Off the top of my head? Movies, foamies, general TV, and Alias.

But it seems like I'm trying to change something a lot of you don't think needs changing. I'm stepping out of this discussion for now, cos I don't want to seem like a dead-horse-beater when really what I am is fascinated by process and community dynamics.

I think there should and will be a Foamies thread when the time comes, which I think is not quite yet. I think the general TV thread idea has only just been proposed, and you know most things take time to percolate around here. I did not know an Alias thread had been proposed. And I'll grant you the general movies thread.

I think that Movies and Politics are the only ones that have been shot down. And with politics, it was proposed, but very few people seemed to be actually interested in posting there.

My real objection to the voting process is that it maybe too rigid and not responsive to circumstance. Maybe we need to have a combination system. If we can't seem to reach a clear consensus on a new thread in a day, then it moves to a vote.

A Politics thread might have its fans, but I very rarely went into the Politics areas of TT. The arguments got a little strident there. I'd trust most of the Buffistas in a political argument in a F2F, but I'd rather not have an open-mike free-for-all here.

I like the idea of a politics thread, and like spoiler threads and mature themed threads you enter at your own "peril". If there's ever a clear, practical way to determine new threads I would vote for it.

A Politics thread might have its fans, but I very rarely went into the Politics areas of TT.

Hmm... this is interesting. So then, connie, do you see us as a replacement for TT?

do you see us as a replacement for TT

Inasmuch as we wanted a place on the Internet to talk to each other about Buffy/Angel/etc., yes. We may be reinventing Table Talk as we go, vis a vis fairly intelligent, sophisticated folk of like minds finding various topics to talk about. I have no problems with it, so long as the Stompies and the server are up to the work load. What makes the system work around here is we've got people who generously donate their time to herd us away from the cliffs and make sure we don't devolve into pointless bickering.

I think that, with the politics thread, it was mostly proposed by people who didn't want politics being discussed in natter. I haven't seen much call for a politics thread by the people who generally tend to discuss politics. (Personally, I'm against a politics thread, because I don't totally see how "politics" can be seperated from general discussions of news or whatever.)

About the "is Schmoker really mieskie"? issue -- ita asked:

John, why don't you send an e-mail?

Well, I did. I won't tell you what the answer is, because I sent it as a private Buffista citizen, not as a stompy foot.

I have reminded him yet again, in my reply to his reply, that the question has been asked here and that he hasn't answered it.

Here are some possible outcomes:

1. He says "no"
2. He says "yes"
3. He prevaricates
4. He prevaricates, but extra proof is forthcoming from evidence in the email itself

What are our feelings on those options?

My thoughts are as follows: I don't hate the "let sleeping dogs lie" thing; but I do hate the idea that someone's ignoring a ban and (possibly) dropping clues about his real identity because he thinks it's funny that he's "beaten" the ban. I think the honourable thing to do, if mieskie wants to come back before his ban is up, would be to write to the admins, ask politely, and let the community decide if we would allow it.

I mean imagine this exchange:

SCHMOKER: "...maybe she had a bad experience on an online message board".

SOME HAPLESS POSTER: "We had an experience like that. There was this mieskie guy and he was really rude and upset people and we had to ban him."

SCHMOKER: "Oh really? Sounds terrible. Anyone play Yahoo Canasta by the way?"

I personally think he's ignoring the question because he thinks it's a moot/irrelevant point. Does he HAVE to prove he's not who some people think he is? This is beginning to smack of "Are you now or have you ever been someone we banned?" Refusing to answer was the honorable course then.