Subject: [META] Yet Another Spoilers Debate (YASD) (was Is Toy Info Spoilers?)
Newsgroups: alt.toys.transformers
References: <19990205224819.16398.00000321@ng-fs1.aol.com> <19990206030536.29402.00000361@ng39.aol.com>
Distribution:

This is very long, and discusses a lot of spoiler issues, some of which
have been raised lately, and some of which have not.  Although it's a
followup to a post of Zobovor's, most of what I say isn't in direct
response to what he said.  He just sort of got my mind rolling.  And, I
ramble a little bit here, but I think it's all relevant. Similarly, this
is not a flame (I think that is apparent, but better safe than sorry).  I
actually agree with half of what Zob says, to some degree at least.  Most
of the time, I am not addressing him in particular.  Most instances of
"you" refer to a general "you, the reader" rather than Zobovor. Rational
followups or email replies are welcome.  Flames will be ignored.

Zobovor (zobovor@aol.com) wrote:
> It seems to me that if you want to see an episode for yourself before you hear
> everything that happens in it, fine.  If you don't want anyone to mention which
> new characters appear so you can be pleasantly surprised... okay, fine.  And
> hell, if you want people to insert spoiler space before mere *speculation*
> about upcoming episodes, just in case your guesses *might* be on the money...
> eh, it's a stretch, but fine.

Personally, I don't consider speculation to be spoilage, unless it
involves advance info, of course.  I prefer not to read speculation about
upcoming eps, because I like to figure everything out on my own, but to
me it's not a spoiler unless it's something that is certain.

> But if now we're talking about people protecting you from new info so you can
> be surprised at a new TOY...  Chutzpah.

My thought on toy spoilers are pretty much in line with George's; most of
the time, it doesn't really matter, but if the tech specs say something
about upcoming eps.  Sometimes that can be hard to judge - like the
"nebulous entity" that was referenced in, what, TM Scavenger's?  Or was it
OpOp?  Either way, it might have been one, so it's probably pays to
protect that sort of thing, just to be on the safe side.  But IMO, the
mere existance of a toy says almost nothing.  (Of course - new forms of
Primal or Megatron are almost certainly going to show up on the show, but,
I don't want to get too convoluted.)

That said, if you make a post about toys and want to spoil protect it,
that's quite okay.  It's just not something that I think should be
required.

> I mean, what do you do when your friend calls you and goes, "Hey, guess what I
> saw at the mall today?"  Hang up?  When you see a commercial for the show, do
> you shield your eyes?

Some people do.  :)  I worked very, very hard to prevent having the
latest Legend of Zelda game spoiled for me.  I stopped reading previews
and looking at screenshots four or five months before it was released.  I
changed the channel when commercials came on the TV.  I was a proud
"Zelda virgin" when I popped in the game for the first time.  We may not
understand the differences between people, but we should at least learn
to accept them.  It baffles me that anyone would want to be spoiled, but
if that's what they enjoy, then I won't stop them.  But I think it's fair
to ask that they have the consideration to be discreet about it.

> You'd have to lead a REALLY sheltered life to completely seclude yourself from
> new information.  And you know one of the best ways to start?  Stop reading the
> newsgroup!  Yes, I've said it once, I've said it again, and I'll keep on saying
> it!

The problem with this argument is that the newsgroups have many, many
functions other than "news".  News about upcoming TF events is - at least
IMO - a pretty small part of what makes the newsgroups important,
enjoyable, and worthwhile.  It seems unfair to me to force people to
abandon all of that simply because they prefer not to know how a story
will end before they see it.

A better way to state what I think you are advocating would be "stay away
from the ng for a day or two before the ep airs".  For example, if you
get BW on sunday, don't read the group on saturday, since there will
probably be people talking about it.  Even this seems irritatingly close
to an acceptance of unprotected spoiling to me, but I am beginning to
swing towards that camp anyway... it pains me to do so because it feels
like I am compromising my beliefs about responsible posting behavior, but
with every flame war I grow slightly more cynical about the whole thing.

A reasonable question to ask of anti-spoiler people such as myself would
be "why is it more 'fair' to force people to use spoiler warnings than it
is to force other people to be more careful when they read the group?"  I
have two answers for that: First, is that it seems to me that there are
more people who prefer not to be spoiled than those who do.  That's not
something that would be easily confirmed, and maybe other people would
disagree with it, but that's how it seems to me.

Second, spoiler protection is a long-established and well accepted
practice on the Internet.  Most of the rules of Internet behavior place
the burden of responsibility on whoever is taking part actively in the
net, such that the passive reader has the easiest time possible.  Posts
are to be made in plain text so that everyone can read them, in less than
80 columns so the lines don't wrap badly on some screens.  Posts are to
be well-written with clear subject lines so the reader will know what it
is saying.  Web pages should have few or small graphics on them so the
reader will be able to load them quickly.  Etc., etc..  This is the
accepted form of behavior on the Internet.  Spoiler protection is a part
of that.

