I don't think that thread description pertains to tv discussion in general - I don't think Natter was ever NAFDA anyway, so it was really about not discussing current Buffy-verse stuff.
Sooner or later, you're gonna want it. And the second — the second — that happens, you know I'll be there. I'll slip in, have myself a real good day.
Spike ,'Conversations with Dead People'
Bureaucracy 3: Oh, so now you want to be part of the SOLUTION?
A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.
Current Stompy Feet: ita, Jon B, DXMachina, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych
brenda m - Sep 28, 2004 11:59:43 am PDT #2254 of 10001
If you're going through hell/keep on going/don't slow down/keep your fear from showing/you might be gone/'fore the devil even knows you're there
DXMachina - Sep 28, 2004 12:04:21 pm PDT #2255 of 10001
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
The Natter description hasn't changed since Natter 1. It was about not posting NAFDA Mutant Enemy stuff in the thread. It should probably be changed.
So I did.
§ ita § - Sep 28, 2004 12:11:49 pm PDT #2256 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Wait, so NAFDA TV talk is allowed in Natter now? What about all those shows (North Shore, or stuff that isn't even crap) that we'd been not spoiling for the UnAmericans?
sumi - Sep 28, 2004 12:13:28 pm PDT #2257 of 10001
Art Crawl!!!
But we'd been whitefonting -- I had understood that we're not even to whitefont shows that can't be discussed in non-Nafda threads.
I mean, I figure we were following a 2-week rule or something so that if for some reason we wanted to discuss a North Shore from the beginning of the summer -- we could do it. (But why would we ever want to do that?)
§ ita § - Sep 28, 2004 12:15:23 pm PDT #2258 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
True, it was only half NAFDA. Unless we discard the gesture, I think we should codify it. Right now, it's set at free for all.
Jesse - Sep 28, 2004 12:16:16 pm PDT #2259 of 10001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
IIRC, we were urging people not to even whitefont Buffy (etc.) stuff in Natter, because that's just too mean.
§ ita § - Sep 28, 2004 12:16:43 pm PDT #2260 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
serial:
I figure we were following a 2-week rule or something so that if for some reason we wanted to discuss a North Shore from the beginning of the summer -- we could do it.
This is why we need codify, methinks. I was following a season-long rule, becaust it'll take about that long for the rest of the world to catch up on the Momoa-goodness.
Jesse - Sep 28, 2004 12:18:49 pm PDT #2261 of 10001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
I am very pro-whitefont, for several reasons. It makes skimming past easier for people who aren't interested, and is kinder for people who are interested, but haven't seen the show yet.
brenda m - Sep 28, 2004 12:20:22 pm PDT #2262 of 10001
If you're going through hell/keep on going/don't slow down/keep your fear from showing/you might be gone/'fore the devil even knows you're there
I think the whitefonting in Natter has been working pretty well, sans codification, but I've got no argument if people want to set it out more specifically.
sumi - Sep 28, 2004 12:20:49 pm PDT #2263 of 10001
Art Crawl!!!
Well, there were all these people who don't get a blank screen when stuff is whitefonted -- which is why we really had to stop the whitefont, isn't it?