With a new season just around the corner for US fans there is a very real possbility that we could temporarily lose some of our friends from across the big puddle. I think we should establish a spoiler protocol.
One idea is to include a specific spoiler warning in the subject of each message. For example: (s3 spoiler) Quinn has a bad hair day. we may need to be even less specific in our subject lines, (s3 spoiler) ep301 act II.
The purpose of this would be to allow the reader to apply software filters to skip any threads with "(s3 spoiler)" in the subject line. this of course means that we have to make sure our British and Australian friends know how to use the proper filters built in to their newsreader software.
There is also the issue of spoiler space. How much is enough?
These are only suggestions to get a discussion on the topic going. Think of it as a Darianite version of the "Y2K crisis," the "S3D crisis" if you will.
I'd really hate to see anyone leave the newsgroup due to loose spoiler standards.
If discussion were limited to those already in the group, I think your proposal would work perfectly. But you just know that with the new season there will come new people to the group, and they may unknowingly post something with a dead giveaway subject. 'Tis a difficult situation indeed. I also don't want to see half of the neat people in this group take off because of this...
One way to take care of this is to have an automatic daily posting reminding everyone here about spoiler space. One hopes that new folks lurk for a while, and will see it before posting anything. Who's our resident sysadmin?
In another group I read spoiler space is set to 26 lines. Should be enough that the first page of a post is blank, except the first line, which should also be (s3 spoilers), then 25 returns. This also can be a boon to us poor folks who don't have the luxury of filtering readers.
Agreed. You could also look into creating a moderated newsgroup (I hear moderating a group is a real pain) where any s3 posts without spoiler space are erased before they hit the group.
One last thing, continued attempts in trying to make the lives of others all warm and fuzzy is the surest way of getting yourself taken out and shot. ;)
Jon Armstrong The Space Ranger Graveyard gives one a unique outlook on life. A dark one.
If possible you should also reference *which* episode you're referring to in your post, both in the Subject: header and in the first line of your post. Your subject should be as specific as possible without referencing specific events.
GOOD: Stuff in 'Daria Goes to Hell' (SPOILERS!) BAD: Daria's first kiss!!!
If there's any doubt at all, take the time to include spoiler space. It'll save you more trouble in the long run... trust me. :]
Even better, use the air number that MTV uses, rather than the episode title-- like the first ep of season three can be referred to as #301, the second, #302, the ninth #309, the thireenth #313. That way, the mystery is even further protected. Vauger is better.
BETTER: Interesting Plot Turn in #311 (SPOILER!)
And the more spoiler space, the better... for some ppl., even 26 lines may not be enough.... I'd shoot for 40 or 50 lines. (Says he of the *long* posts.) ;-)
rich.
Helen: Bureaucracy is the price we pay for impartiality.
On Wed, 03 Feb 1999 18:16:29 GMT, [email] (paperpusher) wrote:
If we need to be more specific we could go with something like: #301, act II, scene 3. That will refer to a specific point in the episode without giving anything away.
here is the subject line format I propose: (s3 spoiler) #3xx, act x, scene x. act and scene are optional. That way software filters can skip any message that contain "(s3 spoiler)" in the message line. A better way would to be to filter messages that contain "(s3 spoiler) #3xx" in the subject line and set the filter to expire after episode xx airs. If episode #301 were to air on C5 on March 15th at 2PM, The filter for that episode could be set to expire on Mar. 15th at 2:30pm. However this could be a hassle because it would involve setting up 13 filters, it could be very simple or very difficult to set up depending on the software.
My software can see up to about 35 to 40 lines when the message window is opened up to full-screen (800x600 resolution). 40-50 lines should be safe unless you have your monitor set up to some insane resolution setting.
It would also be a good idea to keep s3 quotes out of our sigs until everyone has seen that episode. That could be difficult, if it weren't for quotes from Daria, the Simpsons, and Bill Hicks I wouldn't have very much to say.
Can anyone give me a suggestion on how to change the subject of the DRR's without taking the episode title out of it (I don't think that is much of a spoiler, or that too many people would be upset about knowing it early). I only ask because my subject line is pretty long as it is.
