FanFare Pony: No spoilers above the cut, please November 24, 2015 7:30 AM   Subscribe

Rosebud is a [redacted]! [redacted] is [redacted]'s father! Bruce Willis was a [redacted] all along! And that's just the beginning! What spoilers for that new Netflix season that you shotgunned over the weekend will you put up above the cut next? Stay tuned!

In all seriousness, some of us (e.g. me) haven't had a chance to watch all of Jessica Jones yet, and your above-the-cut descriptions have spoiled plot developments several episodes ahead of where I am now. The show obviously has many virtues above and beyond this or that plot twist, but I still would have liked to have found out on my own, and I don't think that it's unreasonable to ask FanFare posters to take a bit of care with shows that are younger than the expiration date on a loaf of bread. TIA for your consideration.
posted by Halloween Jack to Etiquette/Policy at 7:30 AM (65 comments total) 5 users marked this as a favorite

You can hide the descriptions so you don't see them (I'm not in fanfare much at all but I'm freakishly spoiler-averse so I keep them off).
posted by billiebee at 7:32 AM on November 24, 2015 [9 favorites]


Thanks, that's a good hint.
posted by Halloween Jack at 7:35 AM on November 24, 2015


Why not hide post descriptions? As long as you know which episode you're on, you can still find the discussion by the title.

The problem with spoilers is they're kind of on a continuum. I don't like to know anything at all about an episode before I watch it, some people are fine with knowing of a new character or setting but don't want spoilers about actual events, etc. It's hard to know where to draw the line for all but the most obvious cases.

For example, when I set up a FanFare post for The Walking Dead, I use AMC's SUPER generic episode descriptions, but even those could spoil things for people who are a season or two behind. They might mention a character's name, which either spoils that a new character is introduced or that an old character is still alive (kind of a big deal in a show where people die a lot). It's hard to navigate without knowing where everyone is in the series or how averse to spoilers people are.
posted by mama casserole at 7:38 AM on November 24, 2015 [2 favorites]


It's definitely something folks should be mindful of, yeah. I haven't gotten to Jessica Jones yet so I can't really give an informed opinion about this specific case (and in the interest of not turning this into a bonus-accidental-spoilers space, let's maybe skip any unpacking of the reasons why a given synopsis on those particular FanFare posts is or isn't a spoiler or enough of one, etc), but as a general thing it's something to make an effort to keep to a minimum.

A couple notes on this stuff:

- there's a "Hide Post Descriptions" toggle up at the top of the page under the header menu stuff that you can use to reduce the front page descriptions to just titles. Obviously that's a pretty all-or-nothing solution if you otherwise like having a bit of synopsis, but is worth keeping in mind if you're in a specific period of plot-level spoiler averseness with a new show or something.

- it can in some cases be tricky to write basically anything above the fold for a plot-twisty show without descending in to silly vagueness, so I can understand why this is a tricky line to walk in some cases. But probably better, still, to err on the side of silly and vague.

- I think it's probably especially so when it's one of these Netflix-style whole-season-at-once dumps, and one thing we've added recently that might be a good way to go with these shows is season-level threads that can be a rolling discussion of the whole lump all at once. That doesn't need to be in lieu of also episode-specific posts, but could be complementary and might be a reason to not care so much if the per-ep above the fold descriptions are super vague. Shotgunners can jump into the all-inclusive thread knowing it's all going to be in there, with ep-by-ep watchers keeping themselves embargoed as they step along through the episodes.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:38 AM on November 24, 2015 [2 favorites]


Well now I want to know what Rosebud is.
posted by shakespeherian at 7:44 AM on November 24, 2015


Rosebud is Bruce Willis' father. Read the post.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:47 AM on November 24, 2015 [43 favorites]


I have had the same problem with spoilers in fanfare and unfortunately hiding post descriptions is the only way to totally eliminate the possibility of being spoiled. You have to do it separately if you look at Metafilter on different devices, too.

I've found that, when posting, IMDB often has a short one or two sentence description of the episode that tends to be spoiler-free. Or, like mama casserole says, the show promotional materials often have something suitably generic (I used the BBC's descriptions for The Great British Bake Off, for example).

