BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Policy & Help >

Spoilers!!!

  
  

Page: 1(2)3456

 
 
Triplets
06:11 / 25.08.05
A good option, if Tom could implement it, would be a variation on Haus' idea above about Stem Threads*. Mods would be able to generate a LOST (or whatever) master stem thread with links to threads which are variations on that (digital/E4/spoilers/non-spoilers and so forth). The stem would be bumped whenever anyone posted in one of it's smaller 'leaf threads' (which would be invisible from the main forum section and would remain unbumpa-lumpable).

Calling Captain Coates, come in Captain Coates...
 
 
Bed Head
07:22 / 25.08.05
Smoothly: Hm. Well, that does work with comics... or did, anyway, we always had a separate thread for each issue of New X-Men.

Okay, well, the entire Lost phenomenon has kinda missed me, so I’m not really too sure on this. But I think maybe I’d lean towards wanting separate threads for different constituencies because it’s kinda about sharing the experience of watching something, as you're watching it. You’re not just posting your response in a vacuum, you’re pooling your response with others who are at the same point. Like I said before, I think there's a sort of community-building element to the labelling of the Lost threads. So picking up a second-hand thread from sometime last year and seeing that someone else has already been there and said it all, might spoil some of that fun. Possibly. But I agree, it's a solution that's totally worth considering. I'm not so convinced by the argument that it would be 'unwieldy', anyway.


Triplets: Mmmmaybe that would be good, but I'm kinda meh about asking Tom to tweak the site this way or that unless it's necessary. We can work this out amongst ourselves! It's only geek etiquette! C'moooon, feel the Policy!
 
 
Smoothly
08:43 / 25.08.05
Yeah, I’d hope we could sort this out without recourse to new functionality.

Bed, I know what you mean about the communal nature of sharing your thoughts on shows like these, and I take your point about ‘new’ constituencies resurrecting a second-hand thread. But I don’t buy the idea that other people would have already said it all already. And this approach makes for a pretty inconsistent policy for starting new threads. If I wanted to talk about, say, circumcision all of a sudden, I shouldn’t start a new thread because the existing one is second hand, or other people have said everything already. People might be discussing these shows at different times, but they're discussing the same *thing*.

But then ‘second hand’ aspect just doesn’t bother me so much. I quite *like* second hand. And bear in mind that the new constituency wouldn’t lose any of the community stuff. Just instead of moving into brand new premises, they’d set up camp in an established venue with the ghosts of the previous occupants still audible. And, you never know, those ghosts might even want to join in the discussion again.
 
 
Lord Morgue
10:36 / 25.08.05
Adding a section on the "formatting text" guide on the Wiki on how to make the black boxes might be a fast, workable temporary solution, until we decide what and if other action could be taken...
 
 
Smoothly
12:22 / 25.08.05
Please, let’s not. The various options have been outlined and discussed here, Morgue, but ugh. I still think establishing good practice for how we approach this problem is preferable to patching it over with a cheap fix that doesn’t really address the issue.
 
 
gridley
13:19 / 25.08.05
While I don't think the colored text is the best universal solution, it might do well in an emergency situation where someone has posted ghastly spoilers in a declared spoiler-free thread.
 
 
sleazenation
17:19 / 25.08.05
I really WOULD NOT want to see a thread for each new episode because that really destabilizes the entire forum with churn-and can overload the thread with posts on similar topics, ie leave five lost threads in the TV forum's top 10 threads...
I don't think the Comics forum has ever recovered from it's X-mem phase when a good 4-6 of the top 10 threads in the forum were X-men related.

What I'd ideally like to see is some way of being able to move chunks of posts (connected thematically and probably with metadata) around with ease... but this is porbably impractical...
 
 
Triplets
17:42 / 25.08.05
My idea is awesome.

The way I see it: if it leads to a cleaner, more functional site, surely that's a good thing? Isn't that what prompted the change over to Barbelite?

I know and fully appreciate the amount of work that would be involved for Cam and Tom to put the correct code in place along with the hard work they do already. But, I don't believe the site should remain stagnant because change is painful.

(Awesome.)
 
 
Smoothly
19:05 / 25.08.05
I'm sorry sleaze, because you're going to have to spell this out to me.

