It started with 24. I edited to 12 to shorten the process, but 48 or 60 would work for me, too. The basic idea is just creating clear standards for when a thread is started, because the current process seems clumsy and arbitrary to me.

For the record, shrift's opinion matters. Sorry about the insanity, welcome to the club.

I'm another one who likes the idea that a significant majority should approve the new thread.

Majority of what, though? Surely not registered Buffistas. People who vote? Then I'd say we should have a couple of days of voting, anyway.

The board, for me, doesn't have to meet all my needs. But obviously for others it's not the same.

This is definitely an issue for me. Before TT went pay, I spent maybe 75% of my time on MWT and 25% on the Buffy threads. Afterward, I never felt completely at home in any of the MWT successor boards, so I ended up spending about 90% of my time over here.

I'm with Susan-- although I used to post in WX TV. Part of it, I'm sure, just is growing pains and things are different now.

I think we should consider adding new threads for other things maybe when/if a significant part of the ME stable is off the air?

Ah, see this is interesting. If this is the only place where you read and post, then your experience will be significantly different. The question to me doesn't seem to be new thread or not, but what we want buffistas.org to be in terms of a community?

And perhaps this is the crux of most of the recent discussions.

But as it pertains to thread proliferation, do we want buffistas.org to be a TT replication or not? Could we even sustain it if we were?

edited because of the damn homonym issue.

I think we should consider adding new threads for other things maybe when/if a significant part of the ME stable is off the air?

Do you mean not add anything else until then, or consider broader diversion at that time?

Jesse, consider 12 and 24 starting points -- they were just numbers I thought of. Anything shy of 120 total is fine by me.

Do you mean not add anything else until then, or consider broader diversion at that time?

I guess what I mean is that we should consider perhaps adding broad threads as put to a vote, or admin-type threads, like foamies before that. There are so many core people against adding threads that I hate to do it.

If we have no more mutant enemy shows, then we could have broader consideration of what sort of things we want to be know for.

Kat-- I think you are right about the question really being "what sort of board do we want to be." All I really know is that natter used to really, really meet my needs for conversation, and now it doesn't. Perhaps I changed. Perhaps the natter climate with the skipping and skimming has changed. Perhaps the world climate is such that we don't want to talk about deep things.

All I really know, and I have been feeling a lot better about it lately, is that I used to talk lots and lots-- I was one of the top natter posters when John was doing his tallies. Now I feel a bit like I am butting in to natter. As I said, I feel a lot better about it since our last talk about this, and I speak more often.

Majority of what, though? Surely not registered Buffistas. People who vote? Then I'd say we should have a couple of days of voting, anyway.

Could we take a poll on how many people would bother taking a vote on a thread they don't care about. I think a majority of people who vote would end up being in favor. There needs to be a better way to assess interest, i.e. at least a certain number of people have to vote for the thread.

100 people need to vote? 2/3 pro? Something like that?