Lets stop this SPOILERs stuff
Ed Krol
too much on this news group. In the grand scheme of mystery
solving a SPOILER is a spoiler when you have figured something
out before the appropriate time in the story (The same as
blurting out he answer when watching Jeopardy with a bunch of
people - antisocial behavior).
In this group the show has so much going on and it is so confusing
that no one can figure things out. Most of the group is conjecture
on how the clues might relate. In this case a theory on what is going
on is not a spoiler. So, I noticed the chess piece moved is not
a spoiler. Nor since most people seem to do a bit of research
should a spoiler be something which is commonly available (e.g
SPOILER
^L
Beware of SPOILER....
^L
I read in TV guide blah blah blah....
Certainly not a spoiler. I think we should define spoilers as inside
information which is likely not available to the general public.
Like, you were sitting on an airplane next to Lynch and he said
blah blah....
Linda Birmingham
In article <1991Jan22.1...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, kr...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Ed
Krol) says:
>
>Lets decide on a meaning for spoilers because it is used far
>too much on this news group. In the grand scheme of mystery
>solving a SPOILER is a spoiler when you have figured something
>out before the appropriate time in the story (The same as
>blurting out he answer when watching Jeopardy with a bunch of
>people - antisocial behavior).
>Certainly not a spoiler. I think we should define spoilers as inside
>information which is likely not available to the general public.
>Like, you were sitting on an airplane next to Lynch and he said
>blah blah....
I was under the impression we were supposed to use this when
discussing what happened because not everyone was using the
North American distribution and therefore European viewers were
getting the information before they saw the show. I vaguely
remember someone requesting this quite some time ago. Plus I
do remember a very angry exchange between someone who posted WKLP
without using *spoiler* and another reader had not seen the show
yet. So obviously some people want this distinction made.
Would putting the episode date eliminate this problem?
Linda
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"MADE FOR TELEVISION THAT'S WHAT THAT IS. MADE FOR TELEVISION"
"It was more of a surprise to discover how different Canadians were -
they were so polite!" J. Irving, A Prayer for Owen Meany
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Dawson
>>Would putting the episode date eliminate this problem?
>No, but the episode number.....I understand that the
>episodes come in batches of 8 or 12; perhaps some numbering
>like `batch 3 episode 4' (or whatever) might be appropriate.
>However, the dates would be sufficient if someone can
>produce a list of all the dates where you have had TP
>episodes in the US!
Here are the episodes broadcast to date in USA, collected from the indis-
pensible summaries posted by Edwin Nomura (eno...@sdcc13.ucsd.edu):
Lynch/Frost
episode # Date(s) shown in USA Twin Peaks time
---------- -------------------- ------------------------
1000 04/08/90, 08/05/90 24 Feb (Friday)
1001 04/12/90, 08/11/90 25 Feb (Saturday)
1002 04/19/90, 08/18/90 Saturday eve. (cont.)
1003 04/26/90, 08/28/90 27 Feb (Monday)
1004 05/03/90, 09/01/90 28 Feb (Tuesday)
1005 05/10/90, 09/08/90 01 Mar (Wednesday)
1006 05/17/90, 09/08/90 Wednesday eve. (cont.)
1007 05/24/90, 09/15/90 Wednesday eve. (cont.)
2001 09/30/90 03 Mar (Friday) (cont.) [sic]
2002 10/06/90 04 Mar (Saturday)
2003 10/13/90 05 Mar (Sunday)
2004 10/20/90 06 Mar (Monday)
2005 10/27/90 07 Mar (Tuesday)
2006 11/03/90 08 Mar (Wednesday)
2007 11/10/90 09 Mar (Thursday)
2008 11/17/90 10 Mar (Friday)
2009 12/01/90 11 Mar (Saturday)
2010 12/08/90 15 Mar (Wednesday)
2011 12/15/90 16 Mar (Thursday)
2012 01/12/91 17 Mar (Friday)
2013 01/19/91 18 Mar (Saturday)
--
-->Keith
daw...@epps.kodak.com
"Behind your efforts let there be found your efforts."