I really WOULD NOT want to see a thread for each new episode because that really destabilizes the entire forum with churn-and can overload the thread with posts on similar topics, ie leave five lost threads in the TV forum's top 10 threads...

I don't really understand what you mean by destabilize the forum with churn, but we've already got lots of Lost threads on the front page. And what does it matter? They don't stop new threads from being created or old ones bumped. And by having several simultaneous threads, as we do now, you just make that problem (if it is a problem) worse. At least with episode specific threads, the early ones would fall away as the new thread became current.

What I'd ideally like to see is some way of being able to move chunks of posts (connected thematically and probably with metadata) around with ease

Even if this were easy, I don't see why that would be the right solution. Is the idea that we copy across material where it is relevant to another related thread? What a hassle. And I'm all for the idea of making a threads *comprehensive*, but there's a better way of doing it. Isn't there? Paint me the nightmare scenario of having series like Lost and Doctor Who in episode specific threads?

Triplets, I'm probably having a dumb day, because, regardless of how much work it would create for Cam and Tol, I don't understand what's good about that idea. Why do we want stem and leaf threads? I mean, isn't the forum the 'stem'?

If you care about spoilers, you only enter a thread when you're up to speed on material is being discussed. Once in that thread, you don't reveal anything about material to come. Episode specific threads mean that no matter who saw what first, there's nothing in that about subsequent episodes. And 90% of spoiler arguments disappear.
I am wrong? Don't be gentle with me.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
19:20 / 25.08.05
The New X-Men threads - along with the many others dedicated to other releases in the X-franchise destroyed Comics. Any attempt to start a thread on a different subject was drowned out almost immediately by yet another thread about a new issue, or an umcoming issue, or a TPB. Even the X-titles that people didn't like ended up having a new thread for every new issue.

And the problem is, that became to be seen as the norm in Comics, so unless you were wanting to talk about something that was ongoing and well-known, you didn't have much chance of your thread being seen by a lot of the board. It's a situation that's improved recently, but it is only very recently.

Leaving that aside, I wouldn't want to see a new thread for every new epsiode of a series, because that'd inevitably lead to discussion becoming fractured. It'd also mean that each thread would end up turning into a mess of links back to the previous ones as people who hadn't been following the discussion through all the individual threads decided to use any old thread to talk about any old episode and was met with others pointing out that they should be posting their comments elsewhere. The amount of moderation keeping that tidy would require would be horrific.

I'm going to ask again whether or not this is such a serious problem that it requires this amount of attention, because I don't think that question's been answered yet and I'm fairly sure that it doesn't.
 
 
■
19:30 / 25.08.05
My ears were burning...
I realise that a couple of my posts in the Who thread did step over the line a little (and it was a tiny amount), but it wasn't through desire to expose my secr1T kn0lege but a huge and hopeless overwhelming excitement every time I saw a new episode. It took a while to recognise this would be viewed as a bit wanky, but by that time I had been told to "shut the fuck up" and lost it a little. It was only when a couple of people I respect said they wanted me to go I did. I was still fucking fuming at the tone of the original request for a couple of weeks, though.
Anyway, lessons learned.
I think the best way to deal with it is to go the Comics route. I know it creates a lot of threads for the particular series, but the sort of series that people really care about not being spoiled are few (Who, Lost, Farscape.. errmmm), so I don't think there'd be an unwieldy number. Look at Comics for what I reckon is a good parallel. I used to avoid the New XMen/Seaguy issue threads the moment someone got hold of a copy of the issue in question, but would follow it avidly before that, and then again after I had read it. As there is a well-established release procedure for comics and you can expect people to know when to expect spoilers there wasn't such a timing problem.
Is there a system that can be used in the same way for TV programmes? They're not as regular as comics, but there is a clear release schedule for most programmes. Anyone who has teh nollij of a particular episode could start a thread if and only if they research when the episode will be available to various audiences and make it clear in the abstract when that episode will air in the significant zones. It's not hard. We all know how to use the interweb well enough to pop over to four or five sites (Radiotimes, US network, Sky, RTE etc.) and get transmission dates. If you care enough to post, be the big person and take the time to make it clear what youre talking about. If someone is a follower of a show they'll make the effort to find the right thread, as we all did with NXM.
I quite like Triplets idea, but Cal and Tom are way too busy, surely?

