• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Game of Thrones - TV Series (NO BOOK SPOILERS)

Page 348 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

sactoking

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2007
6,662
1,353
136
Well that is exactly what should be happening. Why people who read the books feel he need to post in here at all bewilders me. There is a thread for those people where they can talk about the show and how it all relates to the book, yet they want to come here and post and get pissed at us show watchers when we call out what seems like a spoiler. /sigh

KT
As I mentioned a month or more back, there are some people who have read the books but not seen the show. The show has revealed at least a few points not yet in the books. Discussion of the show in the book thread is therefore a spoiler as well.

The only equitable way to solve this is 10 threads: one for each book, one for each season, and one comparing the books to the show. Otherwise someone, somewhere, is going to be spoiled by something.
 
Mar 10, 2005
14,648
2
0
I'm convinced that it'll be a near miss. The Hound seems stuck with Arya, which isn't a bad thing. I'm also convinced she'll become a fighter and a player in the series as time goes on.
king's landing has got a bit stagnant after joffrey, and the hound+arya has got even better. arya's pretty clearly going to braavos at some point, and the hound mentioned it, but will he make it there? dun dun dunnnnnnn! tune in next week for more questions than answers on the next game of thrones!
 

manimal

Lifer
Mar 30, 2007
13,561
8
0
As I mentioned a month or more back, there are some people who have read the books but not seen the show. The show has revealed at least a few points not yet in the books. Discussion of the show in the book thread is therefore a spoiler as well.

The only equitable way to solve this is 10 threads: one for each book, one for each season, and one comparing the books to the show. Otherwise someone, somewhere, is going to be spoiled by something.
your thinking too hard. Its pretty simple. If you have read the book and are incapable of discussing the SHOW ONLY then go to the other thread or the nef thread for most of us care.
 

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,028
75
86
your thinking too hard. Its pretty simple. If you have read the book and are incapable of discussing the SHOW ONLY then go to the other thread or the nef thread for most of us care.
Well, the thread title says "NO BOOK SPOILERS", so I would appreciate you guys not spoiling things not mentioned in the books, as those would be book spoilers. Thanks!


Also, did techs just leave this thread, or has he been MIA completely?
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
103,546
18,101
136
As I mentioned a month or more back, there are some people who have read the books but not seen the show. The show has revealed at least a few points not yet in the books. Discussion of the show in the book thread is therefore a spoiler as well.

The only equitable way to solve this is 10 threads: one for each book, one for each season, and one comparing the books to the show. Otherwise someone, somewhere, is going to be spoiled by something.

That doesn't make much sense, though, unless there are "purists" who refuse to watch the show until the books are finished...even though most people are resigned to the fact that the show will probably outpace the books.

Every book-reader is therefore already "spoiled" by the what is going on in the show, anyway. Well, I haven't met a book reader IRL that isn't also watching the show.

it's a very simple solution that already exists: 2 threads. One for spoilers, one for no spoilers.
 
Mar 10, 2005
14,648
2
0
Well, the thread title says "NO BOOK SPOILERS", so I would appreciate you guys not spoiling things not mentioned in the books, as those would be book spoilers. Thanks!


Also, did techs just leave this thread, or has he been MIA completely?
the only valid interpretation in this context is that info from the books is not to spoil the tv show discussion. as a formula 1 fan, i respect your effort to exploit poor wording of rules to your benefit.
 

Theb

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
3,534
8
76
That thread consists of 3 people: me, momeNt, and Mongrel. People who have read the books are able to have discussions about the show without giving away stuff.
I actually like the other thread better. This thread is way more active, but it's 90% bickering.
 

02ranger

Golden Member
Mar 22, 2006
1,050
0
76
I still wish we could use a volunteer to approve posts before they come up in this thread, like a Game of Thrones Moderator. Soembody who's read the books and watches the show, who can tell what's a spoiler and what's not and anything that will spoil the show they could not allow to be posted. I know its been mentioned before and we can't do it, but it doesn't hurt to wish. That would definitely stop a lot of the bickering here, and should stop ALL the spoilers............
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
103,546
18,101
136
That thread consists of 3 people: me, momeNt, and Mongrel. People who have read the books are able to have discussions about the show without giving away stuff.
Well, some apparently are. Some clearly are not--not sure if you missed it at the time, as a lot of comments have long since been deleted, but it was made clear than some people are roundly incapable of not being dicks about it.