John Burns
>>too much on this news group.
>
Look, everyone knows when the show's on, and everyone wants to talk about
it. There's not a chance in hell David Lynch is going to confide in any
of us. I say, if someone wants to read alt.tv.twin-peaks before seeing
that week's episode, caveat lector.
John A. Burns (bu...@da.harvard.edu, bu...@huche1.bitnet)
"She's filled with secrets."
Kristoffer H. Holm
>I was under the impression we were supposed to use [spoiler] when
>discussing what happened because not everyone was using the
>North American distribution and therefore European viewers were
>getting the information before they saw the show. I vaguely
>remember someone requesting this quite some time ago. Plus I
>do remember a very angry exchange between someone who posted WKLP
>without using *spoiler* and another reader had not seen the show
>yet. So obviously some people want this distinction made.
This is absolutely right. Here in Denmark we have only seen
11 episodes of Twin Peaks.
>Would putting the episode date eliminate this problem?
No, but the episode number.....I understand that the
episodes come in batches of 8 or 12; perhaps some numbering
like `batch 3 episode 4' (or whatever) might be appropriate.
However, the dates would be sufficient if someone can
produce a list of all the dates where you have had TP
episodes in the US!
Anyway, for a european like me that knows almost nothing
about life in little towns at the US/Canadian border on the
other side of the earth, each TP episode is an interesting
event!
--
Kristoffer H{\o}gsbro Holm <kr...@diku.dk>
Computer Science Dept. (TOPPS group), University of Copenhagen
Universitetsparken 1, DK-2100 Copenhagen {\O} +45 31396466
Scott Amspoker
>Linda writes:
>> Plus I
>>do remember a very angry exchange between someone who posted WKLP
>>without using *spoiler* and another reader had not seen the show
>>yet. So obviously some people want this distinction made.
>
>This is absolutely right. Here in Denmark we have only seen
>11 episodes of Twin Peaks.
This is not a flame but why do you even bother reading this group?
Practically all threads in this group will reveal something about
last week's episode or some recent episode. Everything would have
to be marked as a spoiler and you would have to skip through
practically all articles. I have no easy answers to the lag time
between USA and Europe but marking everything as spoilers doesn't
seem like a practical approach.
--
Scott Amspoker |
Basis International, Albuquerque, NM | This space available
(505) 345-5232 |
unmvax.cs.unm.edu!bbx!bbxsda!scott |
David Ernest Coufal
>pensible summaries posted by Edwin Nomura (eno...@sdcc13.ucsd.edu):
I'm not sure these Twin Peaks Times are correct.
>Lynch/Frost
>episode # Date(s) shown in USA Twin Peaks time
>---------- -------------------- ------------------------
>1000 04/08/90, 08/05/90 24 Feb (Friday)
>1001 04/12/90, 08/11/90 25 Feb (Saturday)
>1002 04/19/90, 08/18/90 Saturday eve. (cont.)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
should be:26 Feb (Sunday)
>1003 04/26/90, 08/28/90 27 Feb (Monday)
>1004 05/03/90, 09/01/90 28 Feb (Tuesday)
>1005 05/10/90, 09/08/90 01 Mar (Wednesday)
>1006 05/17/90, 09/08/90 Wednesday eve. (cont.)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
should be:02 Mar (Thursday)
>1007 05/24/90, 09/15/90 Wednesday eve. (cont.)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
should be:Thursday eve. (cont.)