(ps. Yes, I know I have spoiled a smidgin of Medium, Extras and Absolute Power recently, but tried to do it without giving anything away, and the threads sunk without trace, so I feel better about it. If anyone let them sink because of my input, I'm sorry.)
 
 
Triplets
20:15 / 25.08.05
Triplets, I'm probably having a dumb day, because, regardless of how much work it would create for Cam and Tol, I don't understand what's good about that idea. Why do we want stem and leaf threads? I mean, isn't the forum the 'stem'?

How about a branch then? Of course then we'd have to call Barbelith a trunk and that would cause all sorts of hassle when it's clearly an sphere!

What the idea does is create a smaller hub for a specific TV/comic/novel (as in more than one of that particular series but as a linked set. Such as X-Men #34 and X-Men #35, dig?)

Why? Because it's tidier. Rather than have five Lost threads float to the top of a forum you'd have one Tier 1 Lost thread, with Tier 2 Lost threads inside for discussing iterations of Lost that need to remain seperate. These Tier 2 threads would only be visible inside the main Tier 1 thread.

If you care about spoilers

I personally don't give two shits about spoilers but I'm interested in coming up with a system for dealing with this as there appears to be a need.

you only enter a thread when you're up to speed on material is being discussed. Once in that thread, you don't reveal anything about material to come. Episode specific threads mean that no matter who saw what first, there's nothing in that about subsequent episodes. And 90% of spoiler arguments disappear.
I am wrong? Don't be gentle with me.

I know I've started a seperate thread for Astonishing X-Men #12 (the one where Xavier drives Optimus Prime?) myself but in cases such as weekly TV series that would amount to a lot of threads very very fast with them constantly shifting to the top when people on T'restial catch up with the E4 bods. It gets even worse when people who tape the shows and get round to doing so a few weeks later than that bump the thread again.

Meanwhile somebody's cool Astroboy thread keeps getting buried.
 
 
■
20:23 / 25.08.05
Meanwhile somebody's cool Astroboy thread keeps getting buried.
I can live with that. If it's something people really don't care about it sinks, no matter how cool. Ok, so NXM did dominate Comics for a while but we have, what, 20 threads on each forum front page. I don't believe there were ever enough people to keep discussions on 20 different issues of NXM alive at one time to drown everything else.
 
 
sleazenation
22:00 / 25.08.05
The X-men threads shifted the focus in the comics forum away from the medium and onto superhero comics to such a large degree that there really wasn't, and to a large extent still isn't, all that much difference between barbelith's comics forums and those of any other site devoted to comics published by marvel or DC. I don't want to see a similar process turn Film TV and Theatre into the ongoing TV series forum...
 
 
Spatula Clarke
22:02 / 25.08.05
The point is that threads will sink because others won't be given the opportunity to be seen, not because nobody cares about them. Instead, it'll be because not enough people care - or know - about them in comparison to the massively popular, more frequent things. If there's one superb, small-budget film out that's received little publicity, a thread about it here could end up being swallowed whole by Stargate Episode 43, Lost Episode 13, Six Feet Under Episode 28, Lost Episode 14, Battlestar Galactica Episode 425, Doctor Who Epsiode 17, Lost Episode 15...

What sleaze said, in other words. What'll happen is the only visible threads in the forum will be the ones about regularly updated TV shows. I also don't think that *any* of the discussions about television shows we've had on Barbelith so far could have justified being split into seperate threads for each episode when you consider their length. One thread for epsiode 16 of Doctor Who = seven replies, and so on. One thread for a new episode of Sopranos = three replies, if that.

Go into any thread you care to think of - save possibly the Big Brother ones - and test it out, check how many of the posts in them were about any one episode in particular. And you'd be having that every week for every show that people want to talk about, no matter how few people that may be. Pointless.

I can't really believe we're even having to explain why this is a bad idea.
 
