Poll: Is There A Statute Of Limitations On Spoilers?

[RJ 17]

Not everyone is the same age as you, though. Some people may have been born 10 years ago and are just getting old enough to enjoy the work in question. It may have been 18 years for everybody else, but someone who was born 10 years ago would have only had 2-3 years that they would even possess the basic reading capabilities needed to play the game. But first the kid would have to have found out about the game somewhere, the most likely place being the internet. So it's very likely the kid would have been spoiled at the same time that they even find out about the game in the first place. How is that fair?

Last time I checked: life wasn't fair.

Beyond that, I believe some of the responsibility lies with the person who could potentially be spoiled, not just on the people who are spouting potential spoilers. It's actually pretty damn easy to avoid spoilers if you want to. For instance: if you've never seen Avengers: Age of Ultron and don't want the movie spoiled for you, it would be ill advised for you to click on reviews for the movie or topics discussing the movie.

 

[Hoplon]

I try to be nice with most spoilers. If someone says that they haven't seen/read whatever, I will do my best not to spoil it for them. Even if I give them a dumbfounded look.

However, if I'm just casually talking about something that has been out for years, then it's fair game. For example, read below. Fair warning: Spoilers for Arkham Knight.

Spoiler

My coworker asked me about Arkham Knight, and I asked him if he was ever going to play it. He said no, so go ahead and spoil it. Three other people were in the room and I said very loudly, "Is anyone in here going to be playing Arkham Knight?" No one answered, so I asked again, again very loudly. So I started telling him about it, and revealed that the Knight is Jason Todd. One of the guys in the room got mad at me, "Dude! I haven't played it yet." I immediately shot back that I had asked twice if anyone was going to play, and everyone else in the room had said they had heard me. Still, I felt a little bad, but I continued. I then told my coworker where Jason originally came from, and how Joker beat the snot out of him with a crowbar and how comic book readers called in to decide Jason's fate. Again, the same guy got upset. That time I told him it was all on him. Jason's death had happened decades ago in comics. If he didn't know who Jason was or what had happened to him after all this time, that was his problem.

So yeah, a situation like the end there, I won't feel bad if I ruin it for someone.

Ironically it was the worst kept secret in the game, i was playing it going "surely they aren't just rehashing under the red hood, and doing it this badly"

 

[And Man]

I'd say it has more to do with how mainstream the media is and how common knowledge the spoiler is than how recent the media is. Aerith dies, Snape kills Dumbledore, Vader is Luke's father. Everyone knows that stuff; they've basically transcended being spoilers and are the exception to the rule. Old stuff that isn't/wasn't really mainstream, and/or classics, you shouldn't spoil. I wouldn't spoil what Rosebud is in Citizen Kane,

Spoiler: Chrono Trigger Spoiler

that Crono dies (which someone actually tried to spoil for me when I mentioned that I was playing the game),

Spoiler: Cowboy Bebop Spoiler

or that Spike dies in Cowboy Bebop.

Basically, FFVII, Star Wars, Harry Potter, etc. are all exceptions to the rule because of how ubiquitous they are. Use spoiler tags for pretty much anything else.

 

[Something Amyss]

I'm on Zachary Amaranth's mindset about this. Once it reaches the Stream (how I'm coining all of this easily accessed interconnectivity that we all must be plugged into) that you're apart of, things should be fair game.

I mean, if you subscribe to Netflix and you don't know the twist of Who's Framed Roger Rabbit... yet you always wanted to see it, why haven't you? It is at your disposal.

However, I do like to be fair. I do start every conversation I'm going to have with "Did you see/read/hear X?". But that's because I'm going to have a one or one conversation. For the OP's example of Jim Sterling, he reaches hundreds of thousands of people per day. If he's talking about a topic that's so ingrained into our lexicon that it's almost going to be two decades old... well, he can assume that the majority of people have played or dealt with it. Given all the remakes or chances to play it, it is unfair to ask him to have that discretion, especially if his point that's supposed to reach a wide audience hinges on it.

But yeah, we all love twists. We should try not to spoil them.

captcha: do it now! You are the coldest ***** ever, Captcha.

Yeah, I won't go out of my way to spoil things, either. Hell, I felt bad because I thought I might have accidentally spoiled the Ant Man movie for some friends (Spoiler: I didn't), despite the only reason I might have is because I was discussing plot points that started in the 60s.

And there's a reason I didn't say what the spoilers were in those movies. But I bet most people knew what I meant.

