i read some of swag's posts in the tv show discussion only thread and i would be amazed if he hadn't either read the books or at least some spoilers on the internet. or possibly he's psychic.

As a book reader who has 0 posts in the TV only thread I think this is the simplest, best and most obvious solution. People who have posted in the book thread have no legitimate reason to say anything in the other one.

You guys should make this a rule because it's tiring when half of all posts in those threads are bitching about this same issue.

You are essentially the only book reader who thinks he's just good at watching TV. Everyone else thinks he's spoiled.

It isn't because a couple accurate guesses either, lots of people in that thread have made accurate guesses. It's the kind of other info he includes that make every book reader but you think he's been spoiled.

That and the fact that he's posted in the spoilers thread several times. It's essentially impossible to go into that thread and not read spoilers.

I think it will, though.

Right now, some of the most frequent posters in the TV only thread are book readers.

They stay within the boundaries a lot of the time, but then there will be some sort of speculation that appears to be too difficult for them to keep their mouths shut and they say something they shouldn't. Happens over and over again.

If they were all just not allowed to post in there then those situations wouldn't arise.

If they still do it despite the rules, ban them.

Sure, but the same problems are happening right now that were happening on the first page of the first thread 2+ years ago.

I'm not sure if this is the first ATF thread on this topic as I don't really read this forum but it seems moderation in the GOT threads is something that gets brought up basically every week and it's just going around in circles.

So, why not just try an additional thread or keep book readers out of the main thread? If it doesn't work, go back to how things are.

I don't think he's spoiled but it's not a strong opinion. There's only a few people who are 100% convinced he's spoiled. I figured I should put in my opinion because it differed from the majority.

I think the majority are of the opinion he's probably, at least partially, spoiled but shouldn't be banned for it.

I'd say he may have caught a couple spoilers online, including in the book thread, but isn't a reader who is intentionally pretending otherwise.

He "speculated" correctly about a very specific important event. If he's spoiled of course he's pretending otherwise.

Right, I just thought the Arya post was the final straw. My bad

TT, generally speaking, if you guys set a rule about book thread, tv thread or even go as far as creating a 3rd thread ( idk why you would) if you are clear what the purposes and rules are of each, you should go ahead ban violators without apprehension.

Pm the specifics. I thought people were saying its the none spoilery stuff that was more telling. Like worge and being curious about Dorne.

Yeah, no worries — if a rule is agreed upon, it would be enforced.

Regarding a third thread, I posted it more as a hypothetical solution; I don't actually think it's a good idea, because where would it end? Do you give everyone their own thread, so they can talk to themselves? Two threads is ample, sorry for any ambiguity in my earlier posts which might have suggested I felt otherwise.

I thought, while it is a bit silly, having 3 threads has merit.

Book spoilers
No book spoilers
No book readers, period.

It should be noted that currently it's the first 2. It's fine to discuss changing "no book spoilers" to "no book readers" but this wasn't the original intent (dids). Book readers haven't been out of line to post there(obv some have been out of line, though).

Is it worth a poll/discussion thread in OOTV do you think with the options

Status Quo (cross posting allowed explicit spoilers deleted)

Cross posting allowed, but no book clarification type stuff even in spoiler tags

Three threads; TV only, spoilerific and mix one like the current tv thread

Pick a side, all spoiler thread posters exiled from TV thread

Mccarthyism style, anyone remotely suspected of being a book reader banned

Other


maybe with the pros and cons of each

So what do we do about book readers that don't admit to being book readers?

we ban em like that little swag bitch

With more mods, the 3rd thread idea seems more viable.

how about a fourth thread for non-show watchers? i just want to comment based on previews and will watch this season later

That's funny? I guess you're just trolling with your 152 posts in the TV thread and 252 posts in the book thread. Clearly you are part of the problem.

I've never read either thread but I'm certainly OK with punishing the book readers regardless of the circumstances. ****ing nerds.

If they are going to add in a 4th, can we get a GoT LC thread too? ****, how about a whole subforum? I guarantee it'd get more posts than some of these other forums on here.

So you decide the best course of action is to post about something you have no idea what you're talking about?

You know nothing fredd bird.

Fair enough.

It's a bizarre solution when a both much simpler AND better option exists, one which would reduce post reports and other problems substantially and immediately.

The rest of your post (snipped) is irrelevant as it pertains to the discussion - yes, the show is popular, yes people are going to be jackasses, it's the internet.

As was already noted, a book reader posts something and it often devolves into discussion of the spoilerish-ness of the post and that wrecks the discussion. Yeah it would be a little bit of a shame if posters like senorkeed who just want to snark with the TV crowd and can color within the lines are relegated to the (also high traffic) book thread, but sometimes a wall is the best solution even if it's inelegant.

You can post a poll, but if book readers outnumber the TV only crowd - no clue but it's probably close - then they're just going to vote to have access because why would they vote to restrict themselves? How about just reading this thread and noting the totally valid complaints.

It's also ineloquent but non-book readers could also just put anyone who has posted in the book thread on ignore.

And ftr, I will not be posting in the show only thread anymore.

FWIW there are other posters in that thread that appear to me to be book readers posting stuff as speculation that I cant really see how they got there. Typically those people try to go out of their way to explain how they got there as if to prove they are better at watching tv than everybody else. Two in particular come to mind.

Swag is a good/entertaining poster. I lurk/post in a lot of the threads he posts in and while he can sometimes be kind of a db, I have never thought spoiler, and that includes threads where spoilers are easily/readily available.

Also, I had a post deleted in the GoT thread by the same mod that banned Swag. The reason was that it included book information, when all the post included was something that was specifically stated in that weeks episode. So maybe he just sucks at modding...

Let Swag post.

swag has clearly been spoilered, has posted in the book readers thread, and posts in the non-book readers thread "speculations" which are anything but... and we should let him post? cuz hes a cool guy? sweet life pretending to not have read a book and getting all your guesses right so your e-peen will shine bright. mad swag, yo. mad swag.

Thank you. And violation of such a declaration should be met with a ban

I thought this is the benefit of having book readers active in the thread. We can silently report suspicious posts. I thought its one of the reasons that it's one of the only (relatively) safe places to discuss GoT online.

I'm providing an objective opinion. You thought it was relevant to mention his 3 posts in the book thread (ZOMG 3 ****ING POSTS), 2 of which were when he first got into GoT last July 2012 and the other a meme-style, hotlinked image in Sept. 2012. I just thought it would be relevant to mention all of your posts in both threads for perspective, not even mentioning that you were specifically called out earlier in the thread for being a persistent violator. Do I really need to read the threads to know what I'm talking about?