Example Subject: Mike's Delayed Reaction Review-212 (2-25), "Pierce Me" Format of Subject Line: MDRR-MTV production# (MDRR index), "Episode Title"
Mike Quinn I can be reached through e-mail at: [email]
I dunno, Mike, but actually you might want to see how our British and Australian friends might like it if you kept the title out of the subject line for now... I know the titles don't give a whole lot away, but they do drive a pretty strong hint as to what the ep will cover, and some people prefer a surprise. (I have to admit to being torn on that issue m'self-- part of me loves to know, and part of me loves the surprise.) I'd be tempted to leave the ep title out of the subject line, and instead just put it on the first line of the review.
*shrug* rich
Jake: I love camping! I love it! ... Has anybody seen my pants?
Does anyone who will be unable to see the third season of Daria starting on February 17 mind if the name of the episodes appear in the subject lines for my reviews? If so respond to this post or e-mail me directly.
There will still be at least one (probably more) spoiler warning in each review. .
Mike Quinn I can be reached through e-mail at: [email]
I think that's taking things too far, in fact the whole spoiler thing is being rather overdone. Spoilers really apply mainly to series or films which build up to some dramatic climax, the premature revelation of which would spoil people's enjoyment. A good example is Twin Peaks, where the revelation of the identity of Laura Palmer's murderer would have ruined the series for most viewers. (In fact whilst it was being shown on UK tv, a (so-called!) friend who had been to America carelessly said to me "Oh, her dad killed her, didn't he". Fortunately I didn't believe her, as we'd seen Bob by then and he seemed self-evidently not to be the same person as Leland!) But in a series such as Daria which consists of separate stories, there is no big secret that it all hangs on, nor do the individual stories usually turn on some surprise ending. OK so there *are* plot twists, but they aren't crucial to enjoying the show, as these are not murder mysteries but slices of life. Furthermore, by the time the episodes air in the UK we will probably have forgotten any plot details that have been revealed, as there's bound to be a time lag of a few months. I'd actually read several of the plot synopses on Outpost Daria before I saw the episodes in question, but I never found myself watching an episode and thinking "I know what's going to happen next", as I'd quickly forgotten the details.
Anyway, certainly the episode titles should be left in subject lines, because if people *do* want to avoid reading about episodes they haven't seen, then the title is the best way of enabling them to identify which episode the posting is about.
Finally, I suspect that most people won't be able to resist reading all the postings anyway.
One thing I think probably shouldn't be talked about without spoiler stuff is anything involving Treant. That is, perhaps, the one thing that would really spoil things for people if someone just out and said, "Hey, they finally got together", or "Man... that sucks. I really thought Treant felt the same way..."
I don't think the titles are a big deal. They are misleading as often as not, and should be harmless.
How about using the first letters of each word in the title? 'Pierce Me" would become 'PM'. Only folks who saw the show would know. The letters alone can't tell you much, although speculation would most likely go like...
'PM' Hmmm... Must be something about Darias' afternoon.
HTH
Jon Armstrong The Space Ranger Graveyard gives one a unique outlook on life. A dark one.
So does someone want to post regular rules regarding spoilers?
Penalties for not following Spoiler Rules will result in Righteous Mailbombing and Flaming by Indignant Australians and British (I am still reminded of the Babylon 5 spoiler fiasco).
Alternatively, we may just end up with someone replying "Aw, Man! What'd you hafta go an' do that for? Spoiled it for me now... Or something..."
My proposal for spoiler rules (any other ideas reply to this post):
1) Anyone posting a review for a given episode shall: include some type of reference to the spoiler in the subject line OR at least one page worth of spoiler space OR BOTH.
2) Anyone making a reply that could 'spoil' any or all of an episode should give some type of warning in the subject line OR add spoiler space to the reply.
3) If you're not sure about whether you're posting a spoiler or not. Err on the side of caution and assume that you may be posting a spoiler.
4) Anyone who momentarily forgets these rules (myself included), should be politely reprimanded and asked not to do it again.