I think the all-season threads are a great idea. For regular season stuff, though, I do wish there was more of an effort made to keep big events below the fold.
posted by everybody had matching towels at 8:07 AM on November 24, 2015


If folks could be a little more careful about this it would be appreciated. Cheers.
posted by Artw at 8:12 AM on November 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


I think it's probably especially so when it's one of these Netflix-style whole-season-at-once dumps, and one thing we've added recently that might be a good way to go with these shows is season-level threads that can be a rolling discussion of the whole lump all at once. That doesn't need to be in lieu of also episode-specific posts, but could be complementary and might be a reason to not care so much if the per-ep above the fold descriptions are super vague. Shotgunners can jump into the all-inclusive thread knowing it's all going to be in there, with ep-by-ep watchers keeping themselves embargoed as they step along through the episodes.

This would also help with a thing that's been slightly annoying me about Jessica Jones threads, where people come into the thread for episode 1 but want to talk about episode 4 or 6 or whatever. I get that when you binge-watch stuff it's hard to tell what exactly came when and people are being relatively careful about spoilers so it's just general non-spoiler thoughts and general impressions, it's just a little tiresome to have people talking about the series as a whole or in large part when I've only seen one episode and am still working out the basic relationships. If people could save that sort of discussion for somewhere closer to the end of the series or for a whole-season thread for binge-watchers, I (and maybe I'm the only one) would appreciate it.
posted by Copronymus at 8:23 AM on November 24, 2015 [11 favorites]


I've come to the conclusion that I can stay spoiler-free on FanFare only if I'm reading about regular broadcast shows as they air. Someone's bound to spoil something otherwise.

For you, it's these episode descriptions.

For me, it was when I finally decided I was going to watch The Wire for the first time. I was happy to find S01 already posted to FanFare episode-by-episode and even labeled as 'First Watch'. I believe it was the discussion for the fifth episode where I finally quit reading after being spoiled on the simplest of things: being told not to judge a character too harshly because man, you'll really get them after their arc in Season 04 or whatever. I mean, shit. I just started this show. I don't want to know who's still around seasons later. I didn't even feel like I could flag that comment (and subsequent ones) as spoilers because they're over a year old and other commenters have responded, etc.

So yeah, the only way to keep FanFare a truly spoiler-free experience is to only follow shows that are airing right now. Even then you probably need to limit them to things with no external source material like books or comics, otherwise people are still going to say things like, "Well who knows how this will play out in the show but right now we're like parallel to that bit in the comics where X dies a gruesome death."
posted by komara at 8:24 AM on November 24, 2015 [7 favorites]


This is not a problem. Hide the post descriptions, problem solved.

As to the larger "problem," it might be better to able to post about several episodes at once, say Jessica Jones 1-3. That way, you're still getting the binge feel/dump,
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:26 AM on November 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


It's a bummer that just going to the Fanfare front page will show a description for the eighth episode of a show where the very first episode was only released a couple of days ago. It's very hard to write any description for the eight episode that doesn't give at least a hint about previous episodes plots. It means I need to turn off descriptions entirely, even though I might like them in general.
posted by smackfu at 8:30 AM on November 24, 2015 [3 favorites]


Feature request then, the ability to turn off post descriptions for specific shows?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:32 AM on November 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


It's a bummer that just going to the Fanfare front page will show a description for the eighth episode of a show where the very first episode was only released a couple of days ago.

This is also something that a redesign of the front page should significantly ameliorate; it's something we've been working on the last few weeks (in among other stuff) and I'm hoping we'll be able to roll something out fairly soon. Getting the emphasis of the front page away from "here's just literally some stuff recently posted" as it is now and toward more of a content-discovery interface ala the Watercooler will I think help a lot with some of this, since you'll more likely be looking at the description of a show only if you're actually looking at that show on purpose.
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:35 AM on November 24, 2015 [5 favorites]


Not sure if bug or feature but the title font size setting in our profiles doesn't effect the titles in FanFare so if you turn off the descriptions the page isn't blank if you've set the font size = 1
posted by Mitheral at 9:03 AM on November 24, 2015


It's a feature. If you turn off titles or set them very small you wouldn't be able to see much on the page with descriptions disabled.
posted by pb (staff) at 9:04 AM on November 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


Feature, yeah; titles are structurally vital on FanFare vs. there more arguably supplementary role elsewhere, so they're gonna be there regardless of other title preferences.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:04 AM on November 24, 2015


This is also something that a redesign of the front page should significantly ameliorate; it's something we've been working on the last few weeks (in among other stuff) and I'm hoping we'll be able to roll something out fairly soon. Getting the emphasis of the front page away from "here's just literally some stuff recently posted" as it is now and toward more of a content-discovery interface ala the Watercooler will I think help a lot with some of this, since you'll more likely be looking at the description of a show only if you're actually looking at that show on purpose.

