• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Doctor Who
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
<<
<
3 of 6
>>
>
GDK
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by Dalekbuster523:
“It's a fact that something officially confirmed by the BBC is NOT a spoiler.”

No, that is an opinion. The fact is that the BBC don't consider it a spoiler, or at least that the benefits the publicity garnered by releasing the information outweighs the spoiler effect.
be more pacific
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by GDK:
“No, that is an opinion. The fact is that the BBC don't consider it a spoiler, or at least that the benefits the publicity garnered by releasing the information outweighs the spoiler effect.”

Well, the BBC's opinion (or official policy, rather) on what constitutes a "spoiler" matters much more than your opinion. You are in a tiny minority of fans who feel entitled to be shielded from virtually all information about an episode. It would be virtually impossible for the BBC to promote the show if they respected your wishes.
Originally Posted by GDK:
“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.”

Yes, it is extreme to expect a forum to have a far greater degree of self-censorship than BBC News.

While your view and mine are equally opinions, the opinions are not equal. I agree with the BBC and the majority of people who discuss such news on the forum, while you have an extremist minority view and demand special treatment.
Dalekbuster523
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by GDK:
“No, that is an opinion. The fact is that the BBC don't consider it a spoiler, or at least that the benefits the publicity garnered by releasing the information outweighs the spoiler effect.”

Something released by the BBC is not a opinion. The BBC do not consider it a spoiler therefore it's not a spoiler.
solarpenguin
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by Dalekbuster523:
“Something released by the BBC is not a opinion. The BBC do not consider it a spoiler therefore it's not a spoiler.”

It spoils our enjoyment. It spoils, so it is a spoiler. That is what the word spoiler means. The BBC doesn't get to redefine the English language.
DiscoP
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by bohoboy:
“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?”

I think the Moff was asked this question in an interview and he ruled out it being the Zygon Osgood because the Zygon would have been able to overpower missy.

Also not sure how this can be the Zygon Osgood if the real one is dead because don't the Zygon's need to keep the original alive?

But I'm sure there will be simple explanations if needed. Timey whimey and all that...
DiscoP
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by solarpenguin:
“It spoils our enjoyment. It spoils, so it is a spoiler. That is what the word spoiler means. The BBC doesn't get to redefine the English language.”

Nope but they do get to decide which information they release and which they don't. I am assuming if they felt it would spoil peoples enjoyment of the series then they would withhold the information, especially when it comes to someone like Moffat who is more guarded about secrets than most.
Dalekbuster523
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by solarpenguin:
“It spoils our enjoyment. It spoils, so it is a spoiler. That is what the word spoiler means. The BBC doesn't get to redefine the English language.”

This argument could go on all day but the fact is the BBC do not consider it a spoiler therefore it is not a spoiler regardless of whether you believe it spoils your enjoyment or not.
solarpenguin
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by be more pacific:
“Well, the BBC's opinion (or official policy, rather) on what constitutes a "spoiler" matters much more than your opinion. You are in a tiny minority of fans who feel entitled to be shielded from virtually all information about an episode. It would be virtually impossible for the BBC to promote the show if they respected your wishes.

Yes, it is extreme to expect a forum to have a far greater degree of self-censorship than BBC News.

While your view and mine are equally opinions, the opinions are not equal. I agree with the BBC and the majority of people who discuss such news on the forum, while you have an extremist minority view and demand special treatment.”

The fact that some idiots in the BBC publicity department want to give away spoilers, doesn't stop those spoilers from spoiling our enjoyment. And because they spoil our enjoyment, they are spoilers, by definition.

But since you seem to think it's OK for the majority to act like a big bully towards any minority, I guess there's no point reasoning with you.
solarpenguin
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by Dalekbuster523:
“This argument could go on all day but the fact is the BBC do not consider it a spoiler therefore it is not a spoiler regardless of whether you believe it spoils your enjoyment or not.”

If that's what the BBC considers, then the BBC considers wrong. It spoils our enjoyment, therefore it is by definition a spoiler. The clue is in the word.

I like to be drawn into the fictional world of any show/film/book that I'm experiencing. And I every time I think, "Oh, yes, I remember reading about this on Digital Spy," it draws me out of the action and back into the real world. And nothing some pompous ruling at the BBC says can change that.
be more pacific
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by solarpenguin:
“The fact that some idiots in the BBC publicity department want to give away spoilers, doesn't stop those spoilers from spoiling our enjoyment. And because they spoil our enjoyment, they are spoilers, by definition.

But since you seem to think it's OK for the majority to act like a big bully towards any minority, I guess there's no point reasoning with you.”

Well, seeing as the minority seem to have a problem with the basis of all casting announcements, trailers and publicity shots, they are fundamentally against the promotion which keeps the show in the public eye. There's no reasoning with such a selfish view which basically expects producers and fans to tread on eggshells to avoid upsetting a tiny minority.

Oh, and well done on the ad hom attack, suggesting that I want any minority to be oppressed. While you not-too-subtly paint me as the bigot, the point I'm making is that you and GDK want the freedoms of the majority to be restricted by your own preference.
Shawn_Lunn
09-05-2015
If people don't want spoilers, it's pointless being on the internet. The BBC were better releasing this anyways as Osgood's return would've leaked along with the Zygon stuff.
Dalekbuster523
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by solarpenguin:
“If that's what the BBC considers, then the BBC considers wrong. .”