5) Anyone who blatently disregards these rules over and over shall be sentenced to fifty wacks with a wet noodle. We will not resort to flame wars but we should be absolutely clear that these rules regarding spoiling episodes are to be followed to the letter.
Mike Quinn I can be reached through e-mail at: [email]
Better include a definition of 'spoilers.' I'd never heard the term before I started reading newsgroups. It takes a little while to figure it out from context.
spoiler- term used in newsgroups for information, including; but not limited to; plot, characters and settings, about motion pictures, television series or individual episodes of television series that either have not been shown in particular areas of the country/world or have aired and have not been seen by all newsgroup participants. It is customary for posters to include warnings (extra space for warnings, mention in the subject line, etc.) in any post that contains or may potentially contain spoilers. For example, in the United States the third season of Daria begins on February 17, 1999, any poster living in the U.S. that posts any specific details about the premier episode on the 18th would be posting a spoiler for people who live in Austrailia and the United Kingdom (and anywhere else 'Daria' is shown).
I think that just about covers it :)
Mike Quinn I can be reached through e-mail at: [email]
It might also be an idea to make the subject of the daily post " Read this first" (with leading spaces to push it up to the top of sorted subject lists - does that work, or do leading spaces get stripped in transit?) rather than something like "Spoiler rules for this ng." A fan who doesn't know what "spoiler" means might not read the latter, and blithely post unprotected spoiler material.
If anyone is worried about making subject lines overly long by adding the word "Spoiler" or the phrase "Series 3 spoiler" in the header, perhaps we can offer an option of simply including in the header the ep number in #3xx format. So, for example, "#302 question" or "Comments on #305". The daily posting could include advice that if a poster doesn't know the ep number, and it's from s3, they should include "#3??" in the subject line. Then those of us with filters could filter out "#3."
I agree that spoiler space as well as a subject spoiler would be helpful to some of us. Particularly if a thread migrates (what, here?) and a posting includes general remarks (fine officer, General Remarks) as well as ep-specific discussion: then a poster could change the subject header (Say, "The MRE economy starts 1/1/2000") and put the general stuff above the spoiler space, and any ep-specific details below it.
It might even help some people if the daily posting included example spoiler space after the message, so people had only to cut and paste it, instead of counting 40 lines.
It might also help if the daily posting urged people who wanted to discuss its contents to avoid replying to it (so lengthening that thread), but invited them instead to start a thread on "Spoiler rules in this ng" or "About 'Read this first.'"
Does anyone have the facility to post an automated daily posting? If so, are you willing to undertake this task?
I have to say that I'm truly touched by the thoughtfulness and courtesy of the memebers of atd who are taking the trouble to consider the 30% of us who won't be starting to view Series Three on the 17th. I appreciate the fact that people are considering taking steps that might seem tedious in order to protect other fans' enjoyment of Daria.
In my experience with other TV- and comic-related groups, a regular (like weekly or biweekly) FAQ and use of spoiler warnings by those already present seems to work pretty well. Once in a blue moon somebody fails to post appropriate warnings, but I don't see any way of avoiding that without a moderator.
