Discussing new episodes

irishshogun

User45701 wrote:

i thought it was a reley decent epiosde didnt see them MUTTER MUMBLE tho

FFS use spoilers, especially on big events, some of us use these forums for an overall sense of the episodes, good, bad etc. so thanks for ruining it for the rest of us , and please dont say that we should expect it to be ruined by opening the thread because we shouldn't thats what spoiler option in text is for and if I cant guarantee an episode being ruined I wont open the thread and then there go all the contributers. By the way this isn't all aimed at you its more of a general comment.

User45701

if a thread i create says spoilers in it in the title then it has spoilers in it i remember a big arguement bout this on the star ttrek forum at one stage.

why would a topic say spoilers if there where no spoilers and if u want to get a overall sence of the episode dont read the thread take a look at the poll mabe?

irishshogun

It doesn't say spoilers, the part 1 thread does, this says :
boards.ie/vbulletin > Arts > Sci-Fi / Fantasy > Stargate > SG1, Season 9, Episode 11: The Forth Horseman Part II

if it did I wouldnt have chanced looking, anyway this isnt solving anything I'll just have to wait in future untill I've watched it,

Draupnir

User45701 wrote:

if a thread i create says spoilers in it in the title then it has spoilers in it i remember a big arguement bout this on the star ttrek forum at one stage.

why would a topic say spoilers if there where no spoilers and if u want to get a overall sence of the episode dont read the thread take a look at the poll mabe?

Snippity.

mcgarnicle

How is he a retard, it is obvious that a thread called SG1, Episode 11 etc etc is going to be talking specifically about the content of the episode. If you dont want to know about the episode then dont read the thread, anyone but a retard would be sure there would be spoilers in this thread.

Draupnir

Snip-snop.

ixoy

Name calling stops RIGHT NOW or I'll issue bans. End of - okay Draupnir?

Now this is what I have in the "Discussing new episodes" thread:

* If you are discussing an episode, please mark it CLEARLY in the thread title what episode you are discussing so that people who are waiting for the Sky One airing do not accidentally click on it and get spoiled.

Now I think the thread should have had spoilers in the title. I'm editing it to have this now. In future User, and everyone else, mark SPOILERS in a thread where you are openly discussing details about that episode - particularly for one that hasn't aired here. I do not think that it's necessary, when this is done, to have to use spoiler space within the thread. It will be clear from "SPOILERS" in the thread title.

Now behave everyone.

mcgarnicle

Draupnir wrote:

Well, the boards way of doing things, is to clearly mark all spoilers. There is a special tag for it.

Did the retard in question, User45IAMASPA, clearly mark all spoilers? Or did he make a thread to discuss the episode, which of course can be done by all including those who havent seen it, and then put HUGE SPOILERS in it, unmarked?

Yeah, Answer B is correct, circle gets the square. You are also a gobshìte.

He clearly stated which episode it was, which is all that is needed. How can you discuss an episode if you havent seen it and dont want to know anything about it

Draupnir

ixoy wrote:

Name calling stops RIGHT NOW or I'll issue bans. End of - okay Draupnir?

Now this is what I have in the "Discussing new episodes" thread:



Now I think the thread should have had spoilers in the title. I'm editing it to have this now. In future User, and everyone else, mark SPOILERS in a thread where you are openly discussing details about that episode - particularly for one that hasn't aired here. I do not think that it's necessary, when this is done, to have to use spoiler space within the thread. It will be clear from "SPOILERS" in the thread title.

Now behave everyone.

Sorry. Point taken. I'm having one of my drunk Sundays.

Draupnir

mcgarnicle wrote:

He clearly stated which episode it was, which is all that is needed. How can you discuss an episode if you havent seen it and dont want to know anything about it

How about discussing possible storylines and hwo the episode might play out?

mcgarnicle

Draupnir wrote:

How about discussing possible storylines and hwo the episode might play out?

How would you do that without having seen a spoiler for the episode? Base it all on the title?
As ixoy just pointed out, once the episode is clearly identified spoilers are not required, while i would still opt to put them in myself, i dont really think you have much to complain about when you see a spoiler in a thread, in which the presence of spoilers is blindingly obvious.

Draupnir

but its not blindingly obvious. the discussion, since spoilers arent mentioned, could have started immediately after part one. which is what i thought the case was. bam, I stroll in expecting no spoilers, and bingo I get spoilered.