But yeah, I don't blame Jim for thinking an almost 20 year old game wouldn't be spoiled by bringing up a plot twist that is so ubiquitous, it's pretty much a trope definer and you don't need to play FF or even video games to know about it, would be safe territory. I'm not sure it would have even crossed my mind to call that a spoiler. I think my grandmother knows what happens.

The newer spoilers are the harder ones for me anyway. I had so much trouble not ranting to everyone in earshot about

Spoiler: Netflix Daredevil Spoiler

Ben Urich's death

But, like, a 20 year old game? Less "need" to talk about it. I might, however, not think about it, like the FFVII case.

Honestly, while I'm not sure it's that big a deal, I simply think Jim slipped up. Like filming his live Jimquisition vertically.

 

[Drathnoxis]

I look at spoilers like this. Once it enters major public awareness, it's not worth "spoilering" anymore.

The Vader reveal in Star Wars? No. The twist in the Sixth Sense? No. The identity of God in Dogma? Maybe.

I'm on Zachary Amaranth's mindset about this. Once it reaches the Stream (how I'm coining all of this easily accessed interconnectivity that we all must be plugged into) that you're apart of, things should be fair game.

I crowdfund my spoilers.

If five people talk about the event without spoilers, then I do the same.

But it's this kind of logic that causes the perpetuation of spoilers in the first place! "Oh, well they did it first!" Since when is that a good excuse for anything? Is it really so hard to say/type "*[title] SPOILERS*"? If everybody did this we wouldn't have spoilers enter the major public awareness in the first place and the spoilers that are already publicly known would stop being reinforced.

 

[gunny1993]

As far as I'm concerned the vast majority of spoilers aren't spoilers, in that they do not spoil the experience, you tell me that Vader is lukes dad and I'd go huh interesting, then I'd watch the film and it wouldn't change my opinion or enjoyment got from it one bit. Not all people are like me and I get that so as long as its recent or they tell me they don't want spoiler then I'm happy not to discuss it.

 

[Something Amyss]

Ironically it was the worst kept secret in the game, i was playing it going "surely they aren't just rehashing under the red hood, and doing it this badly"

The fact that they pretty much had to cram all of

Spoiler

Jason Todd's

backstory in doesn't help. But a lot of people guessed it before the game even came out.

I will definitely spoiler it, out of respect for people who might not know those specific comics or the cartoon movie or any other reference, but....

 

[Drathnoxis]

Last time I checked: life wasn't fair.

Beyond that, I believe some of the responsibility lies with the person who could potentially be spoiled, not just on the people who are spouting potential spoilers. It's actually pretty damn easy to avoid spoilers if you want to. For instance: if you've never seen Avengers: Age of Ultron and don't want the movie spoiled for you, it would be ill advised for you to click on reviews for the movie or topics discussing the movie.

I take every precaution to avoid being spoilered, but it still happens. It happens because people bring it without warning when discussing a completely different topic. Like Jim in his video. Just, BAM, spoilers. Just in this thread I had an aspect of Serenity spoiled for me. Is it really too much say/type a short spoiler warning before giving spoilers?

 

[JohnZ117]

All I can say is that I kinda wish Citizen Cain hadn't been spoiled for me by the simpsons, its a fantastic movie and I wish I had been able to experience it cold, but its also like 70 years old. So I can't really hold it against them.

I also went in knowing "Rosebud" was his sled and found that is was mostly irrelevant to the plot. To the audience, it meant something, his last action was to regret his life, but the question was what drove the story, forcing the reporters to delve into this man's life.

 

[Fox12]

The problem is that, if you're fifteen, you haven't had the opportunity to play FF7, regardless of when it came out. Its somewhat pompous to say everyone should have played it by now. If you're young, you may not have even heard of it until now. Most of us in our twenties and thirties take that for granted. The death of aerith is one of the first things many people learn about the game, which is too bad. So yes, there should be warnings from content creators. Especially with a remake in the works.

That said, it's also the responsibility of the audience to avoid spoilers where possible.

 

[RJ 17]

Last time I checked: life wasn't fair.

Beyond that, I believe some of the responsibility lies with the person who could potentially be spoiled, not just on the people who are spouting potential spoilers. It's actually pretty damn easy to avoid spoilers if you want to. For instance: if you've never seen Avengers: Age of Ultron and don't want the movie spoiled for you, it would be ill advised for you to click on reviews for the movie or topics discussing the movie.

I take every precaution to avoid being spoilered, but it still happens. It happens because people bring it without warning when discussing a completely different topic. Like Jim in his video. Just, BAM, spoilers. Just in this thread I had an aspect of Serenity spoiled for me. Is it really too much say/type a short spoiler warning before giving spoilers?

