Or just put it on AskMe.

March 12, 2007 2:00 PM

Can someone please change the text of this FPP on Heroes so it doesn't refer to the name of a well-known comic series with a similarly well-known plot?
posted by spiderwire to Etiquette/Policy at 2:00 PM (44 comments total)

It'd take a fair bit of rewriting to get all the spoiler potential out of the post, reducing the above-the-fold content to, essentially, "there's this one thing that's like this other thing [SPOILERS INSIDE]". I wasn't jazzed about that sort of editing-for-content; I spot-checked it (and the related AskMe) with Matt, who gave ultimately decided against an edit.

And being as how the entire conversation in the thread now is about the well-known comic series with a similarly well-known plot, the spoiler warning would be a pretty weak defense for that subset of readers who watch Heroes, have read Watchmen, and are worried about spoilers.
posted by cortex (staff) at 2:35 PM on March 12, 2007

The original spoiler warning was in reference to the link -- I would have been satisfied if instead of "Watchmen" it said "a well-known comic books series," and a note saying [spoilers at link and inside thread]. The Watchmen has a unique enough plot that it's far too specific a hint, in my opinion. However, I say this having not followed the link, since I don't want to do any more damage than has been done.

At any rate, it seems to me that "a Watchmen-like twist" in this context, if you're familiar with Watchmen, is giving away way too much. The plain text of the FPP could still avoid that part.
posted by spiderwire at 2:40 PM on March 12, 2007

Cortex: would you do with the consent of the OP? Seems like he was trying to avoid being a spoiler.
posted by delmoi at 2:41 PM on March 12, 2007

For me, the FPP on the blue is fine. Unfortunately, having seen THAT, if you then go and read the AskMe (or, in fact, just skim the page) you get the spoiler anyway. Speaking as someone who's never read Watchmen, and has been thoroughly enjoying Heros up until now -- this is a fairly major spoiler :(

So.. would it be possible to reword the AskMe to get the plot-point after the cut?

Pretty please?
posted by coriolisdave at 3:00 PM on March 12, 2007

That'd probably make a difference, yeah. I don't know if Matt heard from dig_duggler or not; I didn't. I'll toss an email at him.

It'd be an edit to the post text and to the title text, so it's asking for slightly more impact on dd's post than just omitting W word. And now we're using that word in this thread, so, heh. You can see why this is feeling like kind of a moot point, especially with the post on the blue having been up for several hours now.
posted by cortex (staff) at 3:07 PM on March 12, 2007

Well, people in Australia are only just getting up and flicking through their morning websites..... ;)

Thanks for the quick response, though.
posted by coriolisdave at 3:16 PM on March 12, 2007

People in Australia aren't watching Heroes.
posted by knave at 3:19 PM on March 12, 2007

Well, it's too late now. But the Watchmen reference was the only thing that's made me even close to interested in seeing Heroes, so maybe that's a bit of a wash.
posted by klangklangston at 3:21 PM on March 12, 2007

People in Australia can't download Hereos torrents? Huh.
posted by five fresh fish at 3:24 PM on March 12, 2007

Now, does anyone know where I can find a tall black man who can make it like I never read that?
posted by coriolisdave at 3:25 PM on March 12, 2007

knave: Uhhh WTF? Speaking as an Australian, in Australia -- yes, we really are. There's a large number of people torrenting, mostly due to the show starting over here on free-to-air television a month or so ago.

And now everyone seems to be watching it. Even my mother, and she HATES anything remotely sci-fi.
posted by coriolisdave at 3:27 PM on March 12, 2007

Can we please just delete it. If you take out the giant spoiler, the post makes no sense. So basically, it's a giant spoiler post on the front page with the point of spoiling. This post couldn't have waited until after the episode aired? It's still just as much a topic for conversation AFTER everyone has had a chance to see it. This really really made me angry, since I see the whole post as pointless spoiling and chat filter.
posted by blueskiesinside at 3:36 PM on March 12, 2007

as a long time fan of watchmen, I would like to chime in and say that I thought the plot point being spoken about involved someone being colored blue.

color me surprised.
posted by shmegegge at 3:38 PM on March 12, 2007

knave: Uhhh WTF? Speaking as an Australian, in Australia -- yes, we really are.