>2001 09/30/90 03 Mar (Friday) (cont.) [sic]
>2002 10/06/90 04 Mar (Saturday)
>2003 10/13/90 05 Mar (Sunday)
>2004 10/20/90 06 Mar (Monday)
>2005 10/27/90 07 Mar (Tuesday)
>2006 11/03/90 08 Mar (Wednesday)
>2007 11/10/90 09 Mar (Thursday)
>2008 11/17/90 10 Mar (Friday)
>2009 12/01/90 11 Mar (Saturday)
>2010 12/08/90 15 Mar (Wednesday)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
should be:14 Mar (Tuesday)
>2011 12/15/90 16 Mar (Thursday)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
should be:15 Mar (Wednesday)
>2012 01/12/91 17 Mar (Friday)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
should be:16 Mar (Thursday)
>2013 01/19/91 18 Mar (Saturday)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
should be:17 Mar (Friday)
>-->Keith
>daw...@epps.kodak.com
Seeing as how this is pretty unreadable, I'll redo it below:
Lynch/Frost
episode # Date(s) shown in USA Twin Peaks time
---------- -------------------- ------------------------
1000 04/08/90, 08/05/90 24 Feb (Friday) +
1001 04/12/90, 08/11/90 25 Feb (Saturday)
1002 04/19/90, 08/18/90 26 Feb (Sunday)
1003 04/26/90, 08/28/90 27 Feb (Monday)
1004 05/03/90, 09/01/90 28 Feb (Tuesday)
1005 05/10/90, 09/08/90 01 Mar (Wednesday)
1006 05/17/90, 09/08/90 02 Mar (Thursday)
1007 05/24/90, 09/15/90 Thursday eve. (cont.)
2001 09/30/90 03 Mar (Friday)
2002 10/06/90 04 Mar (Saturday)
2003 10/13/90 05 Mar (Sunday)
2004 10/20/90 06 Mar (Monday)
2005 10/27/90 07 Mar (Tuesday)
2006 11/03/90 08 Mar (Wednesday)
2007 11/10/90 09 Mar (Thursday)
2008 11/17/90 10 Mar (Friday)
2009 12/01/90 11 Mar (Saturday)
2010 12/08/90 14 Mar (Tuesday) *
2011 12/15/90 15 Mar (Wednesday)
2012 01/12/91 16 Mar (Thursday)
2013 01/19/91 17 Mar (Friday)
+ Note. The show is set in 1989 . Only the diary is set in 1990.
* Nitpicky note. I'm not certain of this. It all depends on
what they meant by "Three Days Later." By most accounts,
however, one day later from a Saturday is a Sunday, two days
later is a Monday, and three days later is a Tuesday.
I know I've opened a whole can of worms with this correction,
so I would like to mention the obvious: this is not writ in
stone, and I would appreciate feedback/comments on my version
of the dates.
--
-- David E. Coufal -- cou...@piglet.caltech.edu
"One time I removed all the hair from a mouse
with Nair-Hair just to see what it looked like.
And it looked beautiful." - David K. Lynch
Sanjiv Sarwate
This group does have worldwide distribution, and it is (ostensibly) a forum
for TP afficinados (you can tell its a cult intellectual thing cause I used
"affinicados" instead of "fans" or "groupies"
).
Now, is someone willing to create something like alt.tv.twin-peaks.europe?
Or how about alt.tv.twin-peaks.hate-james
Or alt.tv.twin-peaks.hate-donna
Or how about just regard the first solution as perhaps the best.
It seems stupid to put them down just because they haven't seen the episodes
yet.
--
Sanjiv Sarwate "But what is truth?
sar...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Is truth unchanging law?
BITNET: SAN...@UIUCVMD.BITNET We both have truths.
Are mine the same as yours?"
cd ~rmaeda/TwinPeaks
>>Here are the episodes broadcast to date in USA, collected from the indis-
>>pensible summaries posted by Edwin Nomura (eno...@sdcc13.ucsd.edu):
>
>I'm not sure these Twin Peaks Times are correct.
>
>>Lynch/Frost
>>episode # Date(s) shown in USA Twin Peaks time
>>---------- -------------------- ------------------------
>>1000 04/08/90, 08/05/90 24 Feb (Friday)
>>1001 04/12/90, 08/11/90 25 Feb (Saturday)
>>1002 04/19/90, 08/18/90 Saturday eve. (cont.)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> should be:26 Feb (Sunday)
The episode started on the Sat, but as you will see in the timeline,
it does take into account that the new day has started.
