la la' until he sees the commercial is over, was kidding......I took him seriously.
Have a nice day.
-Chris
Posted by: tonyoci
As you said people will still make mistakes, I doubt the mods decision can really help with this problem.
I would be happy if someone said "Preview spoiler to follow" not even in spoiler tags.
I think there has only been on instance of a nasty CUP
What exactly do you want the cups to give up. Our only option appears to be not to read the thread which kind of defeats the purpose. My compromise is this, if I know that the thread will offer preview spoilers untagged I will still read the thread and contribute, that's about the best I can offer. All I am politely asking is if people could make a small effort to not include spoilers if possible.
I am always interested in the discussions that offer speculation as to future events but not in actual factual spoilers.
The only ends I go to avoid spoilers is not watching the previews, not watching ads for the show (or any show for that matter) and not reading the show synopsis. It's not really that hard.
T
Posted by: Crrink
It's not that I want the CUPS to give anything up - I was only pointing out that there hasn't been a compromise offered.
Like I said, I'll use tags out of courtesy, but so far there hasn't been any logical, moral reason offered to compel everyone to do so.
I don't like having to put up with using spoiler tags, and the extra effort involved in reading them. I will make the effort for you spoiler-phobes because I think your request is reasonable. I understand that others do not feel the same way, and I don't fault them for it.
Posted by: atreyu
On the matter of "CUP" compromise, here's one:
I (and I expect most other CUPS) would also be fine with, say, a title of "(!) PREVIEW" (see above) on any post discussing the previews, even if the following preview discussion were "exposed." Just give at *least* a one-word heads-up alerting us to skip to the next post.
There... the CUPS give up the total "protection" that spoiler tags offer, while the cost to PUPS is reduced to 7 keystrokes. CUPS avoid the preview commentary with no "gawdawful spoiler tags" needed.
I also, however, agree that starting next week's thread early makes total sense and would work very well.
Posted by: bdowell
Can I just make this all simple for all of us right here and now?
Jack Bauer lives through all 24 hours and is the complete and total hero.
The President determines that several people were bad and involved in a conspiracy.
After 24 hours, we will know that some people have been caught, some have been killed, and the world has been saved from the brink of nuclear war thanks to our hero, his dumb daughter or some random character that she has bumped into, or some other character that has been yet to be introduced.
But, again, after 24 hours, most everything will be ok in the world of 24, just like every other show where you know that the main character isn't going anywhere, and that the previews for the show have done nothing other than introduce more rambling and deception into expectations of the followers of the show.
Oooops, apologies for spoiling the entire series for everyone. Hope it doesn't mean you will miss the remaining shows.
Posted by: Maui
Nothing like condescending sarcasm to influence others to change their position.
Posted by: Hunter Green
What the CUPS give up is quite simply having a thread that doesn't contain preview spoilers, and the likelihood that stuff will slip out of those spoilers anyway. But the spoiler rule brings that risk to a reasonable level.
Posted by: bdowell
What the CUPS are gonna wind up giving up is about 50% of the discussion on the topics, when most of the PUPS decide it just ain't worth it.
Posted by: tonyoci
I ran a quick (unscientific) look at the previous 24 threads and the PUPS appear to be a lot more vocal right now since very few untagged and unwarned preview spoilers appear in any of the previous threads. There seems to be a sudden swell of opinion probably based more on the reaction to this weeks spoilers than any long standing opinion.
T
Posted by: Maui
quote:
Originally posted by bdowell
What the CUPS are gonna wind up giving up is about 50% of the discussion on the topics, when most of the PUPS decide it just ain't worth it.
The reverse is true too, and far more likely in my opinion.
If spoilers tags are not included many won't bother to even wander in to the topic due to the fear of reading those spoilers.
Posted by: smak
It seems clear to me. The title of the thread is "24 9-10". The previews at the end are previews of "24 10-11"
Two different shows, should be two different threads, or have some sort of warning in the current thread.
