No, I mean, for some, seeing flaws in films pointed out can ruin a film, so a spoiler tag could be useful.

I think the fact that the "just what do you think you're doing dave "trim isn't mentioned anywhere else makes this trim pretty interesting. Overall, the livejournal analysis is fairly detailed and while detail isn't an indicator of validity, it does mean he put some effort into it, which makes me think he's being genuine (even if mistaken). Because of this, I would like to know more about this specific trim and I mentioned it because perhaps someone else might know more, but I doubt it.

Spaced Ranger said:

If you're referring to SilverWook's Announcement: New plot spoiler policy *please read* thread, note that applies to "With new Star Wars films coming out, the issue of spoilers has become relevant again." [emphasis mine]
I think 2001:ASO is safely out of that category.

.

Previously, it looked like you were citing the Underview article as not acknowledging a cut that you had found -- "the underview site doesn't mention the 'just what do you think you're doing, dave' edit/trim". I didn't know you were thinking of the LiveJournal article, which is the remembrance it's author without other corroboration -- "... as far as I can tell with the powers of Google, has never been described anywhere. By anybody."

Of course, people who closely worked with Kubrick, like Special Effects SupervisorDoug Trumbull, would know. Too bad, when he was ramping up a presentation, the plug was pulled on that whole thing.