 
Smoothly
22:31 / 25.08.05
I find myself in agreement with cube, but then I think we're both being a bit Darwinian about it.
I suppose there are just competing preferences and points of view here. Personally, I don't think there are enough TV threads in the forum, but I understand that others think that there are already too many. *shrug*

I wasn't aware of the problems this caused in Comics. To be honest I wasn't imagining there being that many shows that would call for episode-specific threads. I had the two that have caused the current spoiler debate in mind - Doctor Who and Lost. I suppose it could be a nightmare if someone got round to starting a discussion of Coronation Street.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
06:08 / 26.08.05
How about some temporary pages in the wiki that list the various threads of things like Lost or Doctor Who and who they are for?
 
 
Bed Head
10:39 / 26.08.05
Seeing as each thread clearly says what it's for in the abstract, I have no idea why you think this would actually help anyone. But there you are. I’ve assumed ‘Lost - the Irish thread’ is supposed to cover the same constituency as the E4 thread, and skipped it. Add it in if that’s wrong.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
10:48 / 26.08.05
New Doctor Who - New Doctor and New Costume (http://barbelith.com/topic/21866) New Doctor Who, now with spiffy new costume. Contains
Rumours and News on the Christmas Special and Series 2 for those of a Spoiler-rific turn of mind.
Officially released info and wild speculation can go in this thread.

Doctor Who spoilers thread (http://barbelith.com/topic/21293) Specifically for discussing/hypothesizing any not-yet-aired
spoilers on the new series. ALL INSIDER INFO AND TEH secr1T kn0lege GOES HERE.

I think it might be wise to change the topic summaries, if that's the way we're going, so that only one of them mentions spoilers.
 
 
Bed Head
11:07 / 26.08.05
Hah. And there’s me being all ‘what’s the point?’ - have I misunderstood what the different threads were for? Anyway, I’ve just scrubbed the word ‘spoiler-rific’ out of the description for the main Who thread, but it can easily be put back in a second if that’s wrong.
 
 
Char Aina
21:48 / 12.12.06
can we re-examine the spoiler issue?
it seems some members have different takes on how much we should repsect other's wishes regarding enjoying pieces of work without being exposed to revealing information.

i feel i appreciate works more when i go through them fresh, getting reveals as they occur rather than before.
others disagree.
jack fear in particular seems to feel that he has every right to stop people from enjoying art their own way, and that by asking for a spoiler free environment have opened themselves to being insulted.

i dont understand his desire to spoil, and would very much like him to explain it.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
01:13 / 13.12.06
As far as I can tell, Jack Fear made a joking reference to one of the most well-known twists in film history, regarding a film that has been out on general release for 14 years. A waggish moderator moved to delete it, and calgodot's subsequent comment about Darth Vader, but I don't think that this is what a spoiler is, really.

A spoiler (TV, film, comic) is the revelation of information either from previews, informed sources or having seen or read the programme before it is released in a particular region. To an extent, one expects good sense to operate - a thread started now about a film released years ago probably doesn't need spoiler warnings, as the discussion will be around people who have already seen it. A new film would need spoiler warnings, because the discussion will be between a mix of people who have seen it and who have not seen it but are interested in it. If you absolutely don't want to be spoiled, it is wise to avoid threads until you have seen the film. I don't read comics threads bounced on Wednesdays, because they will often be Americans who have read comics I am still waiting for.

TV is trickier, because release schedules are often different from country to country, and because some people avidly search the Interweb for spoilers and leaks and others do not. As such, a thread on a TV show needs a firm line on its attitude to spoilers to start off - see the previous discussion. I haven't been following the discussion of "Heroes", but when I was called in to moderate it seemed that Kali had unwittingly infringed a previous resolution not to spoil - that is, one agreed to by the participants of the thread. One should, as discussed above, have a note on spoiler usage in the thread title, to change as discussion evolves.

Jack Fear and calgodot were not in that sense producing spoilers. They were being not very funny, but this is hardly new for Barbelith. The subsequent argument is just threadrot, which really could have been averted if the original crap joke had been ignored.

However, I don't see Jack Fear revealing anything about Heroes, which I think is significant. Also, since he is not a moderator in Film, TV and Theatre, he is not in a position to prevent other people from removing spoilers.

At this point, though, you should probably both take a time out. That thread was not improved by your tussle, and nor would this one be.
 
 
Jack Fear
01:15 / 13.12.06
In looking over the "Heroes" thread, you may notice that I haven't actually spoiled a damned thing myself; I have merely reacted with hilarity every time that you have (like Captain Renault) pronounced yourself to be shocked, shocked to find spoiling going on.