This sounds great. I appreciate that y'all are continuing to tinker and improve.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 9:12 AM on November 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


Bruce Willis was a [redacted] all along.

It was obvious to anyone who saw those wine cooler commercials what a [redacted] he was.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 9:34 AM on November 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


posted by cortex (staff) Rosebud is Bruce Willis' father.

I see sled people!
posted by mattdidthat at 9:34 AM on November 24, 2015 [21 favorites]


Doesn't Jessica Jones already exist in a world where the story is known? I get what this pony is about, and it's a good idea...but honestly, for things like JJ, or GoT, or the Expanse, where the story itself is just being retold, as opposed to , say, Lost or Mr Robot , it's only natural that those who know it want to discuss it based on how it's being retold as much as the story itself, so one has to go into any online discussion expecting those things, It's kinda interweb 101.
posted by OHenryPacey at 9:47 AM on November 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


I think we can and have drawn a distinction between "this is a show unto itself" and "this is a show with a larger narrative/media context" reasonably successfully so far on several things; like GoT, there is the issue of show-as-show vs show-as-adaptation and the approach there (as a particularly high-profile case) was to explicitly distinguish between discussions that do and don't include book stuff.

If Jessica Jones turned out (or in further discussion turns out) to be something where the hurdle of partitioning the show itself from the Marvel context is big enough to necessitate it, formally splitting the discussion between a "just the show" and "the show in the spoilery context of the Marvelverse and previous JJ stories in other media" thread or threads is an okay approach.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:53 AM on November 24, 2015


for things like JJ, or GoT, or the Expanse, where the story itself is just being retold, as opposed to , say, Lost or Mr Robot , it's only natural that those who know it want to discuss it based on how it's being retold as much as the story itself

It is unrealistic to expect that everyone watching and discussing Jessica Jones (or GOT, or any other series based on something) is intimately familiar with all of the existing text out there. Happily, FanFare accounts for this!

from the FAQ, in a section about fanfare labels: Books Included - A second half of the special case above (again, with Game of Thrones as the example) where any spoiler already covered in books is fair game. Anyone viewing these threads is assumed to have read the books and seen the shows.

If you want to discuss JJ in the context of the comics, post a "Books Included" thread (I would imagine that it would make the most sense to do it for the whole season as opposed to individual episodes in that case).
posted by everybody had matching towels at 9:55 AM on November 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


Speaking of reworking the front page of FanFare, here's a current working draft of a new front page view.

Note: work in progress, and we've been monkeying around mostly on the structural rather than presentational side of things so far so (a) it's mostly unstyled so far and (b) little bits and pieces of shit may well be broken and (c) it may change without warning. But it seems worth letting people take a peek at some of the ideas we've been mussing with and get some feedback about what this helps with and where folks would like to see other/different information or presentation in a more discovery-driven view.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:56 AM on November 24, 2015 [8 favorites]


Let's resolve not to [redact] [redacted] people.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 10:52 AM on November 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


Okay, this is an honest question here, but does knowing that a character is around the next season really spoil the entire show for people? I mean, if you find out that Rick the Dick doesn't die this season, because you really want him to... you'll quit watching forever? Or finding out that Mary the Magnificent turns into Bloody Mary, Queen of the Dead two seasons down the road means that you're never going to watch this show ever again? Even if you don't know what brought about that change?

I'm confused by "spoilers". I honestly am. I can find out anything and everything about a show/book/movie before I see it/read it, and still enjoy it. I'm one of those weirdos that reads the end of the book to see if I'm right about whodunit, and will still read to see how they got to whodunit, whether I'm right or wrong. So I don't know what constitutes a "spoiler" when talking about books/movies/television shows.

