Twin Peaks Usenet Archive
Subject: Re: DON'T TELL ME....
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Michelle L Zafron)
Date: 1990-11-10, 11:09
In article <email@example.com>, horny@ucscl.UCSC.EDU (Michael Kaye) writes...
> >In article <9011091111.AA00174@t6g.cs.man.ac.uk> firstname.lastname@example.org writes:
>> >>We in th UK are only into the 3rd episode of Twin Peaks,and reading that
>> >>ABC in the US is about to show the conclusion episode,wouldn't it be
>> >>thoughtful if any one from the US writing about the solution put this
>> >>fact in the title.
>> >>We here in Manchester think that it is BIG ED (of the GAS FARM) but who
>> >>knows ?? Don't ruin it for us !!!
> >No comment about Big Ed. :)
> >I would be willing to comply with this request if I knew everyone else
> >would, but I know they won't. If you don't want it spoiled you probably
> >shouldn't read this group. Someone will spoil it. You must have been
> >reading heaps of spoilers already about the show... Most of the discussion
> >here is about things that happen after the first 3 shows. We can't put a
> >spoiler warning on everything we post.
There is nothing unreasonable about his request, really. It is a very simple
thing to put "spoiler" in the title or to indicate that we are discussing some-
thing as major as the answer to WKLP. In fact, there are probably U.S. viewers
who will not have seen the 11/10 episode on Saturday, who will have taped it and
would appreciate not having the story spoiled for them. We go out of our way to
put spoilers on the previews, does it not seem logical to do so for this?
As for your first statement, if we all took that attitude: well I would, but no
one else will...where would we be? Actually, he didn't specifically mention
"spoilers". He asked for us to indicate that we would be discussing the answer
to WKLP in the subject line. That is what the subject line is there for isn't
it? So it doesn't seem too terribly difficult to comply with his request to me.