357 replies to this topic

[TWoP Dietrich]

Hello! I'm TWoP Dietrich and I'll be your moderator. Announcements and questions will go here, as indicated by the topic title.

I'm going to be doing a little bit of housekeeping over the next couple of days, including neatening up the thread titles (some of them are NAME: COMMENT and some are COMMENT: NAME, which is nonintuitive) and combining the spoiler threads, although I expect to leave that until Friday so it doesn't happen in the middle of this week's spoiler discussions.

[BarbC]

Is it OK to quote someone (Nigel Lythgoe, exec. producer, or a contestant, or Mary Murphy, or guest judge of the week) from a news article if we attribute where we got it, and if the actual news article is linked elsewhere in the thread? I wasn't sure about that recently, whether it violated the FAQ or not -- so I ended up using a paraphrase and indicating what I was paraphrasing. (That seemed to be OK.)

Edited by TWoP Barnes, Jun 14, 2008 @ 11:41 AM.
thread maintenance

[TWoP Dietrich]

Here's what will happen (on Friday, to try to make the transition happen at a quiet time): I'm going to merge the Pairs/Styles thread into the Spoilers thread. That thread will be for the posting of raw, unadorned spoilers. Discussion of those spoilers will go in the separate Spoiler Discussion thread. And we'll go forward with that unless it becomes evident that it is a flawed system.

BarbC, quotes from people are normally fine; it's when entire articles get quoted that there's a problem.

Edited by TWoP Barnes, Jun 14, 2008 @ 11:42 AM.

[lucinda]

Hi TWoP Dietrich! Sorry, I'm sure it must be annoying getting so many responses about the Spoiler threads, but just to clarify - when you say raw, unadorned spoilers, are you referring to a list of the contestant pairings and accompanying dance genres, and not the more detailed spoilers such as music, judges comments and so forth? And so from that, the more detailed spoilers such as music, judges comments and so forth, are to be posted only in the other spoiler thread amongst the discussion?

Sorry to be a pain in the ass, I'm just a little confuddled.

Edited by lucinda, Aug 1, 2007 @ 12:50 AM.

[TWoP Dietrich]

when you say raw, unadorned spoilers, are you referring to a list of the contestant pairings and accompanying dance genres, and not the more detailed spoilers such as music, judges comments and so forth? And so from that, the more detailed spoilers such as music, judges comments and so forth, are to be posted only in the other spoiler thread amongst the discussion?

No; pairings, genres, music, and judge comments will all live in "Spoilers". Discussion of them will live in "Spoiler Discussion". Attempting to maintain two different levels of spoileriness has caused problems in the past (for example, in the Rock Star forums, which I should have used as an example instead of Idol).

[GoodThings]

Just curious (not seeing examples right now of anything), but how far off topic would someone/a post have to get for it to be officially off topic in some of the more esoteric threads? I'm think of the ones where we discuss more existential matters such as race, culture, backstage, etc?

I don't think anything is happening right now, but I've seen the more nebulous discussions veer pretty far off the beaten path in the past (I'm probably guilty of it myself) in the name of "examples" that may or may not tie back into a particular topic, which then spawn mini discussions off that post, etc.

[TWoP Dietrich]

It's hard to draw a clear line, but in general, discussions about the more nebulous topics should be about, say, "Culture in the context of this show". If someone can read several posts in a thread and have no idea what show you're talking about, something's gone wrong.

Edited by TWoP Dietrich, Aug 2, 2007 @ 12:33 PM.
Typo? What typo?

[apropos]

Oooo, I've been looking for a thread like this. I have a couple of questions. Can we discuss meeting up on the boards as long as we don't put personal details on public boards? If not, can we discuss it over PMs(my PM feature recently stopped working, and I'm worried that it's because of this...)?

[TWoP Dietrich]

If your PM feature has stopped work, it might be it's been turned off in your profile. If it's anything beyond that, this thread is the right place to ask. Once they're working for you again, feel free to discuss whatever you feel comfortable with via PM.

For that matter, consider the TWoPCon Organization forum, which is city-specific rather than show-specific, but still could be of use to you. You could use the SYTYCD Meet Market thread to say something like "I'm in City X! Anyone else want to meet up for the finale?" and then go to City X's TWoPCon thread to hammer out the details. For example.

Edited by TWoP Dietrich, Aug 1, 2007 @ 7:48 PM.

[shibori]

TWoP Dietrich, welcome, and thanks! I don't think I've seen a post like this before, here or on AI and the equivalents, and personally I'd rather not see the dancers' threads taken over with appeals for votes every Wednesday night. I can't put my finger on whether it violates any rules per se, so I posted it here to get a mod opinion.