I do not even set foot in the 24 9-10 thread until i've seen 9-10.
I purposely do not watch the previews at the end of 24.
I'm sure a lot of people do the same. By spoiling next week's show you are limiting the people who would like to discuss the current show.
Don't get all, well the previews are at the end of 9-10 therefore fair game, and not spoilers. Every second of the preview is included in the 10-11 show and nowhere else. Obviously scenes from a future show are spoilers no?
And even if you're 100% right, isn't it worth it to take a few seconds extra to either let more people in the conversation here, or not ruin someone's enjoyment of the show?
-smak-
Posted by: Crrink
SNIP:
quote:
Originally posted by smak
And even if you're 100% right, isn't it worth it to take a few seconds extra to either let more people in the conversation here, or not ruin someone's enjoyment of the show?
-smak-
Well, that all depends on your own opinion, courtesy, willingness to placate spoiler-phobes who may or may not be acting rationally, etc.
What a lot of you spoiler-phobes don't get is that this isn't a simple right or wrong issue. What gives you the RIGHT to ask anybody to go out of THEIR way to make YOUR experience more enjoyable to YOU?
Nothing.
It can be easily argued that going through the trouble of putting the word spoilers in the thread title is already effort enough....in fact, I'm pretty sure that HAS been argued in this thread.
I already said that the request of the spoiler-phobes is reasonable TO ME. I am, however, smart enough to know that not everyone feels the same way that I do, and, much to the chagrin of you CUPS folks, there's no reason they OUGHT to feel the way you want them to.
When faced with a disagreement like this, the best thing to do is usually to have a democratic vote - which is what Justapixel has given us. If that doesn't work, then she and/or the other mods can decide how the threads should be run, and that will be that.
But NOBODY has the moral upper hand here, as many of you are wrongly implying, if not outright stating.
EDIT: BTW, I haven't voted: I agree
with the PUPS, but am willing to
accomodate the CUPS, so I figured I
should just abstain. FWIW.
Posted by: smak
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Crrink
[B]
What a lot of you spoiler-phobes don't get is that this isn't a simple right or wrong issue. What gives you the RIGHT to ask anybody to go out of THEIR way to make YOUR experience more enjoyable to YOU?
Nothing.
That should be this community's new motto!
You are right. It's not a simple right or wrong issue. That would mean one side would be absolutely no spoilers of the previews forever, punishable by permanent ban. The other side would say spoil the previews in 20 inch lettering for all non-preview likers to choke on.
Obviously since right now the vote is 47-40 yes, it seems that this is a community, and not a place where people can't waste 4 seconds of their life to help (the majority) out.
-smak-
Posted by: dssdbs
Why does this poll even exist? The "previews" show right along with the current night show, I consider it part of the show. I really don't care how this poll turns out, won't change how I choose to post. If I feel like posting something about the "previews", I'm going to do it.
I am personally getting VERY tired of people trying to dictate how others should post.
Posted by: bkmunroe
I vote that previews don't need to be tagged as spoilers.
To me spoilers are anything that is information from outside the show. I consider the show to consist of the previously-seen segment, the main storyline and the previews for the next episode. The producers put them in the show because they want us to watch.
When I see 9-10PM, I see the episode title not the timeframe of the storyline. So, when I see a thread that says 9-10PM, it simply refers to the show that aired this week and not just that part of the story.
I'm against using spoiler space, simply because it's annoying and threads can become unreadable. Someone says something in invisible ink and then someone replies to it in invisible ink and someone else responds in invisible ink etc. I've actually given up on threads that had too much spoiler space. I'm tired of highlighting invisible ink and scrolling through dozens of blank lines in newsgroup posts. As long as the title gives a spoiler warning then I can make a decision whether or not I want to participate.
I'm not sure why the anti-preview people read the threads. Even if people tag previews you still have to deal with speculation. Which seems that it could spoil it for you just as much. So, why risk it?
