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
The point is to split Natter into enough threads so that a person with a life could keep up with one or two and skip or skim the rest.
And make those of us with no life have our heads explode.
Seriously -- I'm going to own up to having been an opponent of the initial natter thread, and then within short order being the most prolific natterer. But you know what? Natter means more traffic. Because nattering still does happen (and will continue to) in every other thread.
Moving makeup over here, and TV over there will make more volume, as opposed to about the same amount better organized. I think the organic nature of natter demands it.
Also, I don't like to think too hard when I natter.
I like the way that one topic in Natter leads to another and another and another. I'm interested in lots of things. I don't want to have to subscribe to six different threads to talk about all of them.
Anyway, here's what was said usefully before the conversation devolved:
Main casting and things that are easily stumbled across in the media are fine. Promos and interviews mostly fine. Special guest should be white fonted. Themes OK, exact plot points and widgets not.
I think the sticky point is going to be on what makes up an "exact" plot point.
(And I'm anti-thread proliferation, especially Natter. Thread-drift is what makes Natter interesting, and keeps it going, which won't work if people are constantly saying "but maybe we should take this over to Shoe Natter.")
Unfortunately, a summary of that thread would be "We kind of started thinking maybe there should be a clear policy but got sidetracked by nattering about Plei's boobs and then we moved here."
Yep. For instance, looking at the thread, post 1 just mentions vague interviews as being ok, while post 9 expands it to information that's 'widely available'. (I'm already on record as preferring the former def'n. IMO a heavy spoiler remains a heavy spoiler if Joss himself takes out an ad in the NYTimes to announce it - it's a matter of content, not availability.)
Further thought: different people are going to have different spoilage tolerances. Can I suggest that anything whitefonted in the spoiler lite threads also carries some comment to give people an idea of to what the spoiler relates (eg 'casting spoiler')?
Main casting and things that are easily stumbled across in the media are fine. Promos and interviews mostly fine. Special guest should be white fonted. Themes OK, exact plot points and widgets not.
Hmm. So, exact plot points for me would be "Xander leaves Anya at the alter" or "Buffy swan-dives". "Riley returns at some point" would be white fontable, "Riley and his wife Sam annoy the crap outta us and make Buffy re-examine her life for the millionth time" would be a no-no.
ETA: Although I'm cool with a Warning Before the Whitefont policy.
ITA, Plei. (Hee, that rhymes.)
Ok so it is pretty clear that everyone but me is anti-thread drift (or at least an overwhelming majority).
But I still think the tape fairly thread is a good idea. It keeps it out of beep me or press (where it does not belong) and it does not get buried in natter.
I'm a bit baffled by the change to Spoiler Lite. TV Guide descriptions very very often include eaxct plot points, so do many articles.
I'm for a tape fairy thread. Stash it on the right in the administrative section.