Not knowing has pretty much kept me off of Fanfare except for one or two shows. Because I don't want to be screamed at for "spoiling" the show.
posted by patheral at 10:57 AM on November 24, 2015


I would push Fanfare Talk below My Fanfare.

Okay, this is an honest question here, but does knowing that a character is around the next season really spoil the entire show for people?

This has been argued many, many times. I think it is best to just accept that some people don't care about spoilers, and some people really do.
posted by smackfu at 11:00 AM on November 24, 2015 [7 favorites]


This has been argued many, many times. I think it is best to just accept that some people don't care about spoilers, and some people really do.
posted by smackfu at 1:00 PM on November 24 [+] [!]


Guess I'll just stay away from fanfare then... ^_^
posted by patheral at 11:02 AM on November 24, 2015


I think the "knowing they're around next season" thing is more of a case-by-case issue than a general one.

If you're finally getting around to watching House, finding out that Cuddy is around in a couple more seasons doesn't carry much of a payload because it's a formula show and Lisa Edelstein's a foundational member of the cast.

If you're watching something that famously turns on a lot of intrigue or danger or cast deaths, character x still being alive at the end of the season or a couple years on is potentially a lot more of a reveal.

That said, I think the season-spanning character development stuff is a lot more difficult to really narrow down to a clean "this is always/never okay" thing compared to e.g. sticking major plot details about a film above the fold for a single post. It's complicated and something we can only help out so much with structurally as far as where and how people discuss and describe stuff, and the rest comes down to careful and thoughtful discussion and gentle nudging between folks about those boundaries.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:02 AM on November 24, 2015


patheral it takes away some of the emotional reaction. Spoils it, if you will. I was watching a show and a character died and I did not see it coming at all and hadn't heard about it. The reaction was completely visceral - I think people three streets away heard my wail of "Noooooooo!!!" It was great. If I knew it was coming up then when it happened it would have been more like "Oh there's that thing happening now. Huh." Which is why I didn't go looking for the show on FanFare just in case it spoiled my devastating grief/pleasure.
posted by billiebee at 11:06 AM on November 24, 2015 [5 favorites]


"Guess I'll just stay away from fanfare then..."

This comes off as kind of passive-aggressive. In the example I mentioned above the show discussions were clearly labeled as First Watch which means "don't discuss anything outside the scope of this episode." That's it. It's really easy to do. You just don't talk about anything that didn't happen in that episode or the ones before it.

It doesn't mean you can't participate in FanFare ever, and it doesn't mean you can't discuss longer timelines in some other kind of discussion, like a Rewatch or Season Recap or whatever.
posted by komara at 11:08 AM on November 24, 2015 [11 favorites]


So I don't know what constitutes a "spoiler" when talking about books/movies/television shows.

A spoiler for a book is to say "i am in this discussion of book 1 in a 7 book series and here is what happens in book 5, which is not the book we are discussing". Saying "I read this book we are currently discussing in this thread and here are my thoughts on the ending" is not a spoiler.

A spoiler for a movie is similar - are you giving away the ending or vital plot points to people who have not yet seen the movie but are planning to do so? Why? If Fanfare is discussing movie 1 in a 7 film series, again, it is not the done thing to talk about events outside of the specific movie being discussed, unless the discussion is billed as a discussion of the entire series/franchise. (ymmv with marvel threads)

A spoiler for a TV show is the same thing. Are you telling people who haven't seen the episode the ending of that episode? Why? Are you talking about how the next season is totally different because everyone in the currently discussed episode is dead by that point? Why? If people are in a First Watch thread and not a Rewatch thread then they are not coming in with later season knowledge, and they have specifically stated, by being in a First Watch thread, that they specifically do not want this knowledge.

Further for books that have been made into shows or films, if there is a show discussion that says SHOW ONLY it is not the place to talk about how things were different in the book. If the discussion is BOOK ONLY (which i don't think has happened yet but who knows) then it is not the place to talk about how the show did it differently.

In the context of show descriptions it can be problematic to have spoilery stuff in the brief description above the fold for people who are scrolling by to a different show's discussion, and this is why the setting for Hide Post Description exists.