For my sake, I do think the bickering in here about every god-damn-thing is just as bad as the rampant spoiler folks.

More than that, however, I don't understand why such a simple mandate: "Hey dickheads--don't post stuff that will be obviously construed as a spoiler" became so difficult for some bad actors to follow.
 

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,028
75
86
I still wish we could use a volunteer to approve posts before they come up in this thread, like a Game of Thrones Moderator. Soembody who's read the books and watches the show, who can tell what's a spoiler and what's not and anything that will spoil the show they could not allow to be posted. I know its been mentioned before and we can't do it, but it doesn't hurt to wish. That would definitely stop a lot of the bickering here, and should stop ALL the spoilers............
The problem is, the moderator would need an accurate list of who is a book reader and who isn't. Zin claims he isn't a book reader and he speculated some things correctly. This lead to people going "omg closet book reader!" or some shit. Would the moderator have to disallow all speculation posts (which makes this thread get like 5 posts a week, consisting of "oh my God! Becky, look at his squashed head!") or only disallow correct speculation posts, thereby confirming whoever was speculating it and spoiling that for them?

We just need people to stop freaking out about spoilers and then bitching for 50 posts afterwards. Of the book readers I know of (and I've read the book) none of them post spoilers. Most discuss only what has happened on the show, with the occasional background that people wouldn't know (such as the naturef Valarian steel, the disease Stannis' daughter has, etc).
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,299
349
126
The problem is, the moderator would need an accurate list of who is a book reader and who isn't. Zin claims he isn't a book reader and he speculated some things correctly. This lead to people going "omg closet book reader!" or some shit. Would the moderator have to disallow all speculation posts (which makes this thread get like 5 posts a week, consisting of "oh my God! Becky, look at his squashed head!") or only disallow correct speculation posts, thereby confirming whoever was speculating it and spoiling that for them?

We just need people to stop freaking out about spoilers and then bitching for 50 posts afterwards. Of the book readers I know of (and I've read the book) none of them post spoilers. Most discuss only what has happened on the show, with the occasional background that people wouldn't know (such as the naturef Valarian steel, the disease Stannis' daughter has, etc).
I've found that Sunday night - Tuesday or so is a good time to post because I can just discuss the most recent episode. The thread dies down Wednesday-Thursday, and Friday onward it is mostly speculation about future events. I find I stop posting Friday-Sunday morning because of that. It can become a minefield.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
103,546
18,101
136
The problem is, the moderator would need an accurate list of who is a book reader and who isn't. Zin claims he isn't a book reader and he speculated some things correctly. This lead to people going "omg closet book reader!" or some shit. Would the moderator have to disallow all speculation posts (which makes this thread get like 5 posts a week, consisting of "oh my God! Becky, look at his squashed head!") or only disallow correct speculation posts, thereby confirming whoever was speculating it and spoiling that for them?

We just need people to stop freaking out about spoilers and then bitching for 50 posts afterwards. Of the book readers I know of (and I've read the book) none of them post spoilers. Most discuss only what has happened on the show, with the occasional background that people wouldn't know (such as the naturef Valarian steel, the disease Stannis' daughter has, etc).
I guess you missed MonGrel's posts, then. And it wasn't so much that he would post spoilers, he was very vain about it. For what it's worth, I don't recall blankslate every spoiling anything intentionally. If something came out in one of his posts, it was probably unintentional because he always seemed very careful to me.

really though, the "Well my GF never read the books and she obviously knew this would happen, therefore it should not be a spoiler to anyone" is the type of repetitive attitude that deserves banishment.

And I'm speaking from experience: years ago, when The Dark Knight was out, I posted, about 3 weeks after the movie was released: "Well, too bad Rachel is dead!" and attracted some mod heat. ...Didnt' quite get it, and yeah, I was being a dick about it, but this was my argument: it's been out for 3 weeks. If it takes me that long to see something new, I certainly won't go into a thread about it. Spoiler tags or not (this was back in FT days, so before tags, I think). Anyway, I was vacationed for a week for that one post, because I thought a spoiler from a 3 week old movies wasn't such a big deal, in a discussion about the movie. ....because it's pretty easy to not be spoiled like this.