Posted by: Maui
quote:
Originally posted by dssdbs
Why does this poll even exist? The "previews" show right along with the current night show, I consider it part of the show. I really don't care how this poll turns out, won't change how I choose to post. If I feel like posting something about the "previews", I'm going to do it.
I am personally getting VERY tired of people trying to dictate how others should post.
Hey a Rebel... Fight the power man!
Don't let David Bott or Justapixel (the moderator who posted this poll) dictate how you post. How dare they.
And by all means don't let anybody else ask a favor of you that would make you even give one bit of consideration to someone besides yourself. That's just evil of them.
Posted by: DanT
As (I think) the guy who really started this whole firestorm with my reply to the original thread, humor me while I make a few additional points.
Someone mentioned that they looked back at old threads, and it really hadn't been a problem until this week. That's not entirely true. It's happened many times before, and when it did, myself and others politely asked the person to edit their post and put the info in spoiler tags. Many of these times, we've even included explicit instructions on how to spoiler-tag text, in case the person(s) didn't know how. Usually, the original poster went back and edited their post so that the enjoyment of others wasn't diminished by knowledge of preview spoilers.
The reason I posted my "inflammatory" remarks this time was threefold. First, the spoiler in question was rather significant. Secondly, we have a member with over a year of time and over 800 posts, who IMHO should know by now what the general protocol has been, and how to use spoiler tags. Finally, two people posted the spoiler, then someone warned them about preview-based spoilers, then someone DID use spoiler tags concerning the preview, and then a THIRD person went ahead and posted it yet again anyway. At that point, I debated with myself whether to be nice and forgiving as I had in the past, or to try something with a little more oomph. I decided for the more forceful approach, because it's obvious the kinder, gentler approach hasn't worked. And now that it's sparked this debate, one way or another, it'll solve the problem once and for all. (Either by half the group leaving the discussion entirely, or by the other half being respectful of our wishes.)
dssdbs - If you follow through on your threat to continue posting regardless of the rules, then I'll be forced to add you to my ignore list. That's not something I want to do. I've only ignored one other person ever, and that idiot/troll has never made a constructive post in all his time here. I don't think you fall into the same category, but if it saves me from you spoiling my enjoyment, I'll do it.
Oh, and one more thing. I too don't care if it's actually in spoiler tags or not. Just give me a warning that the next section is going to be discussing something from the previews, and I'll skip it. No "gawdawful spoiler tags" and no excessive highlighting, etc.
Posted by: jlb
Damn this thread. All this talk about cups and pups has me wanting to take the thread on a different tangent:
[img][/img]
Posted by: Crrink
quote:
Originally posted by smak
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Crrink
[B]
What a lot of you spoiler-phobes don't get is that this isn't a simple right or wrong issue. What gives you the RIGHT to ask anybody to go out of THEIR way to make YOUR experience more enjoyable to YOU?
Nothing.
That should be this community's new motto!
You are right. It's not a simple right or wrong issue. That would mean one side would be absolutely no spoilers of the previews forever, punishable by permanent ban. The other side would say spoil the previews in 20 inch lettering for all non-preview likers to choke on.
Obviously since right now the vote is 47-40 yes, it seems that this is a community, and not a place where people can't waste 4 seconds of their life to help (the majority) out.
-smak-
smak, I'm afraid I don't understand your post. I'll try again after the morning coffee kicks in.
Posted by: walters
quote:
Originally posted by dssdbs
I really don't care how this poll turns out, won't change how I choose to post.
Yep, I suspected that attitude was out there somewhere, and now that there's proof, I really don't care how this poll turns out, either. I won't be reading 24 threads anymore. Ann, you can subtract one "yes" vote if you'd like.
Posted by: tonyoci
I do not understand someone who say "what gives you the right to ask me not to do something"
Surely I have the right to ask you to do anything I want. I am only asking. I have contributed to every 24 thread so far and would like to continue, I would like to consider my posts worthwhile and part of the community. Those posts will be missing if I cannot avoid the preview spoilers. I doubt that someone with the attitude above would care about that but if a lot of people stop posting then the threads would become less interesting (not just 24 but in all threads).
You say I do not have the right to ASK you to do something, but you have the right to just do what ever you want. That seems a little contradictory.
T
Posted by: Crrink
quote:
Originally posted by tonyoci
I do not understand someone who say "what gives you the right to ask me not to do something"
Surely I have the right to ask you to do anything I want. I am only asking. I have contributed to every 24 thread so far and would like to continue, I would like to consider my posts worthwhile and part of the community. Those posts will be missing if I cannot avoid the preview spoilers. I doubt that someone with the attitude above would care about that but if a lot of people stop posting then the threads would become less interesting (not just 24 but in all threads).
You say I do not have the right to ASK you to do something, but you have the right to just do what ever you want. That seems a little contradictory.
T
You're right, poor wording on my part.
I should've said, what gives you the right to COMPEL me to do something for your benefit.
Posted by: tonyoci
Thank you, I have never attempted to compel you. I am simply asking you to do this so I can continue to enjoy these threads (as much as I am enjoying this one).
Question: What would happen next week if I started a thread called
24 10-11 (*Spoilers*) - No Preview Spoilers Allowed
Would people still post preview spoilers ?
T
Posted by: Crrink
Eh, I think it would probably happen on accident, due to laziness, or due to malice, you know, kind of like the way things are now :)
I still like the idea of starting next week's thread early and putting any comments on the previews there - that would give everyone the chance to make predictions before the episode aired, Survivor style.
I think that after a few weeks of doing it that way, people would get used to it, and might even prefer it.
Wonder if we'll get to see?
Posted by: justapixel
Personally, I think this issue is a bit silly. The 24 producers only show previews of what they WANT us to think will happen, not what actually will happen, so I don't think discussing it really is a spoiler. Just like with Survivor or any other show - the previews for next week don't really give anything away, and in fact, are sometimes designed to confuse us.
However, the will of the majority is what we will go with. It's the fairest way to handle a conflict.
If the use of spoiler tags for preview information is what is chosen, then we mods will enforce it. If somebody makes a mistake, I or another mod fix it.
And, if somebody decides to act like a two-year-old having a tantrum and they deliberately spoil things for other people, well, then I'll have to deal with that situation a different way.
Anybody who wants to change their vote, PM me.
Posted by: tonyoci
I'm not sure I want to be policed by the mods either way. I have asked the pro-spoilers to do me a favor and I am happy with that. If they do not then that's tough on me and I can live with it.
I agree with the starting next weeks thread early approach.
T
Posted by: atreyu
quote:
Originally posted by justapixel
The 24 producers only show previews of what they WANT us to think will happen, not what actually will happen, so I don't think discussing it really is a spoiler.
I agree that some of the previews fit this description, justapixel... but not all of them. A good example of a well-executed redirection would be the preview of Marie pointing a gun at Kate, followed by the sound of a gunshot, which of course turned out to be Jack shooting Marie. This is them showing us what they want us to THINK will happen.
But let me try to explain the sort of preview that shows us what actually WILL happen -- i.e. *is* a genuine spoiler. The one that ticked me off the most was right after the Mosque raid, when Sayed Ali has disappeared. I just about threw my remote at the TV when the preview had a shot of Sayed Ali being tackled and bound by a dozen or so agents, while Kate shouted, "that's him! That's Sayed Ali!" in case we hadn't identified him visually.
That's all it took to vaporize the suspense the final moments of the show had established when Jack shouted into his radio that Ali was still at large -- I knew Ali would be found promptly, instead of disappearing into the ether, alerted to the fact that the government was on his trail.
Consequently there was pretty much zero suspense for me as Jack tracked Ali through the basement on the next episode... I knew he'd find Ali and that there'd be a horde of agents there to help subdue him. I knew Jack wouldn't be disarmed and taken hostage by Ali, and I knew Ali wouldn't find and kill Kate before he was subdued.
This sort of preview subject matter, where you see something (or hear something spoken) that instantly establishes certain things about the next episode, is what I term "preview spoilers" -- they leave absolutely no room for redirection. I've begun skipping 24 previews because they often seem to have this sort of spoiler in them.
BTW, I missed the entire last season of 24... watched it on DVD right before this season. The previews weren't included on the distribution. Just food for thought...
Posted by: tonyoci
Spoilers about 9pm-10pm in this post
The misdirection itself is a spoiler. When they show Marie pointing a gun then you know a lot about the next show. So in the most recent show you know that when Kate see's Marie you have knowledge that she will find her and that they will get into a certain situation. I did not watch that preview so there was suspense for me when Kate saw Marie. I did not know what was going to happen in any direction.
Yes I know that everything will work out OK in the end but it's the details of how we get there that make a show entertaining.
Also, do we really know that the producers setup the next week on 24 or is it Fox.
T
PS. Anyone feel free to spoil any scenes that involve Kim.
Posted by: Maui
Atreyu just listed a perfect example of why I refuse to watch 24 previews especially. It does not sound like they have gotten any better than when I decided to to stop watching them last season.
Justapixel,
I'm of the opinion that the 24 producers (and most other producers) will show anything, including spoilers and deliberately misleading segments, in their previews just to convince people to tune in next week. They are not concerned about spoilers, they are only concerned about making sure that those sitting and watching the preview tune in again next week. Previews are not really for those of us who are already hooked and will tune in regardless. they are for those who may be sitting on the fence.
Posted by: Hoffer
This thread is funny. I can't believe people get so worked up over previews of a TV show. What do you guys do during commercial spots for 24? Assuming you don't fast forward through them. Do you run out of the room yelling and screaming? Maybe a petition should be started so stations quit showing previews.
Posted by: atreyu
quote:
Originally posted by b11051973
What do you guys do during commercial spots for 24? Assuming you don't fast forward through them.
Why, in fact, I *do* fast forward through the commercials... through all of them! :) Part of why I'm a "DirecTivo Evangelist!"
Posted by: tonyoci
I also fast forward through commercials, the only other Fox show I watch is American Idol and my wife ff the commercials while I do something else just in case.
I think I have argued in a friendly manner but, in a similar way to the Enterprise threads, I am arguing for something I do not feel overly strongly about (even though it seems that I do). I end up more arguing against the person I am arguing with rather than for the subject I believe in.
T
Posted by: Maui
Yep, I always FF past commercials.
And personally I am not so worked up. I would prefer not to have things spoiled here in the forum so my only two options are to hope that others here use spoilers for previews or stay out of the topics. Currently I avoid the topics.
But hey, I'm glad we could amuse you.
Posted by: hawkamer
Where did this mountain come from? Last time I checked, it was only a molehill!
And man, this vote is a close one! Anyone have have David Boies' phone number handy? Actually, we're not that far off from calling in Jimmy Carter!
Posted by: Stephen Tu
The "start next week's thread early" suggestion makes by far the most sense to me. The people who don't like to use spoiler tags don't have to use them, just do any speculation on the next week's show in the new thread.
The people who hate spoilers can just avoid the thread, but can still read/discuss the events of the aired episode.
It's clear other solutions would greatly annoy one group or the other. Would anyone be really unhappy with having to speculate in the new thread?
Posted by: Family
quote:
Originally posted by Stephen Tu
The "start next week's thread early" suggestion makes by far the most sense to me. The people who don't like to use spoiler tags don't have to use them, just do any speculation on the next week's show in the new thread.
The people who hate spoilers can just avoid the thread, but can still read/discuss the events of the aired episode.
It's clear other solutions would greatly annoy one group or the other. Would anyone be really unhappy with having to speculate in the new thread?
I'm in. It's such a simple solution that I don't know why everyone doesn't agree and then we're done. Start a new poll. Can anyone think of a reason why this compromise wouldn't be agreed upon nearly unanimously?