Really it's just having a pretty basic level of mindfulness and being aware that not everyone consumes media the way you do, and that's okay.
posted by poffin boffin at 11:20 AM on November 24, 2015 [4 favorites]


Speaking of reworking the front page of FanFare, here's a current working draft of a new front page view.

Not that you asked for anyone's input, but... I like what's on it. Even in the context of it being a MetaFilter product, I am a little surprised it's so plain. I sort of expected cover/poster art, kind of like is on Watercooler.

I wouldn't pretend to have given the same amount to the simplicity cost/usability benefit of images on MeFi as y'all have, though. So don't take this as armchair quarterbacking.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 11:23 AM on November 24, 2015


this would also help with a thing that's been slightly annoying me about Jessica Jones threads, where people come into the thread for episode 1 but want to talk about episode 4 or 6 or whatever

yeah I just checked in to Episode 1 today and there were a lot of "hints", not complete spoilers, but still. I think I'd prefer the GoT model someone upthread mentioned because clearly a bunch of people are coming at this show with a lot more knowledge of the subject than myself.

It's a bummer that just going to the Fanfare front page will show a description for the eighth episode of a show where the very first episode was only released a couple of days ago.

Fanfare moves really fast! Episode 10 already? It's only been out for 4 days! I knew this would be an issue for me in FanFare though. I got pretty excited with a bunch of the stuff announced early on, and quickly realized this would require committing to more TV than I could reasonably watch. Working from memory in these threads can be challenging so I just don't really bother with a lot of stuff I quite enjoy, even. I don't necessarily think that's a problem with FanFare as much as it is with my own schedule though.
posted by Hoopo at 11:30 AM on November 24, 2015


It's not fanfare moving fast, it's netflix et al releasing entire seasons in one go.
posted by poffin boffin at 11:35 AM on November 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


I sort of expected cover/poster art, kind of like is on Watercooler.

It's an interesting dilemma; I'm inclined to not use thumbnail images as a major component of the new view primarily because they just take up a bunch of space, all else aside. That current manages to list a dozen shows, mix of active and newly-posted stuff, in the space that the Watercooler layout uses for images on the top three shows. That's a big difference in information density, even before you look at how it plays out on a mobile screen.

My main goal with trying to rework the front page is to make it a place where (a) it's easier to browse and (b) it's easier to find out what people are discussing, or get to those active discussions. The front page as it is is just "hope you're interested in stuff from the last day or so", which does neither of those well, so finding a way to instead give people an easy dipping-in point on a large number of things and give them easy navigation to more specific media/archives/search is the big thing.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:39 AM on November 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


Okay, this is an honest question here, but does knowing that a character is around the next season really spoil the entire show for people? I mean, if you find out that Rick the Dick doesn't die this season, because you really want him to... you'll quit watching forever? Or finding out that Mary the Magnificent turns into Bloody Mary, Queen of the Dead two seasons down the road means that you're never going to watch this show ever again?

I mean, that's pretty hyperbolic and dismissive. People who don't like spoilers won't necessarily throw a tantrum and quit watching forever, but that doesn't mean spoilers don't affect their enjoyment of the show.

I was recently spoiled in a roundabout way for a major event in a show I watch--I knew that something huge was going to happen in that episode, so even though I didn't know what, I was keyed to look for foreshadowing and clues and when it actually happened it was more "Oh, I guess that's the big thing that's happening" and less "HOLY SHIT WTF JUST HAPPENED." It doesn't mean I will never watch the show ever again. It does mean that I really really wish I hadn't seen the spoiler because it would have been much more enjoyable to experience the episode without that knowledge.
posted by mama casserole at 11:39 AM on November 24, 2015 [9 favorites]


I get the character thing. I made my eyeballs skip over the recent Downton Abbey final season posts because they could potentially have spoilerish things in them.

The real problem is that at best, we can only have broadly painted definitions of what constitutes a spoiler because a lot of people have their own personal opinions of what they don't want to know and what can or cannot ruin a future viewing. I've seen a Vanity Fair writer yelled at on Twitter because she shared a link to a nationally televised teaser for the new Star Wars movie, because a couple people wanted to know absolutely nothing about it - even if what they're objecting to is something they might very well click over and see the next second on their tv.