I stand corrected.
posted by knave at 3:58 PM on March 12, 2007

Spoilers? On my InterWebs?
posted by boo_radley at 4:35 PM on March 12, 2007

As a Watchmen and a Heroes fan, I'm pretty irritated by this spoiler being posted on the front page of the green. I had not tried to find out any spoilers about the show, and that's rare for me. We shouldn't have to be careful about reading the questions on the front page of AskMe. If a spoiler must be included, that's why there's the "more inside" option.
posted by Four-Eyed Girl at 5:21 PM on March 12, 2007

Yeah, thanks guys. We just passed Episode 10 here in NZ, and I've also been doing my best not to see any surprises.
posted by Paragon at 5:28 PM on March 12, 2007

What coriolisdave said, essentially. The combo of the Mefi post that says "Big spoiler for Heroes, won't tell you what" and the AskMe post that says "Here's this big spoiler about a show, won't tell you what show's being spoiled" basically gave everything away for me despite having never read Watchmen.

Removing the reference to the Watchmen on Mefi and removing the spoiler itself on AskMe would be absolutely lovely. boo_radley is right about his snark to an extent, but this isn't a spoiler site; there isn't a general expectation that you should avoid reading Mefi or AskMe if you watch a television show and don't want to know what happens next.
posted by chrominance at 5:29 PM on March 12, 2007

(er, or her—didn't mean to assume boo_radley's gender.)
posted by chrominance at 5:29 PM on March 12, 2007

"Well-known comic series".

LOL
posted by mr_crash_davis at 5:33 PM on March 12, 2007

cortex: I don't know if Matt heard from dig_duggler or not; I didn't. I'll toss an email at him.

He's commented in the thread: First off, sorry for the spoilage. The initial alternative I saw was don't ask the question. After the askme thread, I just wasn't crafty enough. Mods feel free to yank it.
posted by russilwvong at 5:34 PM on March 12, 2007

I'm not invested enough in the show to care about spoilers, but I will say that "there's this one thing that's like this other thing [SPOILERS INSIDE]" is the funniest thing I've ever read.

Seriously. Try to picture the person who would avoid clicking on that. It would have to be someone who doesn't want ANYTHING spoiled. Recipes, baby names, religious texts, anything.
posted by roll truck roll at 6:24 PM on March 12, 2007 [1 favorite]

w/r/t both crash_davis and roll truck roll: You apparently don't understand the context here. The problem arises from knowing the specific plot twist in Watchmen -- the story is a mystery that shares many features with Heroes, so knowing that the plot twist carries over ruins much of the mystery. There's no way around this if you even mention the name "Watchmen," because anyone who's read it knows what the plot twist is.

If you don't like my solution -- which was only pitched as a middle ground in order to avoid removing the post -- then I'd say just get rid of the post. If the spoiler can't be avoided without being needlessly vague, then it's a bad post. $.02.

As russilwvong's comment indicates, the original poster understood that "don't ask" was an available alternative, but just wasn't able to help himself.
posted by spiderwire at 7:31 PM on March 12, 2007

I wasn't jazzed about that sort of editing-for-content

I do hope y'all re-think editing for *spoiler* content in the future. spiderwire's suggestion (replacing 'The Watchmen' with "a well-known comic books series") would have worked fine, and like Four-Eyed Girl says, spoilers to popular geeky shows on the front page really really do suck.
posted by mediareport at 8:16 PM on March 12, 2007

spiderwire and mediareport are right. The post could very easily be redone as:

At a panel last weekend a major plot point was revealed about the NBC show Heroes (it goes without saying - contains spoilers). To many comic book readers this had more than a familiar similarity to the ending of a widely revered comic book series (also contains spoiler). Stories and themes are repeated throughout history in many mediums, but when is it a unique take, when is it a a homage and when is it theft? And when the medium that is lifted from is a less respected one such as comic books, does that make it more palatable?

The edit makes it still completely comprehensible, and avoids giving anything away. If you click on the comic link even with a spoiler message, you can't complain.

To non-comic fans, to understand why this is such a frustrating post, imagine this:

The creators of Heroes last weekend revealed a major spoiler concerning a major plot point. TV fans will notice this has a very strong similarity to a shocking plot device used on the 80s series Dallas.