I could care less about "Heroes" spoilers, myself. It's not the spoiling that amuses me; it's you you silly bastard.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
01:22 / 13.12.06
Yes, Jack. That's why you should take a time out, too.

Have you lot been at the sugary snacks, or something?
 
 
Jack Fear
01:32 / 13.12.06
I wouldn't keep poking the monkey if he didn't keep dancing. He started it. Damned dancing monkey.
 
 
Keith, like a scientist
01:40 / 13.12.06
As far as I can tell, Jack Fear made a joking reference to one of the most well-known twists in film history, regarding a film that has been out on general release for 14 years. A waggish moderator moved to delete it, and calgodot's subsequent comment about Darth Vader, but I don't think that this is what a spoiler is, really.

Right. I don't think that was what Toksik is responding to, though. Jack's attitude, as repeated in this very thread, is to make fun of people concerned about spoilers. Isn't that more accurately threadrot? It has nothing at all do with the discussion of the show nor does it maturely discuss the issue of spoilers. There was a collective decision to have 2 threads for that show, 1 for spoilers, 1 for non-spoilers. Whether or not you agree with that, the mature thing to do would be to respect it, at least.
 
 
Char Aina
01:41 / 13.12.06
I don't think that this is what a spoiler is

fair point.
jack does seem to be a spoiler apologist, or cheerleader, though. i'd like to kow what it is that makes him so happy to piss on other people's enjoyment, though.

jack?
why don't people have a right to ask for spoiler free threads without abuse from you?
it seems a lot of people want them, so why not respect that?
 
 
Char Aina
01:46 / 13.12.06
I wouldn't keep poking the monkey if he didn't keep dancing.

do you feel justified, then?
it is okay to be this unbrearable boor because you enjoy upsetting me?
even if i say it doesnt feel nice, and make you aware that you are fast losing my respect every time you do it?
 
 
Jack Fear
01:54 / 13.12.06
Yeah, well. Imagine my hot, bitter tears at that prospect.
 
 
Char Aina
01:59 / 13.12.06
there was mnore to my post than that, jack.
i wasnt mentioning it as a threat, either.
you clearly don't care what anyone else thinks, and you seem to have no care for my wishes.

why not?
what have i done to you that makes it so fun to make me miserable?
 
 
Char Aina
02:01 / 13.12.06
y'know, while i dont appreciate haus' comments regardng my state of mind, i feel like it might be an idea to step back form this.

you seem to be posturing more than engaging, and i don't know if i want to continue this conversation right now.
i might come back later.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
06:00 / 13.12.06
Keith: Ah, well - if this is a regular occurrence, then, yes, it probably is threadrot, or more precisely trolling. If the moderators agree, we could, for example, agree simply to move for deletion any such look-at-meism as offtopic. However, for that to work, we'd need people to be able to smother their anger until such time as the post disappeared. Does that seem a credible expectation?|

On a related topic, as far as I can tell there is almost no relevant discussion in the Heroes thread from about the "Crying Game" spoiler onwards - is there an argument for a structured set of deletions to get the thread back on track?
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
07:06 / 13.12.06
Frankly, at this point there's an argument for a structured set of deletions starting with the board, and ending with the Northern hemisphere.
 
 
Spaniel
08:53 / 13.12.06
Well, in response to Jack, I simply don't think it's too much to ask of people that they don't spoil in non-spoiler threads, as long as a sensible discussion has been had about what does and what does not constitute spoiler material. To compare keeping spoilers under your hat to treading on eggshells, to paint it as some kind of onerous task undertaken at the behest of a bunch of oversensitive fules, is just ridiculous in my book. It's easily done, and merely about being considerate.

For the record I think it's entirely unfair to take the piss out of people policing this stuff. If a non-spoiler policy has been agreed, then surely people need to publicly police that agreement, especially if the person who has breached the agreement has done so elsewhere and been censured previously (as Kali had, in the Gives me a happy thread no less - where she posted some very spoilerific stuff). I mean, this is just how this shit is done.
 
 
Seth
09:15 / 13.12.06
Why stop at the Northern Hemisphere? MULTI-RACIST.
 
  

Page: 1(2)3456

 
  
Add Your Reply