For shows which are dumped all at once, it might simply help to remind folks to consider their comments in the context as if they have not seen any other additional episodes. That's about the best that can be done.

I was thinking on the show specific pages, the episodes are listed in descending order from the most recent. Perhaps flip that, put the oldest episodes on top with a quick link to the bottom. That way, someone starting a show doesn't find themselves staring at descriptions from the most recent episode.
posted by Atreides at 11:41 AM on November 24, 2015 [2 favorites]


It's not fanfare moving fast

That's a relative thing; to me watching 2+ episodes a day is not always feasible and is a pretty quick pace for a discussion of the shows. That's not the case for everyone, obviously, because the threads are there and active. And I'm not saying there's anything wrong with it. It does kinda feel like adding to a 7-day-old thread is arriving late to the party though.
posted by Hoopo at 11:46 AM on November 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


"It does kinda feel like adding to a 7-day-old thread is arriving late to the party though."

There's always gonna be someone later than you. I mean look at me, I was commenting in a year-old The Wire thread.
posted by komara at 12:11 PM on November 24, 2015


I too have found the Jessica Jones descriptions and threads kind of annoying did people dropping spoilers and am now skipping them entirely.

I get that it's exciting when you have a whole season bubbling around in your head, but it's kinda inconsiderate to call out things from future episodes in thread not devoted to them.

I would love it if posters could make a little more of an effort both above and below the fold. Add it stands, fanfare has no utility to me, ironically, for the shows I enjoy most.
posted by smoke at 12:26 PM on November 24, 2015 [3 favorites]


Question for the moderators: should we be actively flagging comments that we consider to be spoilers? Should there be a separate 'spoilers' flag reason within the FanFare subsite? Or do you all not want to be the arbiters of what constitutes a spoiler? I know I wouldn't want to be.
posted by komara at 12:30 PM on November 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


Flag them, yeah, especially if they're fresh-ish; it's fine to use 'other' or 'breaks guidelines'. It really helps to drop a quick note to the contact form explaining that it's a spoiler, since many of us aren't watching whatever show, so we don't necessarily know what's a spoiler and what isn't.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 12:38 PM on November 24, 2015 [2 favorites]


It might be impossible, but going to My FanFare and then having a box I can tick for the next episode of every show I have in there (and a box for the season?) in order to reveal the relevant thread is my dream set up. Might be too much work for both pb and people who just want to follow along and not have to let the system know what they've watched though.
posted by ODiV at 3:15 PM on November 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


Could all the current JJ threads be retagged as rewatch or books included? And then we could just have fresh threads that really are first watch.
posted by stoneweaver at 4:37 PM on November 24, 2015 [2 favorites]


Doesn't Jessica Jones already exist in a world where the story is known?

No?
posted by EndsOfInvention at 4:57 PM on November 24, 2015 [5 favorites]


I made that comment because I haven't read any JJ, but many of the participants in the threads seem pretty familiar with Luke Cage, Kilgrave and many of the other characters. I look at insights about those details as enlightening rather than spoilerish, knowing that I could always go read JJ if I felt like it.
posted by OHenryPacey at 6:05 PM on November 24, 2015


Could all the current JJ threads be retagged as rewatch or books included? And then we could just have fresh threads that really are first watch.

I read this as being a joke about JJ Abrams. I didn't really get it but MeFites have so many opinions about him I figured it was a meta-commentary on his films.

I use AMC's SUPER generic episode descriptions, but even those could spoil things for people who are a season or two behind.

Whether someone is an episode behind or a season behind, if they don't want to be spoiled they have no business in threads from future episodes or seasons. And I say that as someone who stayed spoiler-free for The Sopranos for a decade. That's like, a technical foul right there.
posted by Room 641-A at 6:11 PM on November 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


(A technical foul as in basketball, not as in technically, a foul. Words. Ugh.)
posted by Room 641-A at 6:13 PM on November 24, 2015


That sexy girl? It's just Bugs Bunny in disguise!
posted by Joseph Gurl at 6:39 PM on November 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


Whether someone is an episode behind or a season behind, if they don't want to be spoiled they have no business in threads from future episodes or seasons.