>>1003 04/26/90, 08/28/90 27 Feb (Monday)
>>1004 05/03/90, 09/01/90 28 Feb (Tuesday)
>>1005 05/10/90, 09/08/90 01 Mar (Wednesday)
>>1006 05/17/90, 09/08/90 Wednesday eve. (cont.) ****
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The episode started on the Wed, but as you will see in the timeline,
it does take into account that the new day has started.
> should be:02 Mar (Thursday)
>>1007 05/24/90, 09/15/90 Wednesday eve. (cont.) ++++
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> should be:Thursday eve. (cont.)
It is!
>
>>2001 09/30/90 03 Mar (Friday) (cont.) [sic]
Huh?
>>2002 10/06/90 04 Mar (Saturday)
>>2003 10/13/90 05 Mar (Sunday)
>>2004 10/20/90 06 Mar (Monday)
>>2005 10/27/90 07 Mar (Tuesday)
>>2006 11/03/90 08 Mar (Wednesday)
>>2007 11/10/90 09 Mar (Thursday)
>>2008 11/17/90 10 Mar (Friday)
>>2009 12/01/90 11 Mar (Saturday)
>>2010 12/08/90 15 Mar (Wednesday)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> should be:14 Mar (Tuesday)
Since the previous episode (2009) went through the night and into the next day,
I took "Three days later" to mean 3 days from Sunday, hence Wednesday.
>>2011 12/15/90 16 Mar (Thursday)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> should be:15 Mar (Wednesday)
I believe 16 Mar is correct.
>>2012 01/12/91 17 Mar (Friday)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> should be:16 Mar (Thursday)
I believe 17 Mar is correct.
>>2013 01/19/91 18 Mar (Saturday)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> should be:17 Mar (Friday)
I believe 18 Mar is correct, since this makes it the Saturday and none
of the teenagers are in school - though Invitation to Love is on. Maybe
it's on everyday? Remember when Shelley turned it off on a Sunday in 1002?
Though it sounded to me like a commercial...
Thanks to David E. Coufal for all those transcriptions!
Edwin Nomura
Please mail replies to me at:
eno...@ucsd.edu or
eno...@sdcc13.ucsd.edu
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hit 'n' now, I just gotta fill up some space
here since the stupid server won't accept
this article cause I don't have enough
new text here...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please mail replies to me at:
eno...@ucsd.edu or
eno...@sdcc13.ucsd.edu
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Krol
news group threads are fluff about the show (e.g. Agent cooper
on letterman, gif files, sound files, ....). The other
80% is a discussion of the nuances of the show. That would
mean that 80% of the articles could be marked spoiler under
a most general definition. Therefor, the word loses all meaning.
The problem of various countries being current at various
points in the series is a problem. Any kind of dating is sort of
hopeless. E.g. Disscussions of the White Lodge trancend episodes
back to the Briggs/Son discussion in the diner I think. What
episode is it a spoiler for? Yet the discussion still goes on today
with relevance to current US episodes.
I personally don't read alt.tv.twin-peaks until I have watched
the current episode. Its a pain but I treat everything in there as
a spoiler.
Robert Slugg
I post only to USA sites, saves spoilers and bandwidth!
Lars Brenk
>
>I post only to USA sites, saves spoilers and bandwidth!
Why can I read this in Denmark then ???
--
*****************************************************************
** Siri, The angriest dog in the Universe. **
** AUC, Aalborg, Denmark. **
*****************************************************************
Johnny Zweig
>In article <23...@beguine.UUCP> rsl...@uncmed.med.unc.edu (Robert Slugg) writes:
>>
>>I post only to USA sites, saves spoilers and bandwidth!
>Why can I read this in Denmark then ???
Because neither your posting nor Robert's has a Distribution: field in the
header. Shame, shame.