In general, the last 20 or so pages of the Lauren thread have had a lot of people who haven't followed the 15/15 rule coming in and demanding an explanation of why people think Lauren sucks, or suggesting that people who hate her are just "sheep," and then attempts to respond to that post, which has resulted in a lot of rehashing and repetition. If you have some time to look at this, could we get a general reminder of the 15/15 and boards on boards rules? Thanks.

[MissAnnThropist]

I came here to echo what shibori just said about this post. The message says nothing about the show itself, suggests downloading a dubious computer dialer and tells voters to only call on behalf of one dancer.

[holly96]

Along those same lines, could posting personal voting tallies and voting pep talks and such during the voting window be discouraged in the contestant threads? See the two or so pages in Danny's thread immediately following tonight's show for examples. There are a number of posts that have no substance, and that doesn't seem to be what those threads should be about.

[TWoP Dietrich]

I appreciate the pointers to posts I may have missed, but it's best if in the future those go in the Forum Traffic Court thread in the Feedback Forum.

[BarbC]

TWoP Dietrich, thanks for your clarification about quotes from articles. I appreciate it.

In Lauren's thread, a number of people came in there apparently trying to sway votes. I didn't see that for what it was right off; I have to admit, I'm one person who did repeat her earlier arguments (and adding a few new examples to the list). Tried not to break "boards on boards" rules.

Now that I see what that is, I'm going to take it for "trolling" and ignore anyone who's posted several times asking in all ingenuous dishonesty why Lauren is so detested. (Or in anyone else's thread, either, if I see the same thing.) Sorry I didn't see it before.

I don't see any need to clutter up anyone's thread with exhortations to vote. (If someone asks the numbers, that's different. But that usually happens in the main show thread.) I think this is just wasted space, although I'm unsure if it actually breaks any rules.

Finally, as someone else just said, we only had one thread last year for this show. (I was here last year; one thread served us all reasonably well.) But I'm glad we have more threads now. (Makes it easier to follow the discussions.)

[TWoP Dietrich]

A quick note on what is, and isn't a spoiler: as far as I'm concerned, DialIdol predictions don't count as spoilers. Feel free to talk about them without spoiler bars, as long as you're still on topic for the thread you're in.

Acceptable post: "I hate Dancer X!"
Unacceptable post: "Everyone who votes for Dancer X is an idiot!"

Acceptable post: "I actually really like Dancer X!"
Unacceptable post: "People are being too mean to Dancer X!"

Most of the posts are on the good side of the line; just be careful.

[AFishaNado]

Hi, Dietrich... I just have one little question, and I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere in any threads, and I was really hoping you might know the answer. WHO THE HELL IS VOTING FOR LAUREN??? Thanks so much. Love, Fish.

[TWoP Dietrich]

That's a question that should go in the Results Show thread, the Lauren thread, or (if you're conspiratorially minded) the Grassy Knoll thread, because I don't want discussion of one dancer to take over the whole board.

But since you ask, my guess would be "people who like her dancing".

[bluenote123]

I have an odd question. Can you please give me an example of "boards on boards"? I don't understand this prohibition. If there are, say, a bunch of people saying how much they despise Lauren, and someone comes on and says the equivalent of, "I'm shocked by how many posters really despise Lauren, and IMHO, folks should cut her a break -- I think the judges are simply exposed to and impressed by her pre-show work, and is not the "whore" that folks have suggested she might be, plus, I actually believe her dancing is pretty good," I would expect to see that person reported in the FTC as violating the boards on boards rule. I know that a mere report does not constitute a violation, but I see these kinds of comments reported so frequently that I have to believe that everyone else gets something that I just don't understand. If you could give us a few examples of what constitutes boards on boards, I would be extremely grateful. Thanks!

[TWoP Dietrich]

I have an odd question. Can you please give me an example of "boards on boards"?

Sure. The guiding principle is that the topic should always be "the television show and things that happened on it" and not "the board and the people on it".

So in your example, the problem is the "I'm shocked by how many posters really despise Lauren, and IMHO, folks should cut her a break" part. It's perfectly all right to disagree with people, and it's perfectly all right to have differing opinions, but it's not okay to demand that people justify their opinions to you and it's not okay to impute sinister motives to them.

People are allowed to despise her and people are allowed to like her, and both groups are allowed to post their opinions.

The things that you want to avoid are phrases like "I don't get the hate/love", "You wouldn't say that if it were this other dancer", and things like that. When that happens, the discussion tends to turn in on itself and become about the people on the board rather than the show. So it's off-topic.

Does that help?

[bluenote123]

Does that help?

Yes, it does. Thanks a lot!

[legaleagle88]

Cross-posted from Danny's contestant thread:

TWoP Dietrich: ...especially because there's no hints outside the spoiler bars to tell the unspoiled what it's about, which I do appreciate...

Since you brought it up... This seems to be a constant problem on these boards - people posting spoilers in bars, but with information outside the bars which indicates disappointment/happiness/etc. regarding what's in the bars . It's gotten to the point that I almost don't want to visit between Monday and Wednesday, because I often accidentally glean info. I don't want from those comments.

Anyway, my question is: will you be monitoring this issue?

Thanks for all your hard work!

Edited by legaleagle88, Aug 7, 2007 @ 3:40 PM.

[Solea]

I'd like to second legaleagle88's concern. Often a post will go something like this:

Oh no! I can't believe it. Black barred spoiler then follows. I'm never watching this show again.

Or something similar.

I'm ok with discussion of what has already aired, and will avoid the forum on broadcast nights until I've seen the show. But any spoilers, reference to spoilers, and reactions to spoilers, I'm thinking, should stay exclusively in the spoiler threads.

Thanks for listening.

[TWoP Dietrich]

Anyway, my question is: will you be monitoring this issue?

Yes I will. It is the responsibility of people with spoilers to keep from telling people who don't want to know.

I'm going to do my best to ensure that everyone is aware that they need to be extra-cautious, especially as the end of the season comes up. And of course, this is going to be especially important this week, with the results show not happening until Monday.

[TWoP Dietrich]

As we roar into the final week and opinions start to run a little hot, I would like to ask for a moratorium on the following words/phrases:

"powervoting tweens"
"Dannyshipper"

...and any phrase designed to dismiss all voters for a particular dancer as being part of a particular demographic. Remember that we have people who are fans of all the dancers here.

Thank you!

[MysteryMeat]

Hi, I have a question. (spoiler tagging in case the answer is "yes, it is a spoiler").

Is the fact that they didn't tell the audience who got kicked off at the taping a spoiler? Or can we talk about it (the fact that the taping didn't give anything away and how it is that that was accomplished, with the multiple takes of everyone pretending to discover they are safe) in the regular threads?

Also, is stuff that happened at the taping that happened off-camera won't be making it on air (like Nigel fun of Lacey's butt during a commercial break) a spoiler or not? There's some funny stuff coming out, and it doesn't seem spoilerish to me since it doesn't give away any information about who gets the boot, but I figured I'd ask since it does relate to a taping of an episode not yet aired.

Thanks!

Edited by TWoP Barnes, Jun 14, 2008 @ 12:01 PM.
removed spoiler tags

[TWoP Dietrich]

Is the fact that they didn't tell the audience who got kicked off at the taping a spoiler? Or can we talk about it (the fact that the taping didn't give anything away and how it is that that was accomplished, with the multiple takes of everyone pretending to discover they are safe) in the regular threads?

Hmm. It's close, but I'm going to rule that that is not a spoiler, because it will ease the minds of the people who don't want to be spoiled.

Also, is stuff that happened at the taping that happened off-camera won't be making it on air (like Nigel fun of Lacey's butt during a commercial break) a spoiler or not? There's some funny stuff coming out, and it doesn't seem spoilerish to me since it doesn't give away any information about who gets the boot, but I figured I'd ask since it does relate to a taping of an episode not yet aired.

Let's keep that as a spoiler until the episode airs. It's just easier to say "if it happened at the taping, it's a spoiler" than to parse each separate event.

Edited by TWoP Barnes, Jun 14, 2008 @ 12:02 PM.
no longer a spoiler; tags removed

[Pixigal]

Is there any chance we can have all the tour discussion/password information out of the spoiler discussion thread and on the tour thread?

[TWoP Dietrich]

The discussion that's been there so far is sort of "spoilers for how to get tickets for the tour", but I'll encourage people to move further discussion to the tour thread.

[AFishaNado]

Where does the *Without Pity* portion come into play if all posts are to take into consideration the feelings of fans of whatever dancer are being discussed? Seriously.

[GoodThings]

Where does the *Without Pity* portion come into play if all posts are to take into consideration the feelings of fans

We can treat the TV characters and subjects (plotlines, producers, etc) without pity. We cannot treat the other posters without pity. Taking into consideration posters' feelings means not being rude, mean or dismissive of their opinions if they differ.

As long as we keep posts to our own opinions and on topic within each thread, and follow some basic grammar and context rules, each poster should be fine.