Why did you have to post it as a thread in the title when there's a perfectly good thread (which those like me never dip into) for that purpose or could have put "spoiler" in the title. A little consideration is all I'm asking for.
Results:Most excited for...?
Osgood
14 (40.00%)
Zygons
16 (45.71%)
Peter Harness writing
5 (14.29%)
Voters: 35. You can't vote on this poll right now - are you signed in?
Osgood and Zygons for Series 9
2 of 6
Originally Posted by GDK:
“Why did you have to post it as a thread in the title when there's a perfectly good thread (which those like me never dip into) for that purpose or could have put "spoiler" in the title.”
“Why did you have to post it as a thread in the title when there's a perfectly good thread (which those like me never dip into) for that purpose or could have put "spoiler" in the title.”
I just explained that in my post. Regarding the title, I suppose I could've kept it vague like "Characters returning in S9 - spoilers!" but I didn't because it's just out there now. It'll be on various news sites, DW-related blogs, Facebook, Twitter, etc. including forums and Doctor Who Magazine, and the official YouTube channel... everywhere that talks about the show! Like I said, once the BBC put out a press release, that news is going to be posted all over the place - and being in a DW forum, you're more than likely to come across some of said news (whether it was this Osgood news, or something else) anyway.
Anyway, I've explained and said what I wanted to, and apologised earlier in the thread. I don't know what else you want me to do. If there's another press release, time will tell what people do or where/how it gets posted.
News sites I can avoid. Putting a spoiler in the thread title makes that impossible. It's irrelevant to me that the Beeb saw fit to make a press release.
What would I like you to do? Use the spoiler thread.
What would I like you to do? Use the spoiler thread.
Originally Posted by GDK:
“What would I like you to do? Use the spoiler thread.”
“What would I like you to do? Use the spoiler thread.”
Sure, happy to, for spoilers.
Originally Posted by GDK:
“News sites I can avoid. Putting in the thread title makes that impossible. It's irrelevant to me that the Beeb saw fit to make a press release.”
“News sites I can avoid. Putting in the thread title makes that impossible. It's irrelevant to me that the Beeb saw fit to make a press release.”
We/I can't cater for every individual and each individual's view of spoilers, unfortunately.
Anyway, I'm off. Enjoy Osgood discussion and speculation, all!
Originally Posted by GDK:
“I'd much rather have the programme itself surprise me. That's all. Always have. Nothing to do with River Song's catch phrase or Steven Moffat's opinion (which, strangely, mirrors my own).
Spoilers are like opening presents before the day. When the day comes, there's nothing left to surprise.
If it was possible I'd much rather know only the date of its return and.
Nothing else.
It matters not if it was an official press release. There are news sites and a thread in this very forum for those who must know simply everything in advance. Use the spoiler thread please. It's a simple courtesy.”
“I'd much rather have the programme itself surprise me. That's all. Always have. Nothing to do with River Song's catch phrase or Steven Moffat's opinion (which, strangely, mirrors my own).
Spoilers are like opening presents before the day. When the day comes, there's nothing left to surprise.
If it was possible I'd much rather know only the date of its return and.
Nothing else.
It matters not if it was an official press release. There are news sites and a thread in this very forum for those who must know simply everything in advance. Use the spoiler thread please. It's a simple courtesy.”
I'd just like to say that I hate spoilers too and actively avoid the spoiler thread for that very reason.
That said. I actually already read the news on DS before I saw this thread:
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/s7/do...octor-who.html
So I don't blame the OP at all for putting the information in the title of the thread. As far as I'm concerned once it gets reported on news sites and DS then it's fair game to talk about in forums.
I long since came to the conclusion that the only way to avoid knowing any information about new series of Doctor Who is to avoid coming to sites like DS at all unfortunately.
Keep her alive this time!
What a bloody stupid idea it was to kill off a character like that in the first place.
What a bloody stupid idea it was to kill off a character like that in the first place.
Originally Posted by Firegazer:
“I suppose Moffat realised the huge mistake he made.”
“I suppose Moffat realised the huge mistake he made.”
I hope so. For all the Sally Sparrows and whatever characters the series has had over the years, for me Osgood is a character with huge potential with which so much could be done.
I really do hope that this isn't a one-off appearance.
Originally Posted by GDK:
“News sites I can avoid. Putting a spoiler in the thread title makes that impossible. It's irrelevant to me that the Beeb saw fit to make a press release.
