Quote:
Originally Posted by SeedFreedom
So this is basically a big "screw you" to people who would be interested in future events, being impossible to wade through tons of pages of materials to find out maybe 5 mins of material that could easily be covered by one or two spoilers.
|
Well, you know, anyone can pick a test case to prove that as broad a policy as this has some less-desirable consequences in certain situations. I personally don't think that this scenario is so common or troubling that it warrants a complete change to the current process, and that implementing the proposed change would have other consequences that would be contrary to the reason the current policy was implemented in the first place. (And incidentally, in Q&A threads, we do allow spoiler questions and spoiler answers, so long as they're clearly marked. Again, we've accepted that no perfect solution could be found for series that don't have sub-forums.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeedFreedom
Also i thought that the entire point of "limited fourms" was to weed out threads with no discussion. Your last post makes that seem incredibility contradictory.
|
No, the point of limited forums was to control the sort of topics that were created. And whether you personally think the discussion is interesting or not, people do want to talk about the new Haruhi movie that was announced. It's a relevant topic for that sub-forum. And if there's enough demand, we can even create a "spoiler thread" for the movie; I mentioned that earlier. All this can be done within the constraints of the current policy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeedFreedom
Again, AnimeSuki is a private entity and are free to set their own rules, i just find the spoiler rules incredibility unfair, restricting, and contradictory.
|
*shrug* There's no pleasing everyone. Like I said, this implementation wasn't my first choice, and I'd be perfectly willing to propose a change if it were logical. But I wouldn't even bring it to the rest of the staff's attention if it doesn't first address the problems that the current policy was trying to solve. Otherwise, it'd just be shot down. So this is why, if you really want to see things changed, you have to understand how we got here first and make a solution that builds on what we have. In a way it's playing politics, but that's always the way it is when you want to bring about change in any sort of group or organization.
I can at least say that the current policy, as written, does have
a logic that can be followed and applied consistently throughout the forum. At least that's something.