Ok, here's a suggestion I am willing to present to the group, just so we can settle on a format and be done with this thread, and get on to more interesting issues like autopsies, teasers, goths, country music, fencing, and the other usually delightfully bizarre oft-times off-topic posts on a.t.d. The suggestion is as follows. Here is the suggestion that is mine. Well, Chris, here it is, my suggestion that is mine. (Sorry, couldn't help the MPFC ref. from A. Elk) *clears throat a dozen times.*
Before Season 3 starts, let's have everyone "nominate"/suggest various formats for making Season 3-related posts. (But the nominations must be *clear* as to what goes in the subject line, and how to handle "spoiler space.") I will then take all nominations that are "seconded" by at least one other person on the list and put them all up on my little site under a special heading entitled "Vote", where we can vote for them. I will also publish the link at least once daily on a.t.d., and make sure that other sites, like OD, LC, DW, et. al., have a link to it as well. I have the ability to screen out multiple votes manually, as the sowftware logs in time/date/ip address, as well as the inputted data-- but all data will be kept confidential, and will be destroyed after the voting is ended, and I swear again on the grave of Abe Vigoda that all data will be safe from public inspection... blah, blah, blah. (I will also boot out multiple anonymized votes from the same ip address!) And if you want, maybe I could arrange to have two former US Presidents monitor the voting as well. <g>
That way, we can pick something quickly and fairly, so long as everyone agrees to be bound by the decision of the plurality. (I doubt we'd get a majority with this bunch of independent thinkers. <g>) Yes, even though I didn't have a problem with the way the USA thing was run, that was mainly because they didn't take any reasonable safeguards to prevent multiple voting, and they weren't explicit about how many votes one fan can cast. I will do both. One fan=one vote. Multiple votes will be booted. Unidentified votes will be booted. (I am not being hypocritical, I am merely drawing distinctions. <g>)
Nominations would have to be submitted and seconded by Tuesday, Feb. 9, at 6PM EASTERN TIME. (The time my news server uses.) This means Midnight, GMT, and 3PM Pacific.
The voting would begin Tuesday night, Feb. 9, at 8 PM PACIFIC Time (that's how time is kept on my site), 11 PM EST, or 4 AM GMT for the UK folks, and would officially end at 7PM Pacific Time on the 17th. (3AM GMT.) Yes, I'd boot out late votes, too, as the server logs the submission time as well. I will be totally fair, impartial, and unbiased about this-- I've been a fiduciary a number of times, so it's not difficult to put on my Professional's Hat and take off my Silly Hat.
As for who would post these guidelines every week, well, I honestly don't know if my newsreader has that kind of power, but I'm sure someone here knows how to do it. Best time to post it would be right before the new episode airs on the East Coast, IMHHASJPWO.
I offer my services to the group mainly because I can do this all very quickly, and, well, also because I'm anal-retentive about these sorts of things-- and I get paid to be anal-retentive, too-- isn't it-- what's that thing, when something turns out funny? Moronic. <g> Seriously, though, I already have a script that will do all of this, and it'd take me no more than 30 minutes to set the whole thing up on my site, thanks to the miracle that is NetObjects Fusion.
So, anyway, I need some indication if we should proceed with this. Or not. Whatever. <g>
rich.
Helen: Bureaucracy is the price we pay for impartiality.
----- Subject header: " Read this first! Guidance for posting messages" -----
(introduction)
This is an automated posting to save you embarrassment. Please read it before posting to this group any message that contains references to an episode from Series Three of Daria (the series now showing on MTV).
About 30% of the people who read this newsgroup live outside the USA, and won't be able to see the new episodes for some time. Because we want them to enjoy the new series as much as we're doing, we have chosen to adopt some rules to follow if we are posting a message that gives away details that might spoil their enjoyment of an episode.
We invite you to comply with these rules, to avoid the embarrassment of discovering that you have spoiled another fan's future enjoyment of Daria.
So, if you think that something in your message *might* spoil someone else's enjoyment of an episode, when eventually they get to see it, please note that:
(end of introduction)
(1) Your subject header should contain a warning in one of these formats:
(Series 3 Spoiler)
(s3 Spoiler)
OR should contain the episode number in the #3NN format, for example:
#301
if you don't know the episode number, you can use:
#3??
AND
(2) The word "Spoiler!" and forty lines of space should precede any material within the post that may spoil the enjoyment of an episode for anyone who has yet to see it.
(3) A post which contains general discussion as well as material that may spoil an episode need not include a warning in the subject header, if, and only if, the general discussion comes first, followed by a warning (such as "Spoiler: #301) and forty lines of spoiler space before the material that may spoil an episode.
(endnote) If you would like to start a discussion about the contents of this automated posting, please don't reply to it, but instead start a new thread with the subject "Spoiler rules."
Thank you for your co-operation; your fellow fans appreciate it.
------
That's my effort!
If anyone wants to second it, sign below!
I second this package of introduction, draft rules (1), (2), and (3), and endnote:
On Sat, 6 Feb 1999 09:36:01 -0000, "Martin Sylvester" wrote:
I do *not* second it. Why are we going to so much trouble to suck all the fun out of talking about "Daria"?
