"Amazing Spider-Man" #700 Ending Leaks Online

**CBR News** · 12-14-2012, 02:46 PM

Following the leak of the major spoiler from Dan Slott's "Amazing Spider-Man" #698, advance photos from a print copy of "Amazing Spider-Man" #700 have appeared online that spoil the crux of Slott's "Dying Wish" arc.

Full article here.

**Kymeric** · 12-14-2012, 02:50 PM

I clicked on that link expecting to read the spoilers -.-

**ShaggyB** · 12-14-2012, 03:06 PM

Ladies and gents remember we arent discussing the spoilers youve read online. Correct me if im wrong but the CBR article does not mention what is on the pages leaked. That means you arent free to mention them either. Again we are banning anyone who spoils what happens. We arent discussing your feelings on the spoilers either. This article is about the leak. If you feel the need to discuss the leak and what it means for marvel / the industry or whether you are cool with leaks or not, feel free. Discussing something the article specifically says it is avoiding telling you is off limits.

**Mister Mets** · 12-14-2012, 03:07 PM

To reiterate points made on a similar thread about Amazing Spider-Man #698, this thread isn't a place to discuss the spoiler. The purpose is to discuss a problem in the industry of spoilers getting out early.

If you post spoilers from Amazing Spider-Man #700, you will be banned for two weeks.

And if you make a public post asking someone to PM you the spoilers, we'll consider it the same as if you're spamming the board.

**Karl Cook** · 12-14-2012, 03:08 PM

For all the genuine guys and gals on here that actually enjoy Amazing Spider-Man, I hope you avoid the spoilers and enjoy/not enjoy the story as it's meant to be interpreted.
It really annoys me when people have to race to spoil things for other people simply because they can. Sorry, just a bugbear of mine.

**DimitriKalashnikov** · 12-14-2012, 03:09 PM

Just a warning. Do not search for ANYTHING Spider-Man related if you don't want to be spoiled.

**Ziza9** · 12-14-2012, 03:09 PM

I'm left wondering then, why did the article have a spoiler tag? That's what actually drew me to CBR from FB. (To get hits to the site?) I respect that the site is keeping it under wraps, but I thought we were going to get the leak since the top of the article had a big bold spoiler on top. Oh well, off to search for it.

**Karl Cook** · 12-14-2012, 03:10 PM

Originally Posted by Mister Mets

To reiterate points made on a similar thread about Amazing Spider-Man #698, this thread isn't a place to discuss the spoiler. The purpose is to discuss a problem in the industry of spoilers getting out early.

If you post spoilers from Amazing Spider-Man #700, you will be banned for two weeks.

And if you make a public post asking someone to PM you the spoilers, we'll consider it the same as if you're spamming the board.

I support this approach. The fans should be able to avoid spoilers as much as possible.
Spoilers suck!

**ShaggyB** · 12-14-2012, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by Ziza9

I'm left wondering then, why did the article have a spoiler tag? That's what actually drew me to CBR from FB. (To get hits to the site?) I respect that the site is keeping it under wraps, but I thought we were going to get the leak since the top of the article had a big bold spoiler on top. Oh well, off to search for it.

I wondered that as well as I dont see a hint to the spoilers in what they wrote in the article. It was probably a move for the reader to assure those reading the article that no spoiler was coming.

**CyberHubbs** · 12-14-2012, 03:12 PM

Superior Spider-Man is spoilers:

Batman.

end of spoilers

There, I said it. It's out there now.

**Lars C** · 12-14-2012, 03:12 PM

Sometimes spoilers can save money!

**CyberHubbs** · 12-14-2012, 03:13 PM

Freedom of speech!

**ShaggyB** · 12-14-2012, 03:13 PM

Originally Posted by CyberHubbs

Superior Spider-Man is spoilers:

Batman.

end of spoilers

There, I said it. It's out there now.

lol: you for got the GD curse. I approve of this message regardless.

**oldforce** · 12-14-2012, 03:17 PM

On topic then: Spoilers are fine, there's nothing wrong with them. If someone is interested in a product, they have every right to know as much as they want to know about that product. Certainly people should have the freedom to know as little as possible, too, but I find this to be a passive consumptive position, not one I'm willing to participate in. I don't find spoilers (really, just "information") harm my enjoyment of something I was already going to enjoy, and they help me determine something I won't.

I would give an example, but I'm interested in expressing this opinion and having it heard.