I think we have to wait until after the current vote has ended, but I'll second in advance.

Sean, by that criteria Firefly never would have gotten a thread.

Yeah, I know. Like I said, I'm willing to write in an exception for Tim and Joss, but my inclination is to start without it.

I just think there's been a little too much OOOH, SHINY NEW SHOW, and already, we've started to see shows where the second seson, even if good, just doesn't generate the excited volume of the first season.

I think in the long run, this may rein in some of the One Season Wonder effect, that I think threatens to leave us with a bunch of half-cared about bastard threads. I'm curious to see if the second season of Lost will continue to generate the heat it did last season.

If it doesn't fly, it doesn't fly. It's not actually a personal crusade of mine, just an attempt at a possibly helpful suggestion.

I'll say this again in Lightbulbs if need be, but I definitely think it's possible for a new show to be disruptively popular, and there's nothing wrong with a thread that turns out to be of short-term usefulness. IMO.

My gut says this feels like making a rule for the sake of making a rule. Generally, I second most things that are proposed, even when I know I will vote against them. I second them just so that the conversation will be time-limited, but in this case, I need some convincing to even do that, Sean, because I can't see where the potential pros of this will outweigh the potential cons.

Well, I must away to work with ND now, so I will expound later.

Like I said, just a suggestion.

Out of curiosity, was Atlantic Canadians closed, or was it disappeared? I don't know if there's a need, but I just realized that Veronica Mars and Lost air on the same Canadian network here, so if they do show VM during the regular season we probably won't be seeing it at the same time as all of y'all.

You said we could close it, so we did.

Sue "Bureaucracy 3: Oh, so now you want to be part of the SOLUTION?" Apr 7, 2005 11:49:38 am PDT

We could reopen it if needs be.

We could reopen it if needs be.

That's really what I was wondering in case there's a need. And I'm really just thinking out loud. I don't know if there's any other Canadians who watch VM who'd use the thread besides Megan and myself, and we usually just chat about it over email anyway.

Okay, back from work.

The reason I suggest requiring a waiting period some time into a second season is not just to have rules for rules sake, but to avoid having these one season show bastards. It feels to me like everything new and shiny, people want to make into a new thread, but that for a lot of those, the shiny wears off, even before the first season is over. Discussion on The OC seemed to really peter off when the second season rolled around, and by the end, most of the initial viewers seemed to think it less shiny (but that's an outsider/lurker's impression, that could be very wrong).

Really, I'm just trying to find a compromise between proliferation, and creating a new thread for every new shiny lying by the side of the road. I think the suggestion is just asking for some proof of legs on a discussion before having it break off into a new thread.

Also, lest Eddie (I think it was...?) get the wrong impression, I'm not suggesting that just because a discussion has legs, that it automatically get its own thread. I'm also not married to the "2x10" threshold either, if that particular part of the proposal is causing it to sound more rules-for-rules sake.

I don't know, it's just a suggestion, not an issue or something. I'm trying to please all the people all the time. But I don't think it's unreasonable to ask that a discussion prove itself beyond just one season and a summer before handing it a thread of its own.

Anyway, so far I've received one of the four seconds it's going to require to even come up for a vote. Have we ever decided how long you have to collect four seconds? I misforget.

I second. And disagree for reasons I'm happy to share in lightbulb if it gets to that.