Put "SPOILER ALERT!" or something in the subject line, a warning at the top of the message, about 50 or so blank lines, and be done with it. Why do we have to be so bloody complex about the whole thing?
Martin (to send e-mail, remove the "nospam" from my e-mail address) ---- "Don't worry. Today it's brains, tomorrow pierced tongues, then the next day, pierced brains." - Jane Lane ---- Outpost Daria: Your Online Database for All Things Daria! http://systech.simplenet.com/daria/
Requests as to the bureaucratic nature of alt.tv.daria posts are to be submitted in person (bring 3 valid forms of picture ID and a note from your mother) and in triplicate using four(4)-month-old carbon paper to the alt.tv.daria Bureau of Bureaucracy Inquiries Bureau Department (aka "rich").
Chris Majors
FAQ-Keeper General of the alt.tv.daria Department of Frequently Asked FAQ Questions Bureau Department: http://www.auburn.net/~cwmajors/dariafaq.htm
Helen: Bureaucracy is the price we pay for impartiality.
Jake: Jefferson!
Helen: Stalin. It's all about fairness.
<g>
Those of you that have been here long enough know that I run to the verbose side-- I do it intentionally because I hate to waste time arguing details that I failed to mention. That way, everyone knows precisely where I stand, to the nearest mm. <g> If it makes me come across as bureaucratic at times, well, it's an occupational hazard, considering I routinely have to explain between 30 and 300 pages worth of legal gobbledygook to nervous borrowers and homebuyers. <g>
I'll take two valid picture IDs and a major credit card, if the picture IDs are issued by a governemental entity, and I'll only require a note from your mother if you want to sit out of gym class for the day. (BTW, who did the sketch about moving your jacket to a lower peg? Was it MPFC? I forget.)
moving my jacket to a lower peg, rich.
Quinn: People are so weird!
Daria: Some people are weird. Some are just astonishingly self-centered and deceitful.
Well, we were invited to be clear and unambiguous! Sometimes that brings verbosity in its train.
I'm sorry, Martin, if my suggestions were somehow offensive to you. I was trying, perhaps unsuccessfully, to distil a number of suggestions made in discussion here.
I thought an introduction might help people who will be newly active in this ng when s3 airs to understand why spoiler rules have been proposed, rather than simply demanding compliance from them.
I can see the virtue in insisting that only one wording be used, as you suggest (ie "SPOILER ALERT!"), but I'm not sure that we need to be *so* prescriptive. Someone expressed unease about lengthening subject lines unduly (ISTR it was Mike). So I thought that an option of simply including "#3nn" would address that problem: if we can filter "SPOILER ALERT!" it's no big deal to filter "#3" as well, is it?
The reason I included "s3" or "series 3" in the subject alert was to help people avoid filtering spoilers relating to other series.
The reason I proposed liberty in postings that contain general discussion as well as spoiler material, was for people who want to continue to enjoy atd's desultory discussions, but don't want eps spoiled: giving them the choice of stopping when the see the spoiler space.
The reasons I proposed that endnote were (i) to avoid growing the " Read this first..." thread, when new copies of the automated message would be posted regularly. This could confuse some (news)readers, and many of us might never see replies to that thread, since having read it once we might filter it out from then on. And (ii) because I think its courteous to acknowledge the co-operation of those who choose to comply.
I appreciate the thoughtfulness of those who are going to (ISTM) extraordinary lengths to protect the future enjoyment of fellow fans, and since rich was kind enough to offer a voting engine, and invite nominations, I thought I'd do my best to throw a proposal together. As I implied above, I guess from the strength of your reply that you find my proposal offensive; I'm sorry about that.
