Definition of a spoiler.....

Firstly if someone's going to tell me what the rules are it would be nice
if they'd identify themselves if they're using an email address that bears
no resemblance to their name ;-) Just so I know who to flame later you
understand.

[ BTW RULES: *The* Rules were written by the Bruces circa 71. Rule 1: No
Po....... ]

Back to spoilers and some more ramblings .....

I am a spoiler junkee and know many things in advance. And I'm quite good
at holding my tounge. I looked for the plot of Endgame the day after it
was shown in the US.

There are occasionally a few things I'd rather not hear - usually relating
to deaths - I knew about Kosh and Marcus 2+ months up front, and I'd think
I'd rather not have known that. I didn't know about the ending of Severed
Dreams and I'm glad I didn't because that would have taken the impact of
that moment away. It's now some years after the event and I don't think
you can object to people talking about them openly now.

It's not good to talk about things before the event but occasionally you
can't help but hear something now days - Matt Peacock has a good story how
in May 99 he's listening to the Episode 1 Soundtrack being played on
Classic FM and Henry Kelly announces the track as "The High Council & Qui
Gon's funeral". (The version of the story I have is then followed by a
bitter diatribe against Mr Kelly)

When does a bried outline of a plot become a spoiler ? Should we not
mention that SWE2 is called Attack of the Clones because it reveals to you
that some clones might do some attacking ?

It is common sense as Mr Wren (you still laid up Andy ?) said earlier, but
if you don't watch/read something in a reasonable ammount of time and you
do care about not knowing what happens then that's your own lookout isn't
it ? People are inevitably going to talk about something they've seen.
The ST:V ep generated a load of discussion and I think we've done quite
well not blowing it...




______________________________________________________________________
If this email contains an attachment, please note the following paragraph:

This material has been checked by us for computer viruses and although none
has been found by us, we cannot guarantee that it is completely free from
such problems and we do not accept any liability for loss or damage which
may be caused. Please therefore check any attachments for viruses before
using them on your own equipment. If you do find a computer virus please
inform us immediately so that we may take appropriate action.

This communication is intended solely for the addressee and is
confidential.

If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it,
is prohibited and may be unlawful.

Visit our website at: http://www.bacon-woodrow.com

Flame away. I have been using the same E-mail address for over a
year, as most of the *hack* *spit* Vampire game players know. :-p
If you E-mail me privately, I'll reply from an account that bears
a lot of resemblance to my name and little resemblance to anything
else. But I don't want that address filled with cruft.

In fact, I use this E-mail address because my setup never survived
moving house. But a lot of things never survived moving house.



[...]
Not being a big ST fan, it's mostly passed me by. But the point
is that this is a community that acquires a big chunk of fresh
faced new victims^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H members every year, and some
of them are going to have holes in their SF knowledge. So at
any time there is a good chance that someone hasn't seen your
favourite topic of discussion, and would get fun from doing so
without spoilers.



20 email addresses from 15,000 domain names - free at http://www.another.com

The flame bit was sort of a joke, but you do find yourself tailoring mails depending on
who sent it.

The flamethrower rests on the shelf waiting for the next fresher caps lock incident ;-)
Worryeth not....
Hmmmm. I sort of see the pt, but I don't see how someone's going to want to like
something old unless they know something about it. If someone goes (for example) "Watch
Doctor Who - Remembrance of the Daleks, it's good" - that's not going to encourage them to
seek out and watch a 14 year old piece of TV. However a discussion of the material and
issues arising might.

Something that's new and easier to find on the other hand does get people by simpler
recommendation.....

Could perhaps the purpose of a spoiler be said to be "to protect the fanbase of something
that's current from finding out something they'd rather not know concerning future or
recent events" ?

I also don't think you'll ever get a full proof method everyone's happy with - even using
common sense. As long as you don't commit the email equivalent of Homer coming out of
the cinema after ESB and saying to those in the queue wot he said....

Spoilers are also a curse of the modern age. Not only do we have a method of seeing tv
etc after it's shown, we can now get information on it before hand - thanks to the
internet speeding us the views of the US viewers - and discuss it after. In the old days
everyone assumed you'd seen it or you'd missed it !

Slightly differently,has anyone ever tried reading the mail archive for a large amount of
spoiler related material ? August 2001 is already taking 40 odd seconds to load on my
machine with a 45Kish link.


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Philip Ayres
payres@
www.netcomuk.co.uk/~payres
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Oh, I wasn't worrying. It's the innocent bystanders who are
worrying.

Have you figured out who I am yet? :-p
It might indeed. But if you can't discuss the material without
dropping spoilers, perhaps you should leave it to those who can.
After all, you want to encourage people to watch it, not be a
substitute for the experience of watching it.

I recommend "Talons of Weng Chiang" and "Pyramids of Mars" to
Cthulhu players everywhere, as well as to TP4 players generally.
I do not "spoiler" them, and if people liked seeing these two,
then they'll probably enjoy more Who. I am aware that there are
others quietly encouraging folks to watch "The Prisoner", and
"Illuminatus!" is being introduced to a fresh crop. But we are
being careful with spoilers as we do it.
No. The purpose of spoiler protection is "to protect those who
might use it in the future from ruined surprises". Fanbase
doesn't come into it: recruitment for instance is a process
that seems to be improved by spoilers but is in fact damaged
by it. Ask Richard about "Buffy".
This statement can be much more widely applied. There are very few
things that are subject to full proof method. Common sense is not
subject to full proof method, so it can't be used to support full
proof.

That is why English law makes heavy use of references to "a
reasonable man" - meaning a juror.
Did you know Homer Simpson is Taurean? 12th May, as it turns out.
Of course, you don't believe in astrology - but Taureans never do.
:-p



20 email addresses from 15,000 domain names - free at http://www.another.com