Look to Zachary Amaranth's first post in this topic, I believe that sums things up nicely.

 

[Something Amyss]

But it's this kind of logic that causes the perpetuation of spoilers in the first place!

Really? Not considering something a spoiler only once it's reached ubiquity is the logic that perpetuates spoilers? Because that's what I said, that's what you're saying perpetuates it, but that seems to be the opposite of spoiling something.

"Oh, well they did it first!" Since when is that a good excuse for anything?

Actually, it's more like trademark law. Once something becomes a genericised term, you can no longer enforce it as a trademark. The line of what is sufficiently generic isn't always a clear one, but there becomes a point where defending a brand is pointless.

By the way, if a sufficient number of people are doing something, it actually can serve as a legal or moral defense in our culture. So unless you're deliberately misrepresenting us, "since when" is answered with pretty much "since always."

Is it really so hard to say/type "*[title] SPOILERS*"?

The irony being, at least two of the three people you quoted already said you shouldn't do it anyway, or that they didn't. *ahem*

However, I do like to be fair. I do start every conversation I'm going to have with "Did you see/read/hear X?". But that's because I'm going to have a one or one conversation.

and

But yeah, we all love twists. We should try not to spoil them.

Yeah, I won't go out of my way to spoil things, either. Hell, I felt bad because I thought I might have accidentally spoiled the Ant Man movie for some friends (Spoiler: I didn't), despite the only reason I might have is because I was discussing plot points that started in the 60s.

And there's a reason I didn't say what the spoilers were in those movies. But I bet most people knew what I meant.

If everybody did this we wouldn't have spoilers enter the major public awareness in the first place and the spoilers that are already publicly known would stop being reinforced.

Spoilers that are already known will continue to already be known because they're already known.

But there's another problem here: everyone has to do it. Not just some, not even most. All. Everyone has to do it. I mean, we could have world peace if everyone just agreed to stop fighting. We could end world hunger if everyone just shared their resources. Realistically, these aren't going to happen.

 

[Silvanus]

Last time I checked: life wasn't fair.

Which isn't really a good reason to intentionally do something unfair.


I try to add spoiler tags to anything intended to be a significant plot development, usually regardless of age. It's probably a little over the top, but it's not as if it's hard to do.

 

[RJ 17]

Last time I checked: life wasn't fair.

Which isn't a justification for intentionally doing something unfair.

Last time I checked: I never said that I went around intentionally doing anything unfair...in this case spoiling. Nor would I believe that anyone who does give out a spoiler intentionally means to (unless they're just a prick).

That said, however, I don't feel there's anything wrong with discussing details of a story that's over a decade old.

 

[Silvanus]

Last time I checked: I never said that I went around intentionally doing anything unfair...in this case spoiling. Nor would I believe that anyone who does give out a spoiler intentionally means to (unless they're just a prick).

I didn't mean to sound so accusatory there; I intended to just speak generally. Apologies.

My point was that life being unfair doesn't really matter when we're discussing how we should act in this situation.

 

[RJ 17]

Last time I checked: I never said that I went around intentionally doing anything unfair...in this case spoiling. Nor would I believe that anyone who does give out a spoiler intentionally means to (unless they're just a prick).

I didn't mean to sound so accusatory there; I intended to just speak generally. Apologies.

My point was that life being unfair doesn't really matter when we're discussing how we should act in this situation.

I understand, and didn't take offense.

As I said, however, I don't think personal behavior fits into this discussion unless we're talking about jerks that intentionally go around spoiling things.

 

[EternallyBored]

I generally consider spoilers to have some limit to them, I am not going to tiptoe around every single conversation I have just in case someone doesn't yet know something about a property that's been around forever or is such a part of common culture that it appears everywhere. I am not going to realistically expect someone to use spoiler warnings when talking about Darth Vader being Luke's father, it's such a part of mainstream culture that it seems impossible to expect people to be careful when talking about it.

Does getting spoiled on a good story suck? Sure, but I don't think it is worth the effort of tip toeing around absolutely any conversation regarding fiction in order to avoid ever spoiling anyone ever. I'll get annoyed if someone spoils something that just came out and is still new, but I really can't get annoyed that I knew Romeo and Juliet died at the end before ever reading the story.

I just can't work up any reasonable justification to have other people always watching themselves when talking about storylines just in case there are a couple people around that don't know it. Jim was justified, in my opinion, in talking about FF 7 and not warning people about Aeris dying. There is no hard line for when and where it is ok to talk about storylines without warning for spoilers, it is up to the individual to use their own discretion. I won't put Aeris' death in spoiler tags in a normal topic, but if I was posting in a topic where someone was trying to get FF 7 to work on their PC and admitted it was their first time through the game, I might avoid spoilers when I am directly talking to someone I already know is not aware of them.

Use your best judgment, there is no perfect answer, but I just can't think of any reason to go out of my way to mark spoilers after a certain point, even before that point, it's a minor annoyance at best unless the person doing it is purposely trying to tick people off.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

I'm on Zachary Amaranth's mindset about this. Once it reaches the Stream (how I'm coining all of this easily accessed interconnectivity that we all must be plugged into) that you're apart of, things should be fair game.

But it's this kind of logic that causes the perpetuation of spoilers in the first place! "Oh, well they did it first!" Since when is that a good excuse for anything? Is it really so hard to say/type "*[title] SPOILERS*"? If everybody did this we wouldn't have spoilers enter the major public awareness in the first place and the spoilers that are already publicly known would stop being reinforced.

When I speak of the Stream, I speak of ease of actually viewing said event. Like say back in the 90's and early 2000's, I might ask someone if they saw Michael Jackson moonwalk for the first time. If they didn't back then, I honestly wouldn't have a clue how to show it to them. I didn't have any Michael Jackson tapes, they might not have cable, and even if they did, who knows when said event will be shown again?

But. If I ask someone if they ever seen Michael Jackson's first moonwalk today and they said no, I or they can bring out our phone and see it right then. That's the ease of the Stream I'm talking about.

Now, again, if I don't know if who ever I'm talking to knows about whatever topic, I ask before I speak.

 

[Drathnoxis]

But it's this kind of logic that causes the perpetuation of spoilers in the first place!

Really? Not considering something a spoiler only once it's reached ubiquity is the logic that perpetuates spoilers? Because that's what I said, that's what you're saying perpetuates it, but that seems to be the opposite of spoiling something.

Well, maybe "in the first place" doesn't work for what you said, I was trying to make one response to all three of those quotes and that probably wasn't the best idea.

But, it certainly does perpetuate it. If people don't use spoiler tags for a spoiler that many people know because people don't use that spoiler tags for that spoiler then the spoiler will never fade from the public dialogue and nobody new will ever be able to experience that work unspoiled.

Unless I misunderstood what you meant by "spoilering." I assumed that meant the act of using spoiler tags.

"Oh, well they did it first!" Since when is that a good excuse for anything?

Actually, it's more like trademark law. Once something becomes a genericised term, you can no longer enforce it as a trademark. The line of what is sufficiently generic isn't always a clear one, but there becomes a point where defending a brand is pointless.

By the way, if a sufficient number of people are doing something, it actually can serve as a legal or moral defense in our culture. So unless you're deliberately misrepresenting us, "since when" is answered with pretty much "since always."

It's still a weak excuse, something should be done because it makes sense or serves a purpose not just because everybody is doing it. The fact is that there are always people new to a text no matter how ingrained it is in the public awareness, they should not lose their ability to experience it as intended simply because they were born later than everybody else or have been busy.

Is it really so hard to say/type "*[title] SPOILERS*"?

The irony being, at least two of the three people you quoted already said you shouldn't do it anyway, or that they didn't. *ahem*

Not really seeing how that's ironic. :\EDIT: Never noticed that the rest of the post was also addressed to me

Spoilers that are already known will continue to already be known because they're already known.

But there's another problem here: everyone has to do it. Not just some, not even most. All. Everyone has to do it. I mean, we could have world peace if everyone just agreed to stop fighting. We could end world hunger if everyone just shared their resources. Realistically, these aren't going to happen.

Well, it may be unrealistic for everybody to post spoiler tags, but according to the poll so far only 14% always post tags. I don't think having a bit of consideration when discussing plots is really equivalent to world peace though.

 

[Drathnoxis]

When I speak of the Stream, I speak of ease of actually viewing said event. Like say back in the 90's and early 2000's, I might ask someone if they saw Michael Jackson moonwalk for the first time. If they didn't back then, I honestly wouldn't have a clue how to show it to them. I didn't have any Michael Jackson tapes, they might not have cable, and even if they did, who knows when said event will be shown again?

But. If I ask someone if they ever seen Michael Jackson's first moonwalk today and they said no, I or they can bring out our phone and see it right then. That's the ease of the Stream I'm talking about.

Now, again, if I don't know if who ever I'm talking to knows about whatever topic, I ask before I speak.

I don't really get what you are saying. You say that once something is easily accessible it can be spoiled without warning, however you never do?