Stephen King Fans discussion

1975 views
Welcome to Our Group > Spoiler Policy

Comments Showing 1-50 of 73 (73 new)    post a comment »
« previous 1

message 1: by Becky (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) Lately there have been quite a few spoilers 'round these parts, so I want to remind everyone to be mindful of their posts and considerate of other readers.

This group is not only for lifelong fans of Stephen King, but also for those new to his books and universe. We all need to keep in mind that posts will not only be read by those who have already read the book in question - especially if the post is in a thread not specific to a particular book.

Unless posting in a marked spoiler thread, keep the following guidelines in mind:

- If your post contains any plot points for a book, sequel or series, mark it as a spoiler.
- If your post contains information about the development of a character or storyline, mark it as a spoiler.
- If your post contains specific information about the link between books in King's universe, mark it as a spoiler.
- If your post contains a twist or anything that you would want to find out on your own as you read, mark it as a spoiler.
- If you are quoting part of a previous post that has spoilery bits in it, whether it was previously marked or not, mark it (before the quoted section) as a spoiler.

Goodreads has made it easy for us all to hide spoilers with HTML tags. Just type "spoiler" inside the tag brackets like this (without the periods): <.spoiler> Sample Text and you get this: (view spoiler). Or you can go oldschool and mark it with some big bold spoiler warning text. Either way is fine by me.

If we see a spoiler, we'll ask you to edit it. If it hasn't been edited, we will quote and repost the comment with a spoiler warning. I don't believe in censorship so I will not delete the post without quoting it verbatim. If you don't want your post to be touched... all I ask is to include a spoiler warning. ;)

If you have questions, concerns or gripes - post 'em here.


message 2: by Lonnie (new)

Lonnie A rant (nothing personal, but feel it should be said);

I joined the Goodreads site in the hopes of having conversations regarding books I have read, am currently reading or books I hope to read in the future.

Obviously I cannot speak for others but I can speak for myself in the manner that I have avoided many, many conversations because of this 'must mark all spoilers' policy.

I think it is being overdone:

Personally, if I were a person reading a topic regarding a specific novel I would expect free flow thought regarding the novel and would therefore avoid the thread if I had either not read the novel or did not want to know what happened in the novel.

To clarify, I think some spoilers should be marked but I will give an example. Let's say I am in topic 'See Jill Go Up the Hill' I think it would be appropriate to list out spoilers about 'they came tumbling down'. However; I feel it is ludicrous to say that I should have to mark spoilers that Jill was carrying a pail of water. In my opinion if you are reading this topic then you have already read the novel or are willing to put up with conversation about the novel so the obvious should not be hidden behind ‘Spoiler’ tags.

I feel this method of always tagging everything that is said in every single thread has limited a lot of creative thinking and responding to posts. I know it has for me and I can only imagine it has for others as well. I find that I skim the entire conversation of posts looking for something relevant because I am so tired of seeing an entire paragraph about almost nothing surrounded by spoiler marks and then a simple sentence regarding the last 4 posts being ‘reminded to mark your spoilers’. I hate it. 

Now…I am not saying I am leaving the group or that I will no longer participate but I am saying that part of why I do not participate as much as I do is because of this. Maybe we should rethink some of the spoiler policies.

Thank you for listening to my rant,
Lonnie


message 3: by Dawn (new)

Dawn (breakofdawn) | 64 comments Well I, on the other hand, am in 100% agreement with Becky about the spoiler policy. It takes two seconds to mark something as a spoiler. Two seconds, that could save a book from being ruined for someone that hasn't read it.

I've had both Under the Dome and The Dark Tower series ruined for me because of unmarked spoilers in this group. And not because I was trolling around in threads about books I haven't read, these were spoiled in threads not even about the books, by people who just assume that because this is a SK fan group, we've all read everything by him. I'm a new fan, there's a lot I haven't read yet.

And for that matter, just because there's a thread titled with the name about a particular book, doesn't mean it should be a spoiler free zone. What if someone wants to see what the general impression was, to see if they want to read it? Do people like it, hate it, recommended it, that kind of thing. So they go in a thread about that book (and I'm not talking a monthly book discussion thread, I'm talking the general threads) and see spoilers galore. Well now that book is ruined.. How hard would it have been to just mark the spoilers? Not very hard at all. Two seconds to be courteous to others isn't too much to ask.

Now I've done my own little rant, but whatever. I just want to say I agree 100% with Becky, and think the spoiler policy is perfectly reasonable.


message 4: by Chris , The Hardcase (new)

Chris  (haughtc) | 1117 comments Mod
I agree with Becky as well. And Dawn, for the reasons she already stated.

Lonnie, you talk about avoiding discussions as a matter of course because of the inconvenience. OK, I see that. But there is a flipside.

I avoid all discussions on books in here I haven't read. Note, there aren't many. But that's because I'm old and I've read most of King's stuff.

I avoided, like the plague, the discussions on Haunting of Hill House, and also the one on Full Dark, No Stars. One was a King recommend, and one was a new King.

I avoided these because I knew that this group is loaded with inconsiderate trolls that ASSUME that everyone has read EVERY King book. So rather than start a stink, as I agree with you that they should be able to freely talk about the books they read without worrying about spoilers, I simply stay out of the thread.

The goal is to stay out until I've finished. But here's the reality: by the time I finished both of those books, the threads were loaded with posts. It was too overwhelming to try to jump into a conversation with that many unread posts, so I didn't bother.

The net result, a group read and a new book read were totally unpartipated upon by me. That's by choice, but I post it to show there is that flipside to your spoiler allowed theory.

I'll note, as Dawn did, that the most common spoilers in this group are those that are not even for the book mentioned in the topic heading. I had Black House, one of the few books I hadn't read, spoiled for me when I went through the Talisman thread. I had just re-read Talisman, and thought it should therefore be safe. But no. It wasn't enough to spoil Talisman for the uncareful browser, but they had to kill Black House for me too.

Yeah, it can be a pain in the ass to mark everything. But I think the cost of going in haphazard fancy free has a much higher price.

Possible compromise? Mayhap with group reads we could have a spoiler thread where everything goes, as well as an overall impressions "safe" thread. I dunno.


message 5: by Becky (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) Thanks for the feedback Lonnie. I think the spoiler policy is perfectly reasonable and fair, but I appreciate your opinion.

To me, marking spoilers is just common courtesy. Because of the nature of King's universe, there is a LOT of overflow and cross-posting in threads. See the Gerald's Game thread to see what I mean. In that thread we have three entirely different books being discussed: Gerald's Game, Dolores Claiborne, and Lisey's Story.

Someone who has read Gerald's Game but has NOT read Lisey's Story or Dolores Claiborne, would not reasonably expect to see discussion of those books - so spoilers regarding them should be marked. If you've read all three, that's perfect, but not everyone who is currently in the group, or who may join in the future will have read them, so spoiler warnings are a courtesy to those people so that the book isn't ruined for them.

I am a little confused by some things you've said though...

"I joined the Goodreads site in the hopes of having conversations regarding books I have read, am currently reading or books I hope to read in the future.

Obviously I cannot speak for others but I can speak for myself in the manner that I have avoided many, many conversations because of this 'must mark all spoilers' policy."

Why would you avoid conversations because of a requirement to mark spoilers? I would think, if you're looking to discuss books that you HAVEN'T read, you wouldn't want the book to be spoiled?

I understand that everyone has different levels of tolerance for spoilers. Mine is very low. If I'm not familiar with Jack & Jill's story, I don't want to know why they were climbing the hill until I get there myself. That adds to my enjoyment of the story. I enjoy books MUCH less when I know what to expect from them... either due to predictable storytelling or through unmarked spoilers.

I'm sorry if you think that this policy is overkill. I disagree, and I think it is fair and reasonable to ask that books and stories not be ruined for those who haven't read them.


message 6: by Lonnie (new)

Lonnie well, as typical I have a hard time conveying what is in my heart into text for others to understand.

In a nutshell I agree with the need for marking spoilers if the discussion is not about the book of topic ie. Gerald's Game thread should be marked with a spoiler regarding discussions of Dolores Clairborn.

When I stated I have avoided the discussions what I failed to say is that the majority of my time reading the discussions is in the form of the email summaries taht I receive. When I feel the need to make a comment I willl then log onto the internet. When the spoiler are html tagged they do not appear in the email summary so I just skip it instead of trying to find out what someone elses point was.

And as to myself marking spoilers I don't have a problem doing that, it's the reading that causes all the brakes to lock up.


message 7: by Becky (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) Lonnie wrote: "When I stated I have avoided the discussions what I failed to say is that the majority of my time reading the discussions is in the form of the email summaries taht I receive. When I feel the need to make a comment I willl then log onto the internet. When the spoiler are html tagged they do not appear in the email summary so I just skip it instead of trying to find out what someone elses point was. "

Ahhh... well this makes a lot more sense. I don't use emails to follow activity on Goodreads, so until the other day when Bondama mentioned it, I didn't realize that the clickable spoilers didn't carry over.

It's a shame that this is the way it is set up, since Goodreads created this method of marking spoilers for us, because it's inconvenient for those who use emails like you and Bondama do. I would love for Goodreads to adjust the way it works for emails so that this is no longer an issue (and I'll request it in the Feedback group).


message 8: by Becky (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) Lonnie, I've mentioned this in the Feedback group, if you like to chime in there to show support for the spoiler links to be clickable in email. :)

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/5...


message 9: by Kit★ (new)

Kit★ (xkittyxlzt) | 609 comments I kind of have to agree with both of you, Lonnie and Becky, because I think it is a bit of an inconvenience, but a totally understandable and necessary one. I kind of agree in a way though that it might hinder discussion sometimes, for example, my most recent post in the Different Seasons thread, with a theory I had written (and tagged for spoilers), which I posted in hopes that other people who had read it would post back and say like "oh yea, I saw that too" and maybe point out their theories... I don't know something like that, y'know?
Anyway I hope I didn't offend anyone, because I do agree that they should be marked for people who haven't read the book yet. :)


message 10: by Lonnie (last edited Mar 02, 2011 12:38PM) (new)

Lonnie have to join the group to join in the conversation and I think I'm in enough groups now


message 11: by Becky (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) Hi all...
We're still having issues with big spoilers being posted in discussions threads. In the thread for The Stand, there were some doozies left unmarked, and honestly, if I was new to the book, it would have ruined my experience to see those spoilers.

Even older books are new to those who haven't read them. Please be considerate of others and hide spoilers in discussions.

Going forward, I will not be asking for posts to be edited, since I have no way of knowing when anyone will be checking the thread again or when they will get around to editing the comment.

If I see a spoiler that I feel should be marked and was not or not adequately to prevent it from being seen, I will delete the post.

I will not repost the spoiler comment with a warning as I said previously, but I will make a comment in the thread that it has been deleted due to an unmarked spoiler and that the user is free to repost it using the spoiler warning/HTML.


I do not want anyone's reading experience to be ruined because of an unmarked spoiler, whether they are new to the book, or the group, or both.

Please remember to hide all spoilers in discussion threads.

Thank you!


message 12: by Bondama (new)

Bondama (kerensa) | 868 comments Becky, now that I FINALLY understand to to html a spoiler, I will do my very best. It doesn't limit discussion, to me, because with one click, the poster can say whatever he/she wants to say. After coming too close to revealing something really, really important, I, for one, would not be in the least offended if that particular post had just been deleted (with a note as to why, of course!! )


message 13: by Kathy (new)

Kathy (bookgoddess1969) | 665 comments Sounds more than fair, Becky!


message 14: by Becky (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) Thanks for understanding guys! :D


message 15: by Chris (new)

Chris (cbrunner11) | 119 comments I'm so glad you are doing this and it must be such a big job. As someone who has only read maybe half of King's collection I am always trying to dodge a spoiler.

I also try my hardest when commenting to not accidentally spoil anything but I am so glad someone is looking out for my mistakes.

Thanks!!!


message 16: by Becky (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) Thanks Chris. :)


message 17: by Chris (new)

Chris (cbrunner11) | 119 comments Any time, this is may favorite of my groups. I look forward to what you and all of the others have to say about my favorite books by King.


message 18: by [deleted user] (new)

Yes!!!!!! Someone spoiled the end of Cujo for me, and that annoyed me. But every time i pick it up I forget the ending!


message 19: by Kelli (new)

Kelli (manxkitti) | 52 comments I have to agree with the spoiler alerts. Tho I have read most of Kings works, there are a few that I have not. And I don't want to spoil a book for someone either.


message 20: by [deleted user] (new)

just testing hi


message 21: by [deleted user] (new)

It wprked


message 22: by [deleted user] (new)

Yes, everyone should mark their things as spoiler if they have spoilers.


message 23: by Angie, Constant Reader (new)

Angie | 2577 comments Mod
I wonder why sometimes when you reply to a post goodreads removes the spoilers and other times it doesn't and just puts the spoiler in italics?


message 24: by Lonnie (new)

Lonnie Angie wrote: "I wonder why sometimes when you reply to a post goodreads removes the spoilers and other times it doesn't and just puts the spoiler in italics?"

I had always assumed it was how the people were adding the spoilers.


message 25: by Kilgallen (new)

Kilgallen | 17 comments spoilers..(sigh)...I do not read discussion threads about a novel if I am worried about learning too much about the story line. I will wait untill I have finished it and then join into the conversation. I am really confused as to why someone would read a "discussion" thread before having completed the story if they are worried about ruining said story......what are they hoping to gain from it? Just curious....


message 26: by Becky (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) Well, if there is a discussion going on, and someone is reading the book and want to share their thoughts on something, they should have a place to do so where they can discuss that without being spoiled about later events.


message 27: by Kathryn (last edited Mar 15, 2012 09:23AM) (new)

Kathryn (kcanty313) | 747 comments Becky, I just wanted to say I agree with your policy. As a new-ish King reader, there is A LOT I haven't read yet.

And here's where I hope to convince everyone to mark their spoilers for people like me who DO NOT want to know about a book BEFORE I've read it: No joke...Two nights ago, I was on Facebook chatting with a friend of mine. He and I were talking about King and how he was thinking of reading a few books of his. He was looking something up he had heard in a song, and apparently something came up about The Dark Tower series. Then...*sigh*...he said, "You know what The Dark Tower represents, don't you?" (Apparently whatever he had looked up, told him...*again, sigh*..)..I said, "No, I haven't read the series yet, but I plan to in a few weeks." Then he tells me...*MAJOR SIGH* I'm hoping I forget it by the time I read the series...I'm REALLY hoping. For those who HAVE read the series, you can probably understand why this would disappoint me since you had to read and find out on your own. For those who haven't and want to read it, I'm sure you can understand why I'd be upset, too. Now, its like, what's the point? So, I completely agree with the spoiler policy.


message 28: by Chris , The Hardcase (new)

Chris  (haughtc) | 1117 comments Mod
Kilgallen wrote: "spoilers..(sigh)...I do not read discussion threads about a novel if I am worried about learning too much about the story line. I will wait untill I have finished it and then join into the conversa..."

I tend to avoid those conversations too. They should be there for people that are reading along, but there is a huge segment of the population that simply doesn't care who they ruin books for. They'll disregard that and post it anyway.

And really, even avoiding a thread isn't always a solution. Most of the spoilers I've seen here aren't even in the threads they're supposed to be in. I was spoiled hugely for the ending of Black House by reading a Talisman discussion, for example.

Oh Kathryn, that sounds like a friend that should be remove/blocked immediately. Not cool.


message 29: by Becky (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) Chris wrote: "I was spoiled hugely for the ending of Black House by reading a Talisman discussion, for example."

...Never gonna let me live that down... O_o


message 30: by Chris , The Hardcase (new)

Chris  (haughtc) | 1117 comments Mod
It wasn't you, Becky...


message 31: by Becky (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) Kathryn, I would have been SUPER ANGRY.

I got angry (really, really angry) with a close friend of mine who spoiled a book that I was reading recently... a book that probably 99% of the population had read in school. But I hadn't.

That kind of thing frustrates me to no end. I hate spoilers.

But I don't agree that discussions should only be possible after a book has been completely finished. If I want to discuss as I go (and I do, often), I should have a way to do that.

There just needs to be a level of consideration. So when I see a spoiler, I delete it. It can be reposted with a spoiler warning.

*shrug*


message 32: by Becky (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) Chris wrote: "It wasn't you, Becky..."

Yes it was... partially at least. LOL


message 33: by Becky (last edited Mar 15, 2012 09:40AM) (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) I have unintentionally spoiled things... Remember the (view spoiler)? :P

I try to be vigilant, but stuff happens even to the best of us... (AKA me).

;)


message 34: by Kathryn (last edited Mar 15, 2012 04:49PM) (new)

Kathryn (kcanty313) | 747 comments Haha, Chris...I probably should never talk to this person again, especially since I have been pretty eager to read the series not knowing ANYTHING about it, which is the way I wanted it.

Becky, to be quite honest, I didn't even realize how angry or upset I am until I saw this thread. Seriously, the more I think about it, the more disappointed and upset I get. I mean, I told the guy, 'No, I haven't read it yet.' So I just don't understand why he would have continued to tell me. I really wanted to go into the series without knowing anything about it, because I have avoided ALL threads and spoilers on the subject. Except for the fact I know the 4.5 "Wind Through the Keyhole" comes out in April. But that's not a spoiler. Oh well, maybe I'll forget it when I start reading Full Dark, No Stars today. :)


message 35: by Ron (last edited Mar 15, 2012 02:57PM) (new)

Ron | 9 comments Kilgallen wrote: "spoilers..(sigh)...I do not read discussion threads about a novel if I am worried about learning too much about the story line. I will wait untill I have finished it and then join into the conversa..."

Consider the Dark Tower series. There are many books in the series. I will probably exercise caution and not read any threads about Book #1 until I've finished it, but I don't want to wait a dozen books before reading any dark tower threads, nor do I want to be told what the dark tower represents.

(Wow, that must have been frustrating, Kathryn!)

It's hard to get a spoiler back out of your brain. It's kinda like if someone told you you'd go to hell if you thought about seeing your mother naked, you'd eventually do it. And why? Because you did not want to imagine your mother naked. Because you did not want to go to hell. ;)


message 36: by Becky (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) Just out of curiosity, Kathryn, what did he tell you? Umm... hidden in a spoiler tag, of course. LOL


message 37: by Kathryn (new)

Kathryn (kcanty313) | 747 comments Becky wrote: "Just out of curiosity, Kathryn, what did he tell you? Umm... hidden in a spoiler tag, of course. LOL"

He said...(view spoiler)


message 38: by Kathryn (new)

Kathryn (kcanty313) | 747 comments YAY!! My first hidden spoiler tag worked!! YES!


message 39: by Becky (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) Umm... Well... That's... not really right.


message 40: by Becky (last edited Mar 15, 2012 06:12PM) (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) It's hard to explain, without spoiling it for you, but believe me, I don't think he ruined anything for you at all by saying what he did.


message 41: by Kathryn (new)

Kathryn (kcanty313) | 747 comments Becky wrote: "It's hard to explain, without spoiling it for you, but believe me, I don't think he ruined anything for you at all by saying what he did."

Really????? You just made me feel SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much better.


message 42: by Chris , The Hardcase (new)

Chris  (haughtc) | 1117 comments Mod
Yeah, I'm kinda agreeing with Becky..while remaining vague on particulars.


message 43: by Kathryn (new)

Kathryn (kcanty313) | 747 comments Well, I guess the main thing is, I'm just glad the two of you aren't saying, "Yep, he ruined it. Sorry." haha


message 44: by Chris , The Hardcase (new)

Chris  (haughtc) | 1117 comments Mod
I guess we'll just have to read it again, to be sure.


message 45: by Becky (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) Honestly, it sounds to me like HE hasn't read it either. The things he mentioned are... not right. It sounds like he read a 3rd party synopsis of the series and formed conclusions from that.

But even if he was exactly right, I don't think that telling you what he did would have ruined things anyway. The story is SO MUCH MORE.

You'll just have to read it for yourself.

And the roses are red. I should know... I have it tattooed on my foot! :P


message 46: by Becky (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) Chris wrote: "I guess we'll just have to read it again, to be sure."

You stop that. You stop that RIGHT NOW.

MEAN.


message 47: by Chris , The Hardcase (new)

Chris  (haughtc) | 1117 comments Mod
Errr..Wasn't trying to be mean. I was trying to cheat on the ban.


message 48: by Becky (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) I know. But... That's mean. NO RE-READS.


message 49: by Chris , The Hardcase (new)

Chris  (haughtc) | 1117 comments Mod
Not even in the interest of being good Mods?


message 50: by Becky (new)

Becky (beckyofthe19and9) Why start now? :P

Though you make a compelling argument...


« previous 1
back to top