I frequent this and the Lost forum and the way things are run, spoilers must be marked. User has been around for ages, posts a lot and should have known this.

mcgarnicle

Well i have looked through the other threads which are similar to users ie just the title of an episode and a poll. They all have spoilers, therefore it was obvious. Ixoy has pointed out that once the episode is clearly named, mention of spoilers is not necessary and in the thread, from what i can make out from the other threads, they are deffinately not necessary.
Just out of interest, if you werent expecting spoilers what did you think the poll would be about?

ixoy

McGarnigle - the problem in this case was that the thread title should say "SPOILERS". This is to differentiate it from a speculative thread. If the word "SPOILERS" is omitted from the thread, people could assume, as Draupnir did, that it was discussing what might happen in the episode (through conjecture, etc.) rather than what did happen in the episode.

If people are openly discussing the content of an episode, without using spoilers, they should definetely mark the thread title with the word "SPOILERS" - capitalized to make it clear. User failed to do it in this case so, in my opinion, he erred. I'm fairly confident he won't do it again but it was a mistake on his part.

mcgarnicle

ixoy wrote:

McGarnigle - the problem in this case was that the thread title should say "SPOILERS". This is to differentiate it from a speculative thread. If the word "SPOILERS" is omitted from the thread, people could assume, as Draupnir did, that it was discussing what might happen in the episode (through conjecture, etc.) rather than what did happen in the episode.

If people are openly discussing the content of an episode, without using spoilers, they should definetely mark the thread title with the word "SPOILERS" - capitalized to make it clear. User failed to do it in this case so, in my opinion, he erred. I'm fairly confident he won't do it again but it was a mistake on his part.

Fair enough, you're the mod so what you say goes. I still think it was blatantly obvious that there would be spoilers so i would support User on this one.

irishshogun

mcgarnicle wrote:

Fair enough, you're the mod so what you say goes. I still think it was blatantly obvious that there would be spoilers so i would support User on this one.

As the instigator of this "discussion" I have to agree with ixoy that if the title of the thread had contained the word Spoilers I wouldnt have looked untill after I had seen the episode, it is not uncommon for the episode to be discusssed prior to air date, its called supposition, and educated quess to what may come based on what came before, as it was a two parter I dont believe that this is an unfair assumption regarding the thread.

Also you may have seen in my second response that I stated that the word spoiler wasnt used but I accepted that sh!t happens and I'd be more aware in future, I quess the obviousness wasn't as blantant to me or Draupnir as it was to you . In this case no one was right or wrong!, I call that a fair compromise. I suggest that all of us can be less "right" in our views and basically chill out, its only a TV show for Fra cks sakes, it annoyed me but I got over it.

These pointless arguements have a negative effect on a forum and only serve to drive contributers away, I personally like this forum and would hate to see it happen. In fact I wouldnt mind Ioxy deleting this whole thread, anyone else agree?

mcgarnicle

irishshogun wrote:

As the instigator of this "discussion" I have to agree with ixoy that if the title of the thread had contained the word Spoilers I wouldnt have looked untill after I had seen the episode, it is not uncommon for the episode to be discusssed prior to air date, its called supposition, and educated quess to what may come based on what came before, as it was a two parter I dont believe that this is an unfair assumption regarding the thread.

Also you may have seen in my second response that I stated that the word spoiler wasnt used but I accepted that sh!t happens and I'd be more aware in future, I quess the obviousness wasn't as blantant to me or Draupnir as it was to you . In this case no one was right or wrong!, I call that a fair compromise. I suggest that all of us can be less "right" in our views and basically chill out, its only a TV show for Fra cks sakes, it annoyed me but I got over it.

These pointless arguements have a negative effect on a forum and only serve to drive contributers away, I personally like this forum and would hate to see it happen. In fact I wouldnt mind Ioxy deleting this whole thread, anyone else agree?

The title of the thread was in keeping with previous spoiler filled review threads, i know it was a two parter so was a tad more ambiguous and the lack of spoiler in the title obviously didnt help but i stand by the fact that the way the title was written along with the attached poll made it pretty clear it would be like those that had been before.
I agree about telling people to chill out, I dont usually post in those review threads myself, i prefer the supposition and discussion of the show in general. what made me post was draupnir calling User a retard and a gob****e just because he did not have the common sense to put 2+2 together and realise the thread was likely to contain spoilers. After i answered he then called me a gob****e before later editing his post. I dont want a running argument here my point is basically that daupnir was out of line to call User a retard as if he had just used some common sense in the first place he would have realised there was a decent chance of spoilers in that thread

ixoy

OK we're all friends again - big hug! Yay and thread is now closed.