Anyway, point being: penalties were swifter back in the day.
 

02ranger

Golden Member
Mar 22, 2006
1,050
0
76
The problem is, the moderator would need an accurate list of who is a book reader and who isn't. Zin claims he isn't a book reader and he speculated some things correctly. This lead to people going "omg closet book reader!" or some shit. Would the moderator have to disallow all speculation posts (which makes this thread get like 5 posts a week, consisting of "oh my God! Becky, look at his squashed head!") or only disallow correct speculation posts, thereby confirming whoever was speculating it and spoiling that for them?

We just need people to stop freaking out about spoilers and then bitching for 50 posts afterwards. Of the book readers I know of (and I've read the book) none of them post spoilers. Most discuss only what has happened on the show, with the occasional background that people wouldn't know (such as the naturef Valarian steel, the disease Stannis' daughter has, etc).
That's a good point, I hadn't considered the speculation thing. You're right, the only real solution is for everybody who doesn't read the books to calm down a little (not saying they don't have a right to be upset about spoilers, just saying to report and let it go) and the book readers (like myself) especially need to be very careful what they post here. I don't think banishing the book readers to the other thread is the correct action because that thread is nowhere near as active as this one, but if you choose to post here you do have a responsibility to not spoil it for others. In fact, the biggest reason I'm not more active in this thread is because I'm always afraid I'll spoil something unintentionally. It isn't always about what you say, sometimes what you don't say or just how you react to a post can spoil things if people know you're reading the books, as we've seen recently.
 

sactoking

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2007
6,662
1,353
136
I would also mention that the 5 books are currently at what, like 4500 combined pages? Some things might be obvious spoilers to someone who has read them, but there are some things that even a "book reader" might not realize are spoilers...
 

manimal

Lifer
Mar 30, 2007
13,561
8
0
I would also mention that the 5 books are currently at what, like 4500 combined pages? Some things might be obvious spoilers to someone who has read them, but there are some things that even a "book reader" might not realize are spoilers...
so go to the other thread.
 

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,028
75
86
I guess you missed MonGrel's posts, then. And it wasn't so much that he would post spoilers, he was very vain about it. For what it's worth, I don't recall blankslate every spoiling anything intentionally. If something came out in one of his posts, it was probably unintentional because he always seemed very careful to me..
I am not defending MonGrel, as he did continuously post questionable spoilers after being told not to. I think most of the other book readers follow the rules.

I think another large problem is as soon as someone things something is a spoiler, they make a large stink about it.

If everyone ignores it, and the one who notices it simply reports it, we don't into these silly arguments.

Responding 50 times to "Snape kills Dumbledore" only further fuels these arguments, especially if the post isn't a real spoiler, as they always respond with "you are the moron, not me! this clearly was stated in Goblet of Fire two years ago!" And that gets a response of "well, if you didn't memorize every passing comment made by the peasants, you'd never have known. you're still the moron!" and so on.
 

cronos

Diamond Member
Nov 7, 2001
9,380
24
91
As I mentioned a month or more back, there are some people who have read the books but not seen the show. The show has revealed at least a few points not yet in the books. Discussion of the show in the book thread is therefore a spoiler as well.

The only equitable way to solve this is 10 threads: one for each book, one for each season, and one comparing the books to the show. Otherwise someone, somewhere, is going to be spoiled by something.
And, as I've mentioned as well, sure! Why the hell not? You are free to make whatever threads you want/need to make the situation 'equitable'! And then contact the mods if you need special spoiler protection for that thread. Simple.

I (and I'm pretty sure most everybody here) couldn't care less of what happened in the other thread, or whether there are 5 or 9 other threads created for their specific reasons. We care about this thread, and we don't want to know what happened (or did not happen in the books). That's it.
 

sactoking

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2007
6,662
1,353
136
so go to the other thread.
Sorry, I meant that in the context of the "The thread should have a 'white hat' spoiler police" discussion. I simply meant that having a designation "spoiler reviewer" wouldn't work because even people who have read the books can't agree on what what's in the books at times...
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY