Spoiler Infraction Policy - Keep It or Loose It?

[Baysiderulez]

just don't have too many plot details.

See this is the problem with HAVING a rule.... how do you define this so the user and moderator both have the same understanding of what 'too many" plot details is?

 

[Austin]

UPDATE

It seems that almost everyone of you want to keep the spoiler tags and the rules. The conflict arises with how do we define the rule and the boards/games it affects. It seems that Skyward Sword is the only game that people want it to affect. If we say that the rule only applies to Skyward Sword, then a direct definition could be simple as saying "This rule only applies to Skyward Sword". Then the new problem is what boards it effects? It seems that Zelda Theory, Game Help, and Articles are the only ones that people don't to affect. We can add another line to the definition "This rule affects all boards except Zelda Theory, Game Help, and Articles".

Obviously one or more of you will disagree with such a simple two line definition. That being said I want to two things. I want to know if the rule affects Skyward Sword, and I want to know if this rule should effect all boards except the 3 mentioned. If not, what would you have? Two, I want to know what we should have for a definition. I believe the best way to determine this, you can each create your own version of the rule segment or edit/comment on someone else's.

Thanks for commenting!

 

[Rishian]

Without reading everything in this post... my thoughts are rather simple...

Anything that isn't Skyward Sword or OoT 3D... shouldn't have spoilers. At this point in time, it seems silly to stick a Spoiler tag on something from Oracle of Seasons. Thus, any spoiler discussion should only be for new games.

I have to agree with Mases on this one. If it's anything older, then there is no expectation of preventing spoilers. However, I would add TP to this list because it is the "newest" release until such a time as the others are released. That is just my two cents

 

[Michael Heide]

I want to know if the rule affects Skyward Sword, and I want to know if this rule should effect all boards except the 3 mentioned. If not, what would you have

It should affect Skyward Sword, and if there are noticable story changes in Ocarina of Time 3D or Link's Awakening 3D (like altered dialogue, additional dungeons and/or enemies, etc), it should affect those as well. I don't like the idea of no infractions at all for spoilers in the Zelda Theory forum. Sure, if the topic states that it is about SWS, then no tags are needed, but I don't want SWS info to creep into a "Does Minish Cap happen before or after Oracle of Ages" thread without warning. And we should have a rule against someone posting "OMG sheik is in teh new link's awakening end credits" into a Game Help thread about the locations of the Golden Insects in TP. Yes, it would fall under off-topic or spam rules, but I would like to cover all bases anyway.

Additionally, we should have a clear rule how long info from SWS (or the upcoming 3D games, should we agree on those) are considered spoilers. Six months? Twelve? Eighteen?

And what about games that aren't available anymore? Is the content of Link's Awakening DX a spoiler? How about Oracle of Seasons?

Two, I want to know what we should have for a definition.

My suggestion:

A spoiler is any information about the plot, the characters and enemies, about puzzles, strategies or easter eggs in *insert game title here*, derived directly or indirectly from trailers, interviews, webpages (including, but not limited to zeldadungeon.net) or from playing the game.

 

[Djinn]

It should affect Skyward Sword, and if there are noticable story changes in Ocarina of Time 3D or Link's Awakening 3D (like altered dialogue, additional dungeons and/or enemies, etc), it should affect those as well. I don't like the idea of no infractions at all for spoilers in the Zelda Theory forum. Sure, if the topic states that it is about SWS, then no tags are needed, but I don't want SWS info to creep into a "Does Minish Cap happen before or after Oracle of Ages" thread without warning. And we should have a rule against someone posting "OMG sheik is in teh new link's awakening end credits" into a Game Help thread about the locations of the Golden Insects in TP. Yes, it would fall under off-topic or spam rules, but I would like to cover all bases anyway.

Additionally, we should have a clear rule how long info from SWS (or the upcoming 3D games, should we agree on those) are considered spoilers. Six months? Twelve? Eighteen?

The problem there would be the fact that a theory forum requires deep information pulled from games and secrets discovered by players beyond what is covered in an instruction book. Normally requiring end game sequences or text pulled from secret areas. There can be no theory or timeline or discussion at all if everyone is not allowed to use the information they have gathered to make a point or counterpoint. Wind Waker's placement can absolutely not be discussed without divulging story spoilers. This would turn all threads into nothing but a series of spoiler tags everywhere annoying anyone wishing to read to constantly click spoiler buttons on and off, while leaving others unwilling to join in the discussion completely because they do not wish to risk gaining an infraction. Some people would simply not bother because of the hassle of having to place a spoiler tag every few sentences over and over again and might just move off this forum completely to somewhere else that has a much more lax spoiler code. A theory thread cannot even be a theory thread without some spoiler information within it so it would be reckless on part of the person who does not want to be spoiled to even enter one.

This would also be a problem for the game help section. People who would normally help out and reply to a thread would in turn avoid it because of the threat of gaining an infraction for simply helping someone having trouble. Which leads me to question why the game help section would ever need spoiler rules since the off chance of someone who had not yet played a game would have no need to even be poking around a thread asking for help in a section of a game that they have not yet played. Or again leave it for someone else to reply to because of the hassle of having to place everything they need to say in spoiler tags. People would then again, take their questions to other forums that have relatively lighter rules covering game help.

 

[Michael Heide]

I agree that timeline theories and other theories obviously incorporating knowledge gained from SWS don't need Spoiler Tags. A Spoiler prefix, however, wouldn't hurt and should be mandatory.
I just don't want to allow all spoilers in the Theory subforum because I don't want SWS spoilers to appear in a thread about "Who was the friend Link was looking for at the beginning of MM?" or something like that.

As for the game help subforum, I would at least ban spoilers in the thread title, since the thread title is visible in the forum overview and through the "New Posts" search option. "How do I defeat Ganondorf" would give too much away. As for people not bothering with the subforum at all out of fear of getting spoiled, well, there's the thread titles and prefixes. If I don't want to be spoilt about Ocarina of Time 3DS, then I'll only look at threads with other prefixes. Problem solved.

 

[Locke]

Theory: I agree with Djinn for the most part for this forum. I think the only reasonable spoiler limitation in the theory section would be against spoilers in titles. If someone really thinks that SS is somehow connected to who Link is searching for in MM, then it should be considered by anyone who is interested in that topic. Perhaps we could encourage people to be considerate of somewhat off-topic spoilers, but I still feel that every theorist should be open to any information.

Help: Help is slightly different in that respect. If someone asks how to defeat Ganondorf in one specific game, we don't want people openly saying "this way, which is the same way you defeat him in this other game." So we should consider a rule for off-topic spoilers in the help section. And of course no spoilers at all in the titles, and prefixes should be unnecessary.

 

[DuckNoises]

I really don't think spoiler policy should be limited to Skyward Sword; it should be enforced very strictly with SS -- but at any rate, spoilers are still spoilers, no matter what game they come from and how old they are. Just because a game is old is not an excuse to wantonly blurt out spoilers because one can; people still want to play these games, but it may be difficult because they're hard to access, but that doesn't mean that we should sit idly by and let them be spoiled.
It's an arbitrary assumption to assume that someone has played a game just because it has been out for a long time -- those two things are not necessarily connected. Some members may not have large amounts of disposable income, or they may not have the means to access these older games, and that should be taken into account. What's the use in having a selective spoiler policy? That's only more confusing, leaving members to get in the habit of posting spoiler tags for a certain topic, but once that topic becomes "aged," it no longer requires spoiler tags. This is where I think the majority of the confusion and resentment of the spoiler policy lies, in the fact that the policy is selective.
(Note that the tiered system I demonstrated earlier was merely for enforcement, not a difference in policy)

I think spoiler rules should still be implemented in Zelda Theory, but they will be much more lenient there than in other sections. The way I manage spoilers doesn't require too many tags beyond the tag in the thread's title, with the exception of an off-topic spoiler.

 

[Baysiderulez]

So would a spoiler also be having your timeline theory in your signature? I mean unless you are aware of plot details you wouldn't know where certain games are placed? If all games were considered spoilers I do think those would have to go or be placed in spoiler tags as well.

I mean it may be common knowledge for those who have played MM to know its a direct sequal, but if you havent played either game you would have no way of knowing.

I think we leave spoilers to only mention the last game for each current generation console, as well as games that have yet to be released. So TP, ST, and SS.

 

[PhantomTriforce]

I think we leave spoilers to only mention the last game for each current generation console, as well as games that have yet to be released. So TP, ST, and SS.

Here's a potential problem. One, TP is technically not one of the games from the current generation console, because currently, the Wii is the current console, and TP is a GameCube game. And even if we are talking about TP for the Wii, TP will not need to have anymore spoiler tags because SS would be the latest game? And once OoT 3D gets released, ST would not need to have spoiler tags anymore either? This could be too early for such games.

However, I still stand by my opinion that there should be spoiler tags necessary for text that reveals details about any game's ending, including ALttP or LA.

 

[Michael Heide]

I mean it may be common knowledge for those who have played MM to know its a direct sequal, but if you havent played either game you would have no way of knowing.

Yeah, but if you haven't played either game, would you really care that it is a sequel to begin with, much less to which game it is a sequel? Knowing that a game happens after another game (without being given any reasons for that placement) isn't exactly spoiling things.

 

[Baysiderulez]

Here's a potential problem. One, TP is technically not one of the games from the current generation console, because currently, the Wii is the current console, and TP is a GameCube game. And even if we are talking about TP for the Wii, TP will not need to have anymore spoiler tags because SS would be the latest game? And once OoT 3D gets released, ST would not need to have spoiler tags anymore either? This could be too early for such games.

However, I still stand by my opinion that there should be spoiler tags necessary for text that reveals details about any game's ending, including ALttP or LA.

OR it could just be known that if you are on a Zelda forum, and in a thread about a certain game, it is likely spoilers will be present. And have a user beware clause.

Either EVERYTHING is a spoiler, or nothing is, is what I am getting from people. And in order to infract or warn people for it, you need to have a strict definition of what is and what isn't a spoiler. Otherwise you will have very upset members if they are trying to obey and follow the rules and still get infraction because there is a discrepancy.

I've seen things people say about OoT and time travel labeled as spoilers. In all honesty the mentioning of Time Travel is in the damn title. So should details about traveling back and forth in time be considered a spoiler? Some would say yes. I personally say no, because it is to be expected.

Yeah, but if you haven't played either game, would you really care that it is a sequel to begin with, much less to which game it is a sequel? Knowing that a game happens after another game (without being given any reasons for that placement) isn't exactly spoiling things.

I beg to differ. Basically because, if I say In OoT at the end of the game link goes back in time allowing for a split timeline theory to be possible. And then publish something that appears that way in my sig. Haven't I just released end game details? According to mods with a very strict definition of Spoilers, I have. and therefore someone with a time line theory w/ a split in their signature would be in violation of spoiling just as much as someone who says "when peace returns to Hyrule it will be time to say goodbye"

Simple way to solve it is... Let's be a Forum that doesn't care about spoilers. Mods don't need to moderate, and if the intent of spoiling is to troll another member then we have already an infraction set up for the violation.

 

[DuckNoises]

Either EVERYTHING is a spoiler, or nothing is, is what I am getting from people. And in order to infract or warn people for it, you need to have a strict definition of what is and what isn't a spoiler. Otherwise you will have very upset members if they are trying to obey and follow the rules and still get infraction because there is a discrepancy.

The way I organize them still has the occasional spoiler tag, but not so much that I've been handing out warnings left and right. The rules I proposed are the rules I've been using up to this point, and I think I've only sent out four or five warnings/PMs regarding spoilers. Generally, I just slap a "Spoiler" Prefix on the thread's title, but if it jumps all around with "off-topic" spoilers, then I may put in a warning. If it's going to come up again, that's the only spoiler tag necessary for that topic, and it can continue to be discussed with no further spoiler tags.

I beg to differ. Basically because, if I say In OoT at the end of the game link goes back in time allowing for a split timeline theory to be possible. And then publish something that appears that way in my sig. Haven't I just released end game details? According to mods with a very strict definition of Spoilers, I have. and therefore someone with a time line theory w/ a split in their signature would be in violation of spoiling just as much as someone who says "when peace returns to Hyrule it will be time to say goodbye"

Well, first and foremost, they'd have to understand Mosley's timeline cipher. Second, a timeline theory in their signature does not necessarily violate spoilers, as most of it falls under the jurisdiction of opinion, and most of the games can be interpreted in any order they want. You do make a solid point, though.

