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: Jon B, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych, msbelle, shrift, Dana, Laura
Stompy Emerita: ita, DXMachina
all I hear this summer is not that the board does not work for a subcommunity, but rather that the board does not work for individuals for individual reasons. When that is the case, I'm not sure if there's a solution. Actually, I know there is not an answer to this. If natter or bitches does not work for people the solution is just not more threads, it's modifying what you expect from the board.
But how many individuals does it take to become a subcommunity? I heard a lot of people expressing similar concerns about the all-or-nothing approach of bucket threads, more than I thought, actually. I expected to be a minority on the board and
had
modified my expectations accordingly--decided I couldn't post in Boxed Set. But during the SPN conversation, many other people said that high volume, be it in Natter or in a bucket thread, kept them from posting about TV.
Don't take away my bucket!
You have no idea how much I've been wanting to name the next lightbulbs this.
I say that we shouldn't consider delayed viewing.
I ask again--why not consider a solution that takes that into consideration? The only one I can think of is single-thread-per-show, but why are you discarding it?
Maybe my thread for each day of the week thing isn't so ridiculous? I mean - if the problem is that you can't watch Monday's tv 'til Wednesday then that would solve the problem.
It's different if you have 4 conflicting Monday shows that you're trying to watch and not be spoiled for.
I ask again--why not consider a solution that takes that into consideration?
because each person will have different delayed needs, unless you want to do a blanket thing like whitefont for 24 hours.
Question: do people think anything was learned from the Experimental Threads?
I just don't see this. It's true that I don't like the bucket threads as proposed, and that I suggested delaying the vote, but if no one else had agreed with me, I would have dropped it, but other people did, including people who want the bucket threads. It was not tied to any one specific issue; I suggested it because I honestly felt that waiting was for the best of the board as a community, for a variety of reasons.
I don't doubt at all that that is why you suggested it. And, yes, I realize that people that do want bucket threads supported the delay. But I think that they supported it because the anti-new thread people were upset, and they didn't want to see them upset. Which is fine. All I'm trying to say is that I don't see multiple smaller threads taking away any of that initial upset.
But how many individuals does it take to become a subcommunity? I heard a lot of people expressing similar concerns about the all-or-nothing approach of bucket threads, more than I thought, actually
It's not a matter of numbers. If the common interest is "this thread does not work for me" then that is not a subcommunity, that's a common complaint. If the same group of people had a single solution that worked for all of them, then that might be a subcommunity.
because each person will have different delayed needs, unless you want to do a blanket thing like whitefont for 24 hours.
But if there's a thread per show, just don't go into that thread till you've watched the episode--it solves the problem quite precisely. You can discuss
everything
you're caught up on without seeing any discussion of what you haven't.
Which is why I don't understand tossing it out without discussion.
