[GEN] Let's talk about the JC Spoiler Policy.

[KnightWriter]: "NO spoilers should be posted ANYWHERE outside 3SA, regardless of how much warning is given."

Except in the cases where special threads are dedicated to spoilers. For example, the Literature forum has a thread for the EpIII book and a another thread about EpIII themes in the EU generally. I think these are reasonable exceptions.

I didn't see the JCC post in question, but I would think that if the person made a reasonable attempt to warn people about possible spoilers, that a lengthy ban isn't warranted. Lock and/or edit as necessary (if the post wasn't appropriate for the forum), but banning seems like overkill in that case since no harm would have been done.

 

I'm still confused...

So, seeming from KnightWriter's responses, linking no matter how many warnings is the same as posting? So someone linking to a 3sa thread or to 3sa itself with warnings before after and in the link text in a "would you mind taking this here, because it's getting a bit too close to spoilers for some of us here" would be banned as if they had posted what was in the thread or board they linked to?

And someone needs to let Fanfiction know of that and the posting policy, because if people are trusting the policy in Fanfiction and give warnings in the thread names and first posts of stories that may contain spoilers, they might want to know of any instant 3-month ban policy, official or unofficial, that exists before they get an administrative ban for what the local moderators had announced was ok here n(discussion of policy, but no actual spoilers in the thread).

 

Except in the cases where special threads are dedicated to spoilers.

Right. I'm sorry I didn't clarify that.

Also, I'm not talking about links to something with a spoiler in it. I'm talking about posts that include spoiler material in them (and not in dedicated spoiler threads when it's outside of 3SA). If someone is foolish enough to click a clearly marked link to spoiler material, they deserve whatever they see on the other side of the link.

I wanted to make a separate thread for this, so as to focus on that issue in particular, but it didn't work out that way.

A big reason why I'm so emphatic about this is that I was spoiled by just such a post last night in the Small Screen forum, and saw two separate members in one CT thread with spoiler material in their signatures.

 

Also, I'm not talking about links to something with a spoiler in it. I'm talking about posts that include spoiler material in them (and not in dedicated spoiler threads when it's outside of 3SA).

Okay, if that part is in big, blinking boldface, then I agree with you, Josh. If somebody clicks on a link that says "warning this is a spoiler!!!!!!11", they have no right to whine about having been spoiled afterwards. It would be stupid to ban the poster over that.

Posting spoiler text in a thread is more iffy. If a person leaves a few blank lines and then posts a spoiler, a reader who's skimming across the thread might see it without intending to, and that would be sucky. And of course, if a link to spoilers isn't clearly marked, readers might click on it without knowing.

Personally, I think it should be allowable to post spoilers either behind links with warning or in black-on-black text anywhere, though. As long as it's pretty difficult to read the spoilers without intending to, they should be fine.

 

Okay, if that part is in big, blinking boldface, then I agree with you, Josh. If somebody clicks on a link that says "warning this is a spoiler!!!!!!11", they have no right to whine about having been spoiled afterwards. It would be stupid to ban the poster over that.

I agree with that 100%. If a person is going to follow a link clearly marked to be a link to a spoiler, they have only themselves to blame for being spoiled. If linking to spoilers is worthy of a ban, then I should be banned. I currently have two links to entire forums full of spoilers on the main JCC page and within every single thread, and I actively aid and abet a mechanism that creates links to ROTS spoilers on a very regular basis on every single JCC page.



Posting spoiler text in a thread is more iffy. If a person leaves a few blank lines and then posts a spoiler, a reader who's skimming across the thread might see it without intending to, and that would be sucky. And of course, if a link to spoilers isn't clearly marked, readers might click on it without knowing.

I don?t believe that posting of actual spoilers should be allowed outside designated areas, just to be on the safe side. Basically, there should be no possible way for a person to get any spoilers off a page in an area marked spoiler free, and all links to spoilers must be very clearly marked. If that is what?s done, then it will be impossible for someone to be spoiled accidentally.

 

So what about all these avatars of characters from EIII? Will the people using them be banned?

 

So what about all these avatars of characters from EIII? Will the people using them be banned?

Why would we do that ? Those aren't spoilers (by TFn definition).

We've revised the policy, and added it to the sticky in the JCC, so everyone is on the same page.

 

Edit the "offending" comments and move on. It's nothing worth banning anyone over. If you're that hypersensitive about spoilers, then this is hardly the place to be.

 

If you're that hypersensitive about spoilers, then this is hardly the place to be.

I don't think that's fair to say. There's a reason we have a 3NS board, after all. I don't fault people one bit for wanting to be completely surprised when they go in to see the movie.

 

"I don't think that's fair to say. There's a reason we have a 3NS board, after all. I don't fault people one bit for wanting to be completely surprised when they go in to see the movie."


I don't fault them either, but the board is surrounded by spoilers of all kinds and one would have to go well out of their way to avoid ALL spoilers. Even then, one poster's news snippet is another poster's spoiler. Why do we have icons featuring ROTS characters when someone could possibly construe that as a spoiler? How are we to know that someone won't freak about something as seemingly trivial as the color of Anakin's socks? I've met some very hard core anti-spoiler folks and it's very difficult knowing what they consider to be a spoiler and what isn't. I shouldn't be penalized for unknowingly "violating" some anti-spoiler fan's fun. If someone were to edit it, perhaps, but explain your actions, don't just slap a ban on someone's acct and then have them sitting around wondering just what the hell they did to get banned all because one person complained.

 

I can easily seen Katarn's point here. We do have a 3NS, but it is vastly outnumbered by 3SA fans. And the more fans, the more people who might just blurt something outside of the Revenge forums. It's impossible to completely avoid some type of spoiler in a place like this. When you figure out how to avoid it, I'd like to hear it.

 

The best way to avoid them is to go away.

 

Note: my originally banned name hasn't be unbanned yet, even though it's past my unban time, and the person who was banned with me has since posted. I hope it's okay that I'm posting under another name anyways. If not, ban me again under this name or whatever. I don't care.

First, it wasn't ever posted (until after people were banned) that links with warnings weren't allowed. I understand that some rules are unwritten, but when we have very specific spoiler rules that DON'T say anything about links with warnings, it's pretty stupid to say it's one of the "unwritten rules." Also, the fact that in this very thread there were various mods, including an admin, who said that they weren't aware it was a rule is a pretty big thing. So I don't understand why it is being defended that OMG IT'S A RULE AND IT HAS BEEN A WELL KNOWN AND LONGSTANDING RULE when (a) it's never been written down, and (b) many mods and at least one admin didn't know about it.

Second, I don't understand why, if it's a longstanding and well-known rule, people who have been pointed out that have links either in posts or sigs haven't been edited and banned. And even if it's not a long-standing rule, it's a new one, so they past posts should be edited and current sigs should be edited and banned.

Third, making a no links to spoilers rule, as it stands, INCLUDES SIGS. Do you know how big a deal that is? Anyone who has a link in a sig to 3sa or a fanfic or fanart or whatever else there is fanwise with spoilers needs to be edited and banned. I've been told that it's a well-known and longstanding rule, and that warnings aren't necessary because it's so clear-cut, so I'm confused as to why there are so many still out there.

Consistancy guys, seriously.