Spoilers Poll (Poll about spoilers not a poll containing spoilers)

[TheSword]

So this spin off from the Wheel of Time trailer thread where a significant event in the book that had ramifications for what was happening in the series before was casually mentioned. This led to a debate and I’m interested in what people think about the topic and why?

For the purpose of a this thread a spoiler is a piece of information that reveals information about the plot of a the story before you would have received it. It might a poil the reader/watcher’s surprise. They can be good things or bad things. We’re talking about…Death of a character: other less terminal character development, plot twists. Essentially anything that reveals the plot earlier than it should be revealed.

It doesn’t include guessing or forming an opinion. Only sharing information that you know is true.

In Game of Thrones first season, which I hope most people would know (but spoilered just in case) examples of spoilers would include

Spoiler: Game of Thrones Spoilers

Jaime and Cersei’s affair, pushing Bran from the tower, Tyrion’s arrest and trial by combat, Little Finger’s betrayal, the outcome of the battle of the whispering wood, the birth of the dragons and of course the death of dear old Ned.

Have at it. Don’t forget to explain why.
Or give feedback on my poll. It’s my first one!

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

If I think that it's OK to talk about a film or book unless the spoiler thing is mentionned in the thread title, should I vote 1 or 3?

Because the way I read three, it's "unless anyone in the thread asked about not having spoilers" which is a lot to tracks, especially on long thread. If the thread is labelled "no spoiler" from the start, I expect it to contain no plot discussion (because, hey, there are people who haven't seen Star Wars [I guess]. I remember reading a blog post about Rome and someone complained in the comment that Caesar's assassination wasn't preceded by a spoiler warning. I am not sure if it was a joke post (it could be from someone with no exposure to western history, after all).

 

[TheSword]

If I think that it's OK to talk about a film or book unless the spoiler thing is mentionned in the thread title, should I vote 1 or 3?

Because the way I read three, it's "unless anyone in the thread asked about not having spoilers" which is a lot to tracks, especially on long thread. If the thread is labelled "no spoiler" from the start, I expect it to contain no plot discussion (because, hey, there are people who haven't seen Star Wars [I guess]. I remember reading a blog post about Rome and someone complained in the comment that Caesar's assassination wasn't preceded by a spoiler warning. I am not sure if it was a joke post (it could be from someone with no exposure to western history, after all).

I think that would fall under 3, you just have a higher expectation that it has to be recognized/requested by the thread owner specifically.

I guess that’s why I would err on the side of caution and have the onus on me not to mention spoilers unless specifically allowed, instead.

 

[Eltab]

Some additional circumstances matter, and change the answer:

• Thread title or OP says "no spoilers please"
• The material is still being produced vs the material has gone to re-runs
• The spoilery fact has / hasn't 'gone viral' in the general population.
• The discussion point at hand is the plot arc
• In-universe, the plot point involves a character pulling off a scam about an important fact. ("I am a bastard child of royalty")

 

[delericho]

If the thread title says either "no spoilers" or "open spoilers", then act accordingly.

Otherwise, I take the view that there has to be a reasonable "statute of limitations" regarding spoilers - discussing Luke Skywalker's parentage is a very different proposition when walking past a line waiting to see the movie in 1980 than it is today.

With regard to the specific example in the other thread... if it had been a thread for discussing the novels, or even a thread about some other topic entirely, I would agree that spoilers are fair game. But discussing detailed spoilers for a series that is hoping to introduce the material to a whole new audience is probably not ideal.

I guess, as so often, you should try to know your audience.

On the flip side, it's also important to recognise that mistakes will happen. When going into an adaptation of a 30 year old novel series, chances are you're going to get some things spoiled, even if people try hard not to.

 

[Rune]

Otherwise, I take the view that there has to be a reasonable "statute of limitations" regarding spoilers - discussing Luke Skywalker's parentage is a very different proposition when walking past a line waiting to see the movie in 1980 than it is today.

Your potential audience matters, though. You only know the people you know, after all.

It’s often easy enough to determine whether or not people in real life already know something that is common knowledge, but you can’t really ever know that’s true of everyone reading a message board.

You know that feeling you got when you were hit with that moment while watching Star Wars? Or whatever moment from whichever media?

I wouldn’t want to rob someone of ever experiencing that moment, even inadvertently.

Fortunately, spoiler tags are easy.

 

[Umbran]

We really should be in the habit of labelling a thread title as to whether it contains spoilers or not. It isn't hard.

We should allow that some things (like, say the core Star Wars movies) are old enough to be beyond the need to call out spoilers.

We should allow that threads about currently active series (like, say "What If...?" at the moment) will contain spoilers. Don't expect folks to refrain in a thread specifically about the show.

 

[Thomas Shey]

We really should be in the habit of labelling a thread title as to whether it contains spoilers or not. It isn't hard.

We should allow that some things (like, say the core Star Wars movies) are old enough to be beyond the need to call out spoilers.

We should allow that threads about currently active series (like, say "What If...?" at the moment) will contain spoilers. Don't expect folks to refrain in a thread specifically about the show.

This seems pretty reasonable to me. I mean, there obviously should be a statute of limitations on how far back you need to spoiler something (if I'm making a reference to something that happened in Forbidden Planet I shouldn't need to worry about spoilering it).

It gets slightly more complicated with media-hopping where you probably should be cautious about spoilers for the thing the spin off media is based on, even if that thing is older and done. That seems to apply to the WoT series since people will watch the series as basically a new thing even if they never read the books.

 

[Blue]

How do I choose both:

Mentioning spoilers is ok if I think most people will know already. Everyone’s seen Star Wars right?
and
There’s no problem mentioning spoilers when a thread title specifically says it contains spoilers.

They are entirely different but both allowed spoiler cases. I can say Han shot Greedo or Rosebud was his sled in an open thread because statue of limitations has long expired. But if I'm in a thread marked "Loki [Spoilers]" we can also post spoilers even though it's current, because that thread is explicitly Reader Beware.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

We really should be in the habit of labelling a thread title as to whether it contains spoilers or not. It isn't hard.

We should allow that some things (like, say the core Star Wars movies) are old enough to be beyond the need to call out spoilers.

We should allow that threads about currently active series (like, say "What If...?" at the moment) will contain spoilers. Don't expect folks to refrain in a thread specifically about the show.

I mostly agree with this.

I voted 3, because it's the closest to my stance, which is that;

A discussion of an adaptation should come with an expectation of discussion of the original work, and thus an expectation of "spoilers" unless the thread title or OP asks for them to be avoided.

A discussion of a new thing that has just come out should avoid major spoilers if the thread isn't explicitly "spoiler-friendly", but minor spoilers are fine unless the thread is explicitly "no spoilers". So, don't openly talk about how Brenn's assistant was revealed to be a corrupted cultist who intentionally gave himself an Abberant Mark in the flashback storyline where he and Brenn were introduced as captives of the Emerald Claw who were being experimented on against their will, and he's actually working with the Emerald Claw, on this week's episode of DoctorBadWolf's Eberron Campaign: The TV Show. Use a spoiler tag thingy. Feel free to discuss the developing dynamic between Vidanya and Khalid, how their dynamic of teacher/councilor and student flips depending on the circumstance, and how you wonder how it will develop as they try to deal with their shared and individual trauma.

Expecting people to just always be on spoiler alert, as a default behavior, is not reasonable. The default, both in terms of norms and in terms of what norms should be, is to simply discuss media, and only avoid topics when someone asks you to do so.