I've brought up the concern in the past with Cool

spoilers are basically impossible to moderate correctly but less people will complain about it being overbearing than under used. It slows down conversation as the trade off
-v

I feel that certain boards could do with less spoiler moderation, like /jp/. Also if one goes down the path of beaing overbearing with spoiler moderation it'll just become an annoying ordeal of what constitutes spoiling or not for which you may as well put black boxes around everything related to media discussion, and nobody likes annoying black boxes.

Not entirely related to this thread, and my opinion doesn't necessarily speak for the rest of the mods, but my personal belief is that if you click a spoiler box you should be prepared for the possibility of being spoiled.

Like with this pasta here >>>/qa/57364, the last line is a spoiler and was properly spoiled by the poster, but was reported for being a spoiler. It is a bit of a non-sequitur spoiler, but I don't think that it should be deleted since the poster did have the courtesy to at least mark the spoiler as such. (it's usually not...)

>>4921
Should antagonism be encouraged?

>>4922
I personally wouldn't encourage it, and I think that there's probably separate levels of antagonism that should be taken into consideration. Like if someone were talking about an entirely separate anime's spoilers and intentionally threw in other shows' spoilers in the mix to deliberately make sure that people hover over them then that would probably be delete-worthy. However a more ominous spoiler like in that post is a bit of a messier issue in which the box is there and out of place in the post, signalling something's off with it and more trying to be a trick for the careless rather than a deliberate malicious attempt at spoiling as many people as possible.

As long as a fair portion of people see these tricks as playful fun and enjoy them it's hard to simply come down on them and declare they're no longer allowed to partake in it.

Also my beliefs don't represent the rest of the moderation as cool would rather that kind of funposting be deleted on sight.

Something else to consider on spoilers, this MAD spoils the twist on Megumin's character (and possibly many posts people may make about Megumin) for those who've never seen Konosuba. At the same time I think that most people here would probably object to having spoilers covering posts talking about her. With this in mind I think the attitude towards spoilers should first consider the knowledge of the average poster on the site. Then after that maybe any extreme spoilers should be hidden, but not everything about a series. For example in the Steins Gate thread I think that the spoiling went a bit overboard to the point that most everything involving the series was spoiled. Discussion becomes annoying when covered in black boxes, and when overdone may make people feel discouraged about the prospects of discussing specific series among each. It may give off the impression that they're in a minority among posters for knowing about a series, therefore leading to the thought that discussing it isn't the best idea. \

I think all that really needed to be spoilered in those posts was
>tootaaroo girl dies

The other spoilers are heavily reliant on knowing the context for them, and wouldn't really be obvious for anyone without prior-knowledge of the series. Like Okabe being mind-broken, it's only a spoiler if you know why he's mind-broken, just knowing that at one point he was does not allow you to understand why he was.

>>4917
>Take >>>/jp/7948 as an example. Steins;Gate came out a decade ago. That's more than plenty of time to watch or read it, I don't think people should have to wonder if it's correct to put spoilers on something that came out that long ago. And nobody likes a thread full of black boxes, that's why /cry/ was made.

I made that thread myself and I brought it up with Cool/yotgo personally on IRC. I felt like that was very unnecessary as well. I think he's already exaggerating a bit about the Higurashi spoilers, let alone stuff that pretty much everyone has read/watched by now.

Another thing I forgot to mention. I remember having used imageboards to discuss anime/manga/VNs and having to be wary of people posting spoilers casually or in ways such as >>>/qa/57364, and being able to mostly navigate my way through discussions while avoiding being spoiled. Maybe I'm biased because of that, but I'm not sure why it needs to be assumed that others are incapable of doing the same. Moderation of spoilers can be handy for making sure people don't get screwed on a major plot twist/death that some person may have posted unthinkingly, but I think babying posters by spoiling everything is the wrong way to approach discussion.

I understand how it can seem overbearing at times, but I also don't see any issue with refraining from posting anything particularly intriguing about an episode or show before others have had a chance to watch it.
I don't know what to do with situations like the Steins;gate one, which is why it became a black box mess. Someone called out that people should be using spoilers, so I took action. You can say Steins;gate is a major otaku culture thing and everyone should know it, but how am I or users to know which material has been grandfathered in? Is someone going to assemble a list?
I refrained from posting pictures like this Mewkledreamy one because while it's not story related at all, seeing the characters this way for the first time is pretty amazing and should be experienced "live" instead of as an imageboard reply. I'll post them normally in a week or so

>>4927
For what it's worth. I think that the only part of the discussion the one reply was telling the madoka poster to spoil was what I pointed out in >>4924. Nothing else really warranted black boxes.

If it's about a series I haven't checked out very far yet, I just don't read the thread unless it's just some basic comments.

>>4922
Telling someone to kill themselves over pasta is a lot more antagonistic than pasta with correctly tagged spoilers, more so given those spoilers are normally never tagged.
>>4923
I agree, it was signposted.
>>4926
I thought about bringing up that you can hide a thread or close the tab and go watch the show in question, but it would've become more of a rant at that point.
>>4927
It's one thing to hold back for a few days on posting something spoilery like that cap, which shows something notable, but the pic in >>>/qa/57258 is not spoilery and it doesn't rob anyone of the experience of watching it. It's also a completely different thing to publicly complain about spoilers of a decade-old work and having a moderator swoop in to correct it. That generates disruptive, boring posts. Being new or never having bothered to watch it should not give one the right to call for moderation of others, especially when any sort of in-depth discussion necessitates spoilers.
This is on top of having to consider the usage of and reading spoiler tags being a bit of a bother.
>>4929
Exactly.

There isn't really any objective criteria to determine what is and isn't okay to spoil, because it's impossible to set a cutoff date or compile a "watch all of these before posting" list etc. What I do, and would generally expect from other users as common courtesy, is: use spoiler tags for major reveals and plot twists, no matter how old or popular, and for plot developments in currently airing series.

At the same time I don't think people should be required to be mindful of spoilers of all kinds, at all times. If there's something you're really looking forward to and want to experience with zero previous knowledge but haven't been able to get to it yet for whatever reason, it's also your own responsibility to take anti-spoiler measures. You can hide threads with a single click, and it's easy to set up word filters.

Btw, I wouldn't post it myself because I find it to be in poor taste, but I would assume everyone has already seen that Clannad pasta since it's been around forever.