Mean3400.38 Maximum10024 Minimum53 Standard Deviation3775.954178 Mode10003

Because it doesn't seem like there has been less posting in Natter since the birth of the TTT thread or the music thread.

I post in TTT, I don't post in Natter. TTT has my great interest; Natter, I can't keep up enough to be involved. My point, and I might not have one, is that .. Yeah, I don't have one. But new threads might not mean less posting in Natter. In fact, it might mean more. People who don't usually post there might venture forth if a massive subject (like TTT) was taken out and there was more room for other things that interested them.

I think new threads will definitely have a net increase effect. Both from people who'd not have posted otherwise, and from people who now post in the perceived space left over. We've never really had an indication that ANYTHING slows natter.

We've never really had an indication that ANYTHING slows natter.

HA! And oh so true.

Followed by a pondering of what would slow Natter? Perhaps the Bubonic Plague?

No, people would be comparing pustule size and home remedies.

Postulating on Pustules could be the first title!

My sense is PMM, who initially asked for the Alias thread, isn't an Alias watcher. Is that true, Plei?

That'd be the case. But I want to start watching it, and I'm having a hard time avoiding the white font. So, I'm hella spoiled.

Followed by a pondering of what would slow Natter? Perhaps the Bubonic Plague?

I was thinking about this in the car on the way home. I need a life. Anyhow, WX was essential like the old typewriter QWERTY. It forced a certain speed limitation through its own ferwonkiness. Here, it's all Dvorak, built for speed. It's been faster in terms of postcount since day one.

Here, you post, and thank the lord, go back to the post you last read, where at WX, you had to actually go back yourself. Posting took longer. There were fewer crossposts.

I think the flavour of Natter has changed in large part because there's so much cross talk that it becomes easier to just chatter than to make a long, thought out post, which is more likely to get lost than before.

So, unless you want to introduce artificial post slowing means (which I FUCKING HATE, FTR), ain't no way of slowing that puppy down.

I think.

I'm just pulling this out of my ass, but I think I'm right. So there.

But is this true? Because it doesn't seem like there has been less posting in Natter since the birth of the TTT thread or the music thread.

What everybody else said about natter. Natter fills the vacuum. I think that if a new thread interests a person, and they have to drop another thread to make time for it, they'll drop the thread that's lowest on their interest list. I never used to skip in the show threads. Now I do, so I have time to read TTT. People will shift around.

And I think Plei's right about the speed thing.

So - in addition to process set a maximum number of threads? Cause everything I hear seems to argue for that.

And in terms of what it takes to start a thread, I'd agree that it should be more than a simple majority.

I don't think we need to have a set maximum number of threads. I also don't think that we really know enough at this point to be able to say what an ideal number would be. I think that if we've got a good process for figuring out when to start a thread, that ought to be enough to keep things under control.