Perhaps some people have a problem with these foundations of Netiquette.
It's hard for me to see that as anything but laziness, but I suppose I
can understand that it could also be seen as laziness of the reader, that
they're not willing top put up with things.  (That said, I don't want to
see anybody professing that viewpoint who objects to spamming, as that
would be sort of hypocritical.)  So we come to the question of whether we
should continue the code of Netiquette or replace it with something new.
Should we toss out the traditions because we don't like them anymore (or,
some people don't like them at least)?  I suppose we could.  I think the
net would become unbearably noisy and completely useless if we did.

When confronted with this sort of issue, when there is an irreconcilable
difference of viewpoints, it's best for one group or the other to go
elsewhere.  Traditionally (yeah, again with tradition) it's the group
that wants change that goes elsewhere, such as the creation of the Usenet
II net.* hierarchies, or ATTCMod.  Sometimes it's more hazy; the creation
of ATTM was criticised as going against tradition, in that the people who
wanted new rules should have been the ones to leave, instead of forcing
others out.  But, it's questionable as to whether limiting sales in ATT
should be thought of as "new" or not.  The control message says
absolutely nothing about sales, which implies that the groups creators
hadn't even thought it could be an issue.

Now, I'm not proposing that we create another new TF newsgroup, either
for spoiler posts or for a spoiler-free haven.  That would be an extreme
reaction right now, and as Zob said, RTTMod is pretty much the latter
already.  Spoilers sometimes slip through, but not often.  If you're
looking for a spoiler-safe newsgroup, RTTMod is a good place to go.  It
may not get enough traffic for your tastes, but everyone gives it a
chance and makes some posts, it'll liven up.  You've got to participate
before you can complain legitimately.

> A lot of vehement pro-spoilerists use the argument, "It's not so hard for you
> to hit the Enter key 15 or 20 times."  No, it's not...  But it's an
> inconvenience.  Granted, an inconvenience that I'm willing to endure, in most
> cases.  But spoilers on the TOYS?

Of course, it's also an inconvenience to stay away from the newsgroup for
several days simply to avoid subject-line spoilers.  Which one affects
more people?  I think a lot more people read the group than make posts
with spoilers in them...

>                                  How far does it go?  Has Finland (just for
> example--no offense, Joona) gotten all the Transmetal 2 toys yet?  Does that
> mean I have to protect everyone down there from any info regarding their very
> *existence* until they're released who-knows-how-many-years-from-now?

That's a legitimate question with no easy answer.  I would certainly be
annoyed if I was expected to spoiler-protect S3 discussion for two years
until it's all seen in the UK, or 10 years or more before it's seen in
Scandanavia.  I would also be annoyed if I lived in those places, though,
and had to pretty much choose between being an active TransFan and being
able to enjoy the surprise of seeing a new episode that I didn't already
know everything about.  Some fandoms have created seperate newsgroups for
their international splinter groups - there's a UK Babylon 5 group, for
example.  That's still not a perfect solution, because by segregating
fans by nationality, we're losing contact with each other.

In some ways, the only way to proctect everybody from spoilers would be
to make every single post, about anything, spoiler protected with a
statement at the top as to what the content is... "Spoilers for 'Heavy
Metal War'"... "Spoilers for MW Mirage's tech specs"... "Spoilers for G1
comic #9 and #10".  That would be hard to implement, and I admit I would
think it was a pain in the ass to protect every post I made.

Maybe some of the people who don't like spoiler space only make spoiler
posts, and *are* being forced to protect everything they post?  I dunno.
I think the anti-spoiler camp sometimes has a little arrogance, a sort of
"can't you post about anything besides those dirty spoilers? don't you
have anything from your own mind to contribute?"  I myself find it hard to
fathom that anybody would be so interested in spoilers.  But, the
anti-anti-spoilers (they're not exactly "pro-spoiler") have their own sort
of condescension.  "What are you going to do, live in a cave to avoid the
real world?  Maybe you should just go away if you don't want your ears to
burn."

> I also hear the defense, "My eyes automatically read everything on the screen.
> I can't just read the first line and realize there's spoilers afoot."  Well,
> learn.  Seriously.  You weren't born knowing how to read, so it's a habit you
> can change.  Granted, it's an inconvenience on your part, but one you should
> learn to endure if you're going to read the newsgroups.

This, actually, is one of the things that I see as condescension.  When
stated in some ways, this sort of thing can be deeply offensive to me,
actually.  I can't unlearn how to read.  I can't turn off my brain and
focus on only one word at a time; not without focusing so intently that
it takes me two seconds to read each word without my eyes wandering and I
get a headache.  "Well, that's not my problem, just don't read the
newsgroup at all then!"  No - that's an unacceptable solution, as I've
discussed above.