Simple way to solve it is... Let's be a Forum that doesn't care about spoilers. Mods don't need to moderate, and if the intent of spoiling is to troll another member then we have already an infraction set up for the violation.

The infraction isn't often enforced, as it's really more of a deterrent. The point is that spoilers can ruin games for people, and I think it's best if we take a few extra seconds per thread to ensure that it doesn't happen. Most people won't have to do anything beyond what they're already doing; some may require taking a little extra time, but once they take the initiative, everything pertaining to the same topic won't need to be further covered by spoiler tags.

 

[Locke]

MM's manual just about confirms it takes place after OoT, WW's manual specifically tells the legend of the HoT. I stand by my definition of spoiler: "...anything contained on the game's box or in its manual is fair game, as that information is supposed to be read before starting the game anyway." Both the manuals and the developers make it clear that the games are meant to be played knowing at least what their prequels were. If people know what the split in the timelines means, then they already know a great deal about OoT and it wouldn't be a spoiler. If they don't, then they can find out for themselves how OoT connects to both MM and WW, but since it's already stated in the manuals there are no MM or WW spoilers involved, and there's no hint of how they relate to OoT, so there's no OoT spoilers involved either.

I'm considering the pros and cons of enforcing the rule for all spoilers of "off-topic" games (games other than the one(s) the thread is about) in addition to all spoilers regarding games with their own forum (SS currently). It might be difficult to moderate and there would probably be some confusion, but I disagree with both extremes in this case so I'm trying to find the best compromise. People avoiding spoilers for older games should just stay away from threads about them, and they should feel safe reading other threads. Brand-new games like SS are more exciting and many people will want to talk about it while avoiding spoilers. For this reason, I don't think the same rule for older games should apply, and it should not be assumed that people reading threads in that forum are predisposed to reading spoilers.
Then the issue would be with World of Zelda, which contains threads that may encompass many games, implicitly or explicitly. I haven't put much thought into that, so I'll save it for later.

 

[Djinn]

MM's manual just about confirms it takes place after OoT, WW's manual specifically tells the legend of the HoT. I stand by my definition of spoiler: "...anything contained on the game's box or in its manual is fair game, as that information is supposed to be read before starting the game anyway." Both the manuals and the developers make it clear that the games are meant to be played knowing at least what their prequels were. If people know what the split in the timelines means, then they already know a great deal about OoT and it wouldn't be a spoiler. If they don't, then they can find out for themselves how OoT connects to both MM and WW, but since it's already stated in the manuals there are no MM or WW spoilers involved, and there's no hint of how they relate to OoT, so there's no OoT spoilers involved either.

That may be true, but WW coming after OoT and MC coming before FSA, you have to play those games some and actually discover some key story points before you can tell where those go. Major WW and MC spoiler.

Spoiler

You have to go to Hyrule castle under the ocean first before you know where WW takes place. And you have to forge the four sword before it's understood where MC goes.

All these methods seem far too extreme just to make sure someone who has not played a game learn something they did not want to. There is a large difference between a well meaning courtesy towards younger members and flat out bending over backwards just to be completely sure no real information is leaked in the smallest way on the off chance that some hypothetical individual has not yet played or heard anything on a game that might be fifteen years old.

This is just going to cause people to argue back and forth that the post they made is related to the topic while others that are nitpicky enough will argue that it is not and violates the rules. Some people will consider it separate even if there is a connection to the original subject. Or if there is not enough of a connection. This will create trouble. In any event, all the mods should be prepared to have to deal with a huge influx of reported posts by those who believe that they have violated spoiler rules, and complaint filled pm's from those who believe that they have not and perfectly followed the rules accordingly at the same time.

When a game is old enough that all the spoiler information is common in conversation among all members and is divulged in the first paragraph of the wikipedia article about it, then a spoiler rule should not be enforced. Saying that spoiler information covers any and all plot details of every title regardless of age is asking a lot. This would transform almost any casual conversation about ALTTP or WW into nothing but a series of spoiler tags in fear of violating some rule, or secondary rule such as changing the spoiler subject. Or worse yet, there simply will be no more casual conversation on ALTTP or WW any longer. Rules like this will only cause so much annoyance and anger that it will only drive people to move over to other forums where there are more lenient rules and can openly talk about games without fear of being punished for doing so.