Posted by: Maui
quote:
Originally posted by Maui
The best idea I think I have read so far that does not include spoiler tags is to start the topic for next weeks episode 1 week early and discuss the previews there. Even though previews are shown with this weeks episode they are technically scenes from next weeks episode.
Yep, I said yesterday (see quote) that I thought that was the best plan. I'm all for it.
Posted by: wallace
Well, this topic seems to be so split down the middle without one side gaining a clear majority that I do not see how any rule can fairly be made and then enforced by the moderator. So, until I see at least a 2/3 majority on something I don't see why anything should change at all from what is and always has been happening.
Posted by: smak
I totally agree. Start next week's thread right after the show airs. I would actually like to see all the speculation (of course after i watch the next show), and see who figured out things by watching the previews.
My problem is if this were a scale of 0-100, 0 would be no preview info posted at all, and 100 would be post all the preview info you like.
Thing is, the two sides aren't 0 and 100, they're 50 and 100. Post preview spoilers tagged, or post them untagged. Nobody's asking not to post any preview spoilers at all.
I stopped watching the previews because they did have real spoilers in them. The one with the gun held on Reza was one where i figured that it was Marie...
-smak-
Posted by: Rob Helmerichs
...although actually, it's more like .0016/.0016, counting the 30,000 people who just don't care...
Posted by: Crrink
I think the only problem with starting the next week's thread early was that it might increase the load on our poor server and make it crash even more often than it already does.
That's why Justapixel nixed the idea of having two threads (w and w/o spoilers) for each show.
Posted by: tonyoci
But in total there will be the same amount of data, one thread per week with the same amount of total text. I doubt that one extra thread is going to kill the server. If it is then let's get rid of some of the crappy one's in other sections (including a lot of my own threads)
T
Posted by: bdowell
quote:
Originally posted by Family
I'm in. It's such a simple solution that I don't know why everyone doesn't agree and then we're done. Start a new poll. Can anyone think of a reason why this compromise wouldn't be agreed upon nearly unanimously?
I'm game as well.... put preview info in the thread for the next weeks show, which gets started right after (or the same day, whatever) the show airs...
Either way, it's gives a place to speculate, and as was pointed out, it doesn't mean any additional traffic to the servers, since eventually that thread will exist anyway (it just exists early).
Posted by: Crrink
Well, sounds good to me - Justapixel should we have a new poll to include this option?
Posted by: spelcheker
quote:
What do you guys do during commercial spots for 24? Assuming you don't fast forward through them. Do you run out of the room yelling and screaming?
Actually, that's EXACTLY what I do, except I put my fingers in my ears and hum a Sousa tune really loud.
Posted by: justapixel
quote:
Originally posted by Crrink
Well, sounds good to me - Justapixel should we have a new poll to include this option?
The dots are back, so I'm assuming the server upgrade has happened. Although, I have to say, I get bogged down, timeouts and slow pages still.
However, I have no problem with a thread starting next week's show early,where we discuss speculation and the previews from that week .
Example Titles beginning Tuesday:
24, 10:00 - 11:00 - Spoilers, No Preview Discussion
24, 11:00 - 12:00 - Spoilers + Previous week's Preview Speculation
That does mean that we can't carry threads over from week to week and my experience is many people will search for the other thread and add to it rather than starting a new one, and spoilers will happen anyway.
I like the solution of using spoiler tags or not and letting the other side suffer, but I'm game for anything that will help and not cause more problems.
Do we need a new poll?
Posted by: Maui
I can't think of why we would need a new poll.
At least I can't think of any reason why those of us who want to avoid spoilers and previews would have a problem with this solution. We can just avoid next weeks thread.
I can't speak for the other side of the argument though.
vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2009,
Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
vB Easy Archive Final ©2000 - 2009
- Created by Stefan "Xenon" Kaeser
Modified by Adam J. de Jaray