What would I like you to do? Use the spoiler thread.”
“News sites I can avoid. Putting a spoiler in the thread title makes that impossible. It's irrelevant to me that the Beeb saw fit to make a press release.
What would I like you to do? Use the spoiler thread.”
But it's not a spoiler - Who spoilers are, these days, usually information that the BBC doesn't want anyone to know.
This is news, as proven by an official BBC press release and the information being written up by hundreds of news sites. Do you really avoid all newspapers and news websites and magazines just in case you catch a glimpse of some Doctor Who news? You must live a very cloistered life! Hey, if you've avoided all news you may not know we've had a general election. I won't spoil the result for you....
Be reasonable - there's absolutely no reason to hide this news on a Doctor Who Forum. Realistically, if you don't want to hear officially released news then you'd be better off avoiding this forum over the next few months.
Originally Posted by ProfMarius:
“Hoping maybe you could further enlighten us on that, CD”
“Hoping maybe you could further enlighten us on that, CD
”
No trace of anyone called Cleopatra Dickens in IMDB or on google. Perhaps it is the name of a character..
I am being reasonable. I know people have different thresholds of what they consider is and is not a spoiler. A little consideration of others' spoiler thresholds is all I'm asking for.
The fact is, before seeing Lewis's headline thread title I was unaware of Osgood's return. That makes it a spoiler and it certainly spoiled the surprise of seeing her return in the episode.
Sure, I might have stumbled across that information elsewhere, but I hadn't. I avoid entertainment "news" as much as possible - I never go to this site's home pages, for example. (BTW, adams66, I'd appreciate a less sarcastic tone, thanks).
Lewis's thread title has spoiled the episode for me. If he'd put it in the spoiler thread he would not have spoiled it for me.
The fact is, before seeing Lewis's headline thread title I was unaware of Osgood's return. That makes it a spoiler and it certainly spoiled the surprise of seeing her return in the episode.
Sure, I might have stumbled across that information elsewhere, but I hadn't. I avoid entertainment "news" as much as possible - I never go to this site's home pages, for example. (BTW, adams66, I'd appreciate a less sarcastic tone, thanks).
Lewis's thread title has spoiled the episode for me. If he'd put it in the spoiler thread he would not have spoiled it for me.
I have to side with official news not being classed as a spoiler-tag worthy.
"The Zygon Episode with Osgood" is going to billed long in advance in many forms between now and then. It's also going to be mentioned in threads up and down this board for months to come.
Avoiding set reports is one thing, but people are just going to talk about Doctor Who News.
"The Zygon Episode with Osgood" is going to billed long in advance in many forms between now and then. It's also going to be mentioned in threads up and down this board for months to come.
Avoiding set reports is one thing, but people are just going to talk about Doctor Who News.
Originally Posted by GDK:
“I'd much rather have the programme itself surprise me. That's all. Always have. Nothing to do with River Song's catch phrase or Steven Moffat's opinion (which, strangely, mirrors my own).
Spoilers are like opening presents before the day. When the day comes, there's nothing left to surprise.
If it was possible I'd much rather know only the date of its return and.
Nothing else.
It matters not if it was an official press release. There are news sites and a thread in this very forum for those who must know simply everything in advance. Use the spoiler thread please. It's a simple courtesy.”
“I'd much rather have the programme itself surprise me. That's all. Always have. Nothing to do with River Song's catch phrase or Steven Moffat's opinion (which, strangely, mirrors my own).
Spoilers are like opening presents before the day. When the day comes, there's nothing left to surprise.
If it was possible I'd much rather know only the date of its return and.
Nothing else.
It matters not if it was an official press release. There are news sites and a thread in this very forum for those who must know simply everything in advance. Use the spoiler thread please. It's a simple courtesy.”
But it isn't a spoiler. How many times do you need people to tell you this?
Originally Posted by Dalekbuster523:
“But it isn't a spoiler. How many times do you need people to tell you this?”
“But it isn't a spoiler. How many times do you need people to tell you this?”
The point is, different people have different spoiler thresholds.
How many times do I have to tell you that? Less sarcasm please.
What is or is not a spoiler is a matter of opinion, and opinions differ because, in the end, they're subjective and not objective.
Originally Posted by CD93:
“I have to side with official news not being classed as a spoiler-tag worthy.
"The Zygon Episode with Osgood" is going to billed long in advance in many forms between now and then. It's also going to be mentioned in threads up and down this board for months to come.
Avoiding set reports is one thing, but people are just going to talk about Doctor Who News.”
“I have to side with official news not being classed as a spoiler-tag worthy.
"The Zygon Episode with Osgood" is going to billed long in advance in many forms between now and then. It's also going to be mentioned in threads up and down this board for months to come.
Avoiding set reports is one thing, but people are just going to talk about Doctor Who News.”
It's not news. It's part of the promotional hype cycle.
Entertainment "news" is not news. It's trivia meant to keep the programme in the public eye. Unfortunately, it displaces real news and reduces the time available for covering more serious matters.
Ever heard of the phrase "bread and circuses"?
Originally Posted by GDK:
“It's not news. It's part of the promotional hype cycle.
Entertainment "news" is not news. It's trivia meant to keep the programme in the public eye. Unfortunately, it displaces real news and reduces the time available for covering more serious matters.
Ever heard of the phrase "bread and circuses"?”
“It's not news. It's part of the promotional hype cycle.
Entertainment "news" is not news. It's trivia meant to keep the programme in the public eye. Unfortunately, it displaces real news and reduces the time available for covering more serious matters.
Ever heard of the phrase "bread and circuses"?”
I shall write a strongly worded email to doctorwhonews.net immediately, asking them for more post-election coverage.
It is information of note about the programme we're discussing here from a BBC press release. Of course somebody shared it outside of the spoiler thread. That in itself is mostly for pouring over things not released by the production team.
Originally Posted by GDK:
“It's not news. It's part of the promotional hype cycle.
Entertainment "news" is not news. It's trivia meant to keep the programme in the public eye. Unfortunately, it displaces real news and reduces the time available for covering more serious matters.
Ever heard of the phrase "bread and circuses"?”
“It's not news. It's part of the promotional hype cycle.
Entertainment "news" is not news. It's trivia meant to keep the programme in the public eye. Unfortunately, it displaces real news and reduces the time available for covering more serious matters.
Ever heard of the phrase "bread and circuses"?”
But have you ever managed to avoid the news about returning villains in any series of Doctor Who though? Is that actually possible?
As someone else who tries to avoid spoilers I've always known which episodes the Daleks will be appearing in, what the Cybermen re-design looks like, (both times), that Ice Warriors were returning to series 7, that the Zygons where returning for the 50th etc etc usually because the BBC promotes the hell out of it before hand. I think the only one that I didn't know far in advance was Davros returning in series 4, but even that was spoilt by him being put in the trailer for next weeks episode.
Hmm. Returning to Doctor Who...
The Osgood thing in particular is important to me because I see her as an important secondary character, even potential companion material, and I hated that she was killed off.
She was good, smart and scientific. And geeky and different from your ordinary person.
I think for a lot of Whovians she also represents the ultimate personal fan fantasy. She too is a fan of the Doctor. A lot of fanfic involves a character, who is a thinly disguised version of the author, meeting and becoming involved with their favourite fictional characters. At least, I think she's Steven Moffat's version of fans themselves. Which made we wonder if he was baiting fans by killing her off. I have to admit though, it made a delicious scene for Missy.
I am much less bothered by the return of Daleks or similar major adversaries. Almost expected in fact.
The Osgood thing in particular is important to me because I see her as an important secondary character, even potential companion material, and I hated that she was killed off.
She was good, smart and scientific. And geeky and different from your ordinary person.
I think for a lot of Whovians she also represents the ultimate personal fan fantasy. She too is a fan of the Doctor. A lot of fanfic involves a character, who is a thinly disguised version of the author, meeting and becoming involved with their favourite fictional characters. At least, I think she's Steven Moffat's version of fans themselves. Which made we wonder if he was baiting fans by killing her off. I have to admit though, it made a delicious scene for Missy.
I am much less bothered by the return of Daleks or similar major adversaries. Almost expected in fact.
Originally Posted by GDK:
“The point is, different people have different spoiler thresholds.
How many times do I have to tell you that? Less sarcasm please.
What is or is not a spoiler is a matter of opinion, and opinions differ because, in the end, they're subjective and not objective.”
“The point is, different people have different spoiler thresholds.
How many times do I have to tell you that? Less sarcasm please.
What is or is not a spoiler is a matter of opinion, and opinions differ because, in the end, they're subjective and not objective.”
It's a fact that something officially confirmed by the BBC is NOT a spoiler.
Moffat's inability to actually kill someone strikes again. Looks like Danny Pink will get resurrected in Clara's last story just like everybody else who has "died" in Doctor Who.
Originally Posted by Sora2311:
“Moffat's inability to actually kill someone strikes again. Looks like Danny Pink will get resurrected in Clara's last story just like everybody else who has "died" in Doctor Who.”
“Moffat's inability to actually kill someone strikes again. Looks like Danny Pink will get resurrected in Clara's last story just like everybody else who has "died" in Doctor Who.”
Could be Zygon Osgood yet.
Originally Posted by Dalekbuster523:
“Could be Zygon Osgood yet.”
“Could be Zygon Osgood yet.”
It's at least implied.
Quote:
“This time though, can the Doctor trust his number one fan?”
“This time though, can the Doctor trust his number one fan?”
But it would require some Zygon tech update.
In DotD wasn't there some line of dialogue somewhere about being able to tell the difference between a Zygon and the original by the smell? And didn't Missy comment on Osgood stinking? Did Missy kill Zygon Osgood?
Originally Posted by GDK:
“I am being reasonable. I know people have different thresholds of what they consider is and is not a spoiler. A little consideration of others' spoiler thresholds is all I'm asking for.
The fact is, before seeing Lewis's headline thread title I was unaware of Osgood's return. That makes it a spoiler and it certainly spoiled the surprise of seeing her return in the episode.
Sure, I might have stumbled across that information elsewhere, but I hadn't. I avoid entertainment "news" as much as possible - I never go to this site's home pages, for example. (BTW, adams66, I'd appreciate a less sarcastic tone, thanks).
Lewis's thread title has spoiled the episode for me. If he'd put it in the spoiler thread he would not have spoiled it for me.”
“I am being reasonable. I know people have different thresholds of what they consider is and is not a spoiler. A little consideration of others' spoiler thresholds is all I'm asking for.
The fact is, before seeing Lewis's headline thread title I was unaware of Osgood's return. That makes it a spoiler and it certainly spoiled the surprise of seeing her return in the episode.
Sure, I might have stumbled across that information elsewhere, but I hadn't. I avoid entertainment "news" as much as possible - I never go to this site's home pages, for example. (BTW, adams66, I'd appreciate a less sarcastic tone, thanks).
Lewis's thread title has spoiled the episode for me. If he'd put it in the spoiler thread he would not have spoiled it for me.”
You clearly used the word "spoiler" as an objective statement of fact.
Originally Posted by GDK:
“Thanks for the huge spoiler in the title!
Not.”
“Thanks for the huge spoiler in the title!
Not.”
No indication that this was just a subjective opinion. Besides, when it's a matter of etiquette as to what is and is not a spoiler, there needs to be a clear definition, agreed by the majority. It is selfish to expect everyone to tread on eggshells because you have an extremist minority opinion on what constitutes a spoiler.
Originally Posted by be more pacific:
“You clearly used the word "spoiler" as an objective statement of fact.
No indication that this was just a subjective opinion. Besides, when it's a matter of etiquette as to what is and is not a spoiler, there needs to be a clear definition, agreed by the majority. It is selfish to expect everyone to tread on eggshells because you have an extremist minority opinion on what constitutes a spoiler.”
“You clearly used the word "spoiler" as an objective statement of fact.
No indication that this was just a subjective opinion. Besides, when it's a matter of etiquette as to what is and is not a spoiler, there needs to be a clear definition, agreed by the majority. It is selfish to expect everyone to tread on eggshells because you have an extremist minority opinion on what constitutes a spoiler.”
Eggshells? Is it extreme to hope people would use the spoiler thread? I'm not asking for people to not discuss spoilers, if that's their wish. That would be "extreme". Just to use the spoiler thread. Or at least not put it in a thread title. How is that in any way extreme?
It's extreme to discount entirely the opinions of others when your point of view is equally an opinion. All I ask for is a little consideration .
And it is a fact that, regardless of source, knowing about a surprise in advance of the reveal, spoils the surprise. No need to resort to or hair-splitting or lawyer-esque quibbling over semantic detail or definitions of words.
2 of 6