If I were the only person in the world who read dynamically, then I would
just accept it, and find my own solution.  But I'm not; a lot of people
are the same way.  Until this issue came up last year in a spoiler flame
war, it had never even occured to me that there might be people who
*don't* read dynamically.  Here, again, it's hard for me to keep some of
my own arrogance out: a word-by-word, non-scanning style of reading seems
primitive to me.  Asking me to read like that is like asking me to cut
out my brain.  You may think that I can change the way I read, you may
have even changed your own reading style, but when I tell you that *I*
cannot, I'm not saying it because I'm lazy and don't want to, or because
I don't care what you you want, or because I have no control over my own
actions.  It's because that is how I read, how I have always (to my
memory) read, and always will read.  Changing that would be even more
difficult than changing my manner of speech; more akin to changing my
entire style of thought.  Even if I *could* do that, I wouldn't want to,
because how I think is who I am.

It is much, much easier for a handful of people to insert spoiler space
than it is for a different handful of people to alter their brains.

> Y'see, I don't at all approve in the slightest of folks posting messages with
> headers like "Dinobot joins the Maximals in BW part 2!!!"  But I accept the
> reality that it happens.  I'd stay off the newsgroup for a bit if it was that
> crucial that I not learn anything before I see the episode.

Sadly, it's beginning to look like that really is the only safe course of
action.  And it's difficult to even throw blame at anyone, because a lot
of those subject lines are written by newbies who don't know better.
And, I've already become jaded enough to not say "every newbie should
read a netiquette guide and a newsgroup FAQ before posting", because I
know that about 1% or less of them do.  Less than 50% will probably
*ever* read a guide or FAQ.

> Transfandom flames.  But speaking from a personal standpoint, I can't imagine
> why anyone would want to be kept in the dark about things.  I consider myself
> fortunate to live in the Age of Information.  The mind boggles at the idea that
> at the click of a mouse, I can call up pictures of Transformers screen shots,
> hear clips from episodes, and see pictures of toys that won't be released for
> months!  I'd hate to lose access to this.  I *like* being able to say, "Oh,
> there's a BW kangaroo Soundwave coming out.  I'd better start saving up for
> him."

Oh, I love having access to all that information, but I don't like to
have specific bits of it that I don't want to know thrown in my face.
:)  You can't imagine why anyone would want to be kept in the dark.  *I*
can't imagine why anyone would want to be spoiled.  There you are.  Two
people who don't understand each other.  But neither one of us is lying,
so we'd all better accept that different people value different things.

> I dunno, I guess it's your prerogative if you prefer living in the 80's...

Aren't all classic TF fans living in the 80s?  You say this as if you are
looking down upon people who don't want to be spoiled.  The notion that
living in the past is inherently bad is a whole other can of worms that I
won't address, but that doesn't even seem like a relevant statement
here...  Obviously, anyone who reads newsgroups is interested in sharing
information.  They're not hiding from it.  All I want is to not have
specific, tiny bits of information placed in front of me until after I
have experienced them myself.

> When it comes right down to it, folks, this is a NEWSgroup.  "News" is the
> reporting of recent events.  If you read the newsgroup, expect to hear news.
> It's really that simple.

Well, just because it has the word "news" in its name doesn't mean it has
to have news in it.  A much more accurate name would be "discussion
group", but we call it a newsgroup because that's what they were called
when they were created.  The name is a legacy which doesn't neccesarily
mean anything.  But yeah, a discussion group will have news in it.  There
will always be some risk for those who don't want to know all the news.
But when it is so easy, so unbelievably simple for people to hide that
news and reduce the risk to practically zero, it seems like the height of
egotism to deny them that.

Where's the love, people?  Every day we do things that are slight
inconveniences in order to make life easier for others.  We stop our cars
at red lights, we refrain from speaking at normal volume while in a movie
theater, we hold doors open for the people behind us, we give up our seat
on the subway for a senior citizen...  It's very easy to forget all about
being polite when sitting at your computer, because you never see
anybody.  We do things and say things on the Net that we would never in a
million years say to someone face to face.  When that leads to increased
openness and freedom of communication, it's a good thing.  When it leads
to hurt feelings and rash statements, it's a bad thing.

If you were sitting at a table in Denny's talking about Beast Wars with
your friends, and one one of them had not yet seen a new episode, would
you not refrain from discussing the episode (unless the friend didn't
mind)?  Would you tell them to go home so you can talk about it?  Would
you tell them they should train their ears to not hear everything said at
the table?  Would you call them a fat ass if they were bothered that you
ruined the story for them?

Every post you see comes from a real person, and there are far more people
who lurk than post.  We can be more brave on the Net than in real life and
say things we might not otherwise say (I would never be able to give a
speech like this in front of a large group of people), but don't forget
that there are thousands of people who will see every post you make to
ATT.  Please, fellow TransFans, remember that.  Your audience is not
screen names and cathode rays.  It's people.  Don't treat them with any
less respect and consideration than you would treat someone in real life.

                                                --Steve-o

Steve Stonebraker | alt.toys.transformers FAQ Keeper | Help end email spam!
srstoneb@bu.edu   |  http://astro.bu.edu/~srstoneb/  | http://www.cauce.org