Or

The creators of Heroes last weekend revealed a major spoiler concerning a major plot point. Movie fans will notice this has a very strong similarity to a shocking revelation about the relationship between two main characters in The Empire Strikes Back.
posted by Sangermaine at 1:28 AM on March 13, 2007

Man...who would've thought that Darth Vader was Luke Skywalker's father?
posted by Diskeater at 7:09 AM on March 13, 2007

I must be dim. I've read Watchmen a few times, including recently, but I didn't think at all of that particular plot point.
posted by jb at 7:26 AM on March 13, 2007

I've never read W and never seen H - could someone please spell out the spoiler in its entirety, just for the record?
posted by Meatbomb at 8:27 AM on March 13, 2007

"w/r/t both crash_davis and roll truck roll: You apparently don't understand the context here. The problem arises from knowing the specific plot twist in Watchmen"

I understand your context exactly. You claim a "comic series" is "well-known". In response to your claim, I LOL'ed. Which I repeat now.

LOL
posted by mr_crash_davis at 8:37 AM on March 13, 2007

You're laughing at loud about Watchmen being well known. In response to your LOL, I will LOL.

LOL.
posted by Bugbread at 9:29 AM on March 13, 2007

Here's another spoiler.. at the end of Romeo and Juliet, they both die. Also, Jesus turns up in the Bible at the start of the New Testament. I have totally ruined those pieces of literature now. Ha!

(P.S. Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker's father!!!)
posted by wackybrit at 9:38 AM on March 13, 2007

In response to your LOL, I will LOL.

You have to say this in the comic-book-guy voice.
posted by roll truck roll at 10:01 AM on March 13, 2007

Man...who would've thought that Darth Vader was Luke Skywalker's father?

You ASSHOLE!
posted by phearlez at 1:19 PM on March 13, 2007

wackybrit : "Here's another spoiler.. at the end of Romeo and Juliet, they both die. Also, Jesus turns up in the Bible at the start of the New Testament. I have totally ruined those pieces of literature now. Ha!"

Those aren't pieces of literature which are made good by twist endings. Ha!
posted by Bugbread at 3:41 PM on March 13, 2007

I don't know, the NT was just sort of letters-to-the-Corinthiansing along and then BAM! Revelation! Out of nowhere.
posted by cortex (staff) at 3:48 PM on March 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

Man...who would've thought that Darth Vader was Luke Skywalker's father?

You ASSHOLE!

DO NOT WANT
posted by mr_crash_davis at 3:50 PM on March 13, 2007

Those aren't pieces of literature which are made good by twist endings.
You can't make a piece of literature good just by using a "twist" ending.
posted by dg at 4:54 PM on March 13, 2007

Watchmen is "well-known" in relation to the rest of the comic book canon, I think. I didn't mean in relation to culture at-large, but even in that respect, it won a Hugo and was on Time's 100-best list, according to Wikipedia. Is the joke about "comic series"? It was originally released in a serialized format. Whatever, I'm just not getting something, apparently.
posted by spiderwire at 5:04 PM on March 13, 2007

"Watchmen is 'well-known' in relation to the rest of the comic book canon, I think. I didn't mean in relation to culture at-large ... "

Now we're on the same wavelength.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 6:21 PM on March 13, 2007

dg writes "You can't make a piece of literature good just by using a 'twist' ending."

No. That's why there are some piece of shit novels that have twist endings. And there are some good novels that have twist endings, which would be good even without the twist. And there are some good novels that are good because of the twist.

Basically, there is not a 1 to 1 relationship between "twist" and "good". Neither in the sense of "all twist makes things good", nor in the sense of "no twist ever makes something good".
posted by Bugbread at 7:37 PM on March 13, 2007

True.
posted by dg at 8:21 PM on March 13, 2007

Sorry, don't mean to flog a dead horse, but something occurred to me earlier: even accepting that a twist cannot make something good (which I don't think is necessarily true in all cases), you've still got the issue of "good" versus "better". I think Fight Club was a good movie. And I think it would be a good movie even if there were no twist (that is, even if we knew from the start that the Narrator was Tyler). But I think the twist made it better. To pick something whose quality usually engenders less controversy than Fight Club, I think 1984 was a good book. And I think it would be a good book even if you knew from the start that O'Brien was actually a government spy. But not knowing that until he confronts Winston and Julia made it better.

So even if a twist can't make a bad thing good, and removing a twist can't make a good thing bad, there's still the possibility that it can make a good thing better, and that spoiling it can bring a great thing down to just good.

Ok, I'm done, sorry about that. Just had it bouncing around in my head and needed to get it out on-screen.
posted by Bugbread at 9:25 PM on March 13, 2007

I think you already said exactly the same thing but with fewer words. Unless I misunderstand you, which is more than likely.
posted by dg at 5:13 PM on March 14, 2007

Nah, I probably was just repeating myself. Bad habit of mine.
posted by Bugbread at 8:19 AM on March 15, 2007