Most of us are willing to use the term cow as representative of a bovine of any gender, though.
I am not, except for Polter-Cow, because his name is cool.
Wash: I mean, I'm the one she swore to love, honor and obey. Mal: Listen... She swore to obey? Wash: Well, no, not...
'War Stories'
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
Topic!Cindy - May 28, 2004 2:35:12 am PDT #942 of 10001
What is even happening?
§ ita § - May 28, 2004 4:47:42 am PDT #943 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
It was good enough for Pylea.
Topic!Cindy - May 28, 2004 4:48:55 am PDT #944 of 10001
What is even happening?
See what I mean?
Gris - May 28, 2004 6:16:25 am PDT #945 of 10001
Hey. New board.
t natter some more
Stop insulting Pylea. I love those episodes. Fred + dance of Joy + general fun all around.
t /natter
Nobody answered my original question. How much posting interest is necessary to make a new thread worthwhile, and what are the drawbacks that you (we) care enough about to make it even a posable question?
Dana - May 28, 2004 6:18:14 am PDT #946 of 10001
I'm terrifically busy with my ennui.
Nobody answered my original question.
Probably because no one knows. We're making it up as we go along.
msbelle - May 28, 2004 6:26:24 am PDT #947 of 10001
I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb
well not really. A new thread would need a vote, no?
What does it take to have a vote pass? simple majority or those who vote?
Jesse - May 28, 2004 6:28:41 am PDT #948 of 10001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
Simple majority of those who vote, as long as 42 or more people vote.
Dana - May 28, 2004 6:30:07 am PDT #949 of 10001
I'm terrifically busy with my ennui.
Yeah, but he used the word "worthwhile". That implies more to me than just "how do we get a new thread created?".
msbelle - May 28, 2004 6:40:28 am PDT #950 of 10001
I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb
ok true, but we as a group are never gonna agree on what is worthwhile.
Gris - May 28, 2004 6:43:08 am PDT #951 of 10001
Hey. New board.
That implies more to me than just "how do we get a new thread created?".
Definitely. I don't want to start a new thread if the "community" as a whole will then grumble about it, even if I can get a vote pushed through.
I'm just curious about what the people of the buffista community feel would make a thread that added to the completeness of what we have. Specifically: if you, as a person, aren't interested in a thread, then how many of your fellow buffistas do you think SHOULD be interested in the thread for you to consider it worth it's own separate world, that might become a separate 'sub-community', eventually?
I mean, I, personally, don't watch The O.C. (yet), but I would be perfectly happy for there to be an O.C. thread, as I think at least 15 or 20 regular buffistas would probably post in there, and enjoy the discussion. I don't think a Law and Order thread, however, would make much sense, because I don't think there're that many buffistas that follow new developments (though i may be wrong, and a bureaucracy discussion about such a thread might prove me wrong, I dunno)
Also, how do you as people decide whether a new thread would be a good thing? What do you weigh against the idea of "people would enjoy posting in this thread"? Is it the fear of many new members, the fear of technical problems with the server, the annoyance of more threads on your homepage, or what?
(P.S. Is there somewhere I can donate to the b.org server fund? I'd love to, it seems entirely worth it.)