On Sat, 6 Feb 1999 20:05:51 -0000, "Martin Sylvester" wrote:
You gotta be careful about that. It's how lawyers are created. ;-)
Offensive, no, of course not; sorry if I came across that way. I guess I still have a little leftover tension from trying to defuse the "Daria! (The Musical)" hysteria of the past few days. :-)
I'm just of the opinion that we're introducing a lot of complexity where none is really needed, that's all. After all, lots of other newsgroups (and other non-Internet message bases) do just fine in this area without a lot of complex rules and guidelines. But that doesn't mean we can't keep discussing it as an intellectual exercise. <grin>
Martin (to send e-mail, remove the "nospam" from my e-mail address) ---- "Don't worry. Today it's brains, tomorrow pierced tongues, then the next day, pierced brains." - Jane Lane ---- Outpost Daria: Your Online Database for All Things Daria! http://systech.simplenet.com/daria/
I can understand that. I'm confident, I hope not vainly, that "The Musical!" will owe more to Dennis Potter than to Andrew Lloyd Webber. If I'm wrong, then hey, the team are free to experiment: a "Daria" that sticks to a formula would be less attractive to me. If they've chosen to parody the musical genre, I'll bet they've done it well.
I don't share your experience, so I suppose that's why I tried to put together a proposal. I'm not keen to see the discussion about spoiler rules take over the ng, so I was grateful to rich for suggesting a way of settling it.
The solution that came first to my mind was simplicity itself: to unsubscribe to atd until after the s3 finishes its run. (And I've still not ruled this out unequivocally.) I was (I've said before) touched by the lengths that fellow fans are prepared to consider in order to offer a choice to those of us who won't be seeing s3 for some time; my proposal was an attempt to crystallise something concrete out of the very considerate and thoughtful proposals submitted by divers hands.
I agree-- you have to be able to take risks. But I think most will be pleasantly surprised, even though there will always be a small group that will hate any episode-- it's not usually the same people, but there's always a debate whenever a new ep airs. Here's hoping that none of the debates either get out-of-hand or get ugly (as a few did during season 2.)
*groan* That's exactly what I was hoping to avoid, Martin, and you know it! <grin> This NG can sometimes pass over a perfectly good topic for discussion, and instead flog a minor difference of opinion to death. (as it appears I'm doing right now.) <g> The only effort required would be to click a link, fill in two boxes, click a couple of buttons, and that's it. I'll do the not-so-heavy lifting in the background... trust me, it'll be as near painless as I can make it. <g> And I have been on ngs in the past that were totally anarchic with respect to spoilers-- in one group, the British fans got a book before the American fans, and a flamewar darn near erupted when some posters didn't include spoiler space-- but it had never been discussed, so it was never used. Considering how anarchic a.t.d. is, I'm not trying to do much, just keep the flames down, that's all. <g>
Yes, that was truly my only intention-- the preservation of bandwidth so we could get back off-topic. <g> (At least until Season 3 actually *starts*, at which point we can all start "discussing" interpretations again.) <g>
I think it's very important that we don't lose members of this ng needlessly, and if all it takes is a little common coutesy, I'm all for it. Besides, they'll only be airing 6 new eps at first, so it's only for 6 weeks. (And hopefully by then some sympathetic souls will come to the aid of our transatlantic cousins. <g>) We can restrain ourselves for at least that long, can't we? It's the least we can do, considering that us Americans benefit from an entertainment distribution system that is Byzantine at best with regard to overseas markets. <g>
rich.
"Woooo, what a racket!" -- General Buck Conroy, Publisher, Brutal Mercenary Magazine.
In fact, on re-reading Martin's post, he did say, "Or something," so this comment of mine is not appropriate.
I do think, though, that suggesting some options, and leaving it to the individual poster to select one option, will help those who plan to use filters; my newsreader isn't sophisticated enough to filter ("SPOILER ALERT!") OR (something) without filtering everything.
I know, I could build a whole suite of filters if I try to predict what any posters 'something' might be, but maybe *I'm* not that sophisticated. <g>
And I was trying to be unambiguous!
I should have added a "Thank you!" to rich for offering us a way of getting this whole thing settled and out of the way, so we can resume normal service.
I would guess that it's because a lot of us are growing insane with anticipation for season three and that coming up with the fancy-shmancy spoiler rules is a good way to pass the time ;)
Mike Quinn I can be reached through e-mail at: [email]