No, the BBC are right because it's their show and they (no offence) have more knowledge than you about what will happen in the episode.
doctor blue box
09-05-2015
Wasn't someone who was particularly bothered about the demise of Osgood, as I didn't feel we'd seen her as a character enough to really form a bond, but all the same I think she is a quirky, fun character so I'll be happy to see more of her.

Zygons returning sounds good too. I for one think they were used brilliantly in the 50th. It is rather unique to have a villainous race who can be used as a serious threat and for comedy moments simultaneously within the same story, and I like that you can never know if you are really seeing to who you think you are seeing when they are around.
solarpenguin
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by Dalekbuster523:
“No, the BBC are right because it's their show and they (no offence) have more knowledge than you about what will happen in the episode.”

The BBC doesn't "have more knowledge than" me about what does or doesn't spoil my enjoyment. The licence fee doesn't give it the right to dictate my every emotion.
Lewis Christian
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by GDK:
“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'll be happy to forward any complaints to the BBC PR department

Christ, you'd think I'd posted a 1000-word summary of the plot. I kinda wish I had, cos then at least I'd understand all the ruddy fuss a few people are making.
solarpenguin
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by be more pacific:
“Well, seeing as the minority seem to have a problem with the basis of all casting announcements, trailers and publicity shots, they are fundamentally against the promotion which keeps the show in the public eye. There's no reasoning with such a selfish view which basically expects producers and fans to tread on eggshells to avoid upsetting a tiny minority.

Oh, and well done on the ad hom attack, suggesting that I want any minority to be oppressed. While you not-too-subtly paint me as the bigot, the point I'm making is that you and GDK want the freedoms of the majority to be restricted by your own preference.”

Where in this thread did anyone say anything about "all casting announcements, trailers and publicity shots"? You're creating a straw man here.

Fact is, we don't have a problem with them as long as they're kept separate so we don't have to see them. And not putting them in thread titles that we can't avoid seeing.

And if you don't want to be seen as a minority-hating bully, then don't act like one.
be more pacific
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by solarpenguin:
“Where in this thread did anyone say anything about "all casting announcements, trailers and publicity shots"? You're creating a straw man here.

Fact is, we don't have a problem with them as long as they're kept separate so we don't have to see them. And not putting them in thread titles that we can't avoid seeing.

And if you don't want to be seen as a minority-hating bully, then don't act like one.”

Yet, strangely enough, you and GDK are the ones demanding that everyone else restricts their discussion of widely available official announcements. And then you cry "BULLYING!"

Oh dear.
GDK
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by solarpenguin:
“If that's what the BBC considers, then the BBC considers wrong. It spoils our enjoyment, therefore it is by definition a spoiler. The clue is in the word.

I like to be drawn into the fictional world of any show/film/book that I'm experiencing. And I every time I think, "Oh, yes, I remember reading about this on Digital Spy," it draws me out of the action and back into the real world. And nothing some pompous ruling at the BBC says can change that.”

Thanks solarpenguin for weighing in. The very point I've been trying to make all along.
solarpenguin
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by be more pacific:
“Yet, strangely enough, you and GDK are the ones demanding that everyone else restricts their discussion of widely available official announcements. And then you cry "BULLYING!"

Oh dear.”

Well, if by "demanding that everyone else restricts their discussion" you mean "wishing that everyone carries out their discussion in the best place for it" then, yes.

Never heard of "the tyranny of the majority"?
GDK
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by be more pacific:
“Yet, strangely enough, you and GDK are the ones demanding that everyone else restricts their discussion of widely available official announcements. And then you cry "BULLYING!"

Oh dear.”

I demanded nothing. That's your word and a straw man. I only asked for some consideration from others. No restriction, but there is a time (after the ep has aired) and a place (the spoiler thread if it's before it's aired) where the preferences of all can be met.

I don't think I'm the one being selfish.
sebbie3000
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by Shevk:
“Zygons are interesting.

Osgood though, meh. She's hardly an iconic character worth resurrecting. (Except for perhaps in Moffat's wet dreams).”

Except it appears she has become a fan favourite quite quickly. Just because you're not a fan doesn't mean you have to be so crude about a decent character.
Lewis Christian
09-05-2015
I'm off for a bit. Gunna survey every single Doctor Who fan online so I know next time where each individual draws the line at what they consider a spoiler. Then before I post a thread, I'll make sure to check down the list to make sure I appease every single online fan first.
GDK
09-05-2015
There are plenty of people who prefer to know as little as possible ahead of a favourite show or film. No need for a survey.

No offence to you, Lewis. It could have been anybody,
Dalekbuster523
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by solarpenguin:
“The BBC doesn't "have more knowledge than" me about what does or doesn't spoil my enjoyment. The licence fee doesn't give it the right to dictate my every emotion.”

Have you seen the episodes?

No. So the BBC does know more than you.
Corwin
09-05-2015
Originally Posted by CD93:
“
I have to ask, though.... who the hell is Cleopatra Dickens?
”

Fake name used to avoid revealing the actress in question? One Who previously played (fake) Cleopatra maybe?
<<
<
3 of 6
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map