Well the MeTa is about descriptions above the fold--of course the thread itself can, should, and will talk about the current episode.
posted by mama casserole at 7:14 PM on November 24, 2015 [2 favorites]


Of course. I was distracted and misspoke and I retract my statement!
posted by Room 641-A at 7:45 PM on November 24, 2015


I really liked jenfullmoon's approach to posting the Jessica Jones threads. Mini-recaps (below the fold) are usually unnecessary IMHO, but when all episodes are simultaneously released they really help at keeping one honest/clear about what happened when for multi-episode watchers. That's a good model for any series released all at once, I think.

(Which isn't to say I didn't also appreciate your JJ thread-posting efforts, Brandon Blatcher)
posted by comealongpole at 4:55 AM on November 25, 2015


I've flagged a few "you won't believe what happens to him!" hints in the JJ threads, the first few were especially heavy with comic spoilers/hints/answers. With regards to whether knowing someone is still around in the future being a spoiler; it removes the feeling of peril that the people making the show have gone to a lot of trouble to create. If you told me ze is safe, well a good bit of the butterflies in my tummy disappear, and them's what I'm paying for.
posted by Iteki at 11:15 AM on November 25, 2015 [3 favorites]


So I don't know what constitutes a "spoiler" when talking about books/movies/television shows.

This thing you want to post: does it contain only facts which somebody who hasn't seen/read anything beyond the work in question would already know? (Not "consider likely"; know.)

If yes, it is not a spoiler.

If no, it is a spoiler. It doesn't matter whether this thing from a future installment is something you consider obvious, or unimportant, or whatever. It is a spoiler.
posted by Shmuel510 at 4:05 PM on November 25, 2015


Re: that draft of the new Fanfare layout, if your thesis is that the user is coming there and just wants a quick rundown of what's new and what's active, it might make more sense to make status the major category and media type the minor category. But on the other hand, you don't really know what the user would rather see - a quick rundown of what's new/active will negatively impact anything that's not new or active but would still interest them. Are they specifically looking for a movie? In which case it makes sense to group by media type. But that's the only case where it makes sense to group by media type and afaik you don't really know that. Or do you?
posted by bleep at 6:28 PM on November 25, 2015


I was also surprised you're not using the box art because it would be an easier way to do a grid, which is the most typical presentation when it's like "Here's a bucket of stuff to choose from in no particular order".
posted by bleep at 6:29 PM on November 25, 2015 [1 favorite]


Lastly, user research and user centered design would really help you here- there is really no need to guess.
posted by bleep at 6:30 PM on November 25, 2015


They can't use the box art because there is no box these days. -- kidding aside, the industry term is "key art"
posted by roger ackroyd at 10:20 PM on November 25, 2015


It was box art when I was doing stuff with box art. But thanks.
posted by bleep at 10:43 PM on November 25, 2015


Soylent Green is Rosebud!!
posted by Devils Rancher at 2:30 AM on November 26, 2015


I really appreciate the lack of pictures (generally) on MeFi. It means I get to browse and read over a slow connection, and this is one of the last places on the web for that. I'd be really really sad if that got lost.
posted by stoneweaver at 4:12 AM on November 26, 2015 [3 favorites]


Horace Rumpole: "It was obvious to anyone who saw those wine cooler commercials what a [redacted] he was."

But Seagram's was both wet *and* dry! How could he be expected not to sing about it?
posted by Chrysostom at 8:55 AM on November 27, 2015


I really liked jenfullmoon's approach to posting the Jessica Jones threads.

This discussion is probably dead, but I just wanted to say that I really, really didn't like that approach. I'm with smoke on this: the descriptions themselves often had spoilers, and seemed to encourage spoilers in the discussions. I also didn't like how they weren't just factual recaps, they were personal Onion AV-style review-recaps that really should be comments in the thread if anything, not in the descriptions.

I won't be following future FanFare discussions of shows where this approach is used.
posted by Sangermaine at 10:56 AM on November 30, 2015 [2 favorites]


There were spoilers for future episodes in the descriptions? I guess I missed them. Or did you just mean the above the fold stuff had information on the episode in question
posted by ODiV at 11:17 AM on November 30, 2015


« Older Decent Activity   |   Metafilter Chat Feature Request Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments