Technically I've heard of everyone, because I get to see the user lists and the registration emails.

On the flip side if they post where I can't see them they are invisible to me, but they have an impact on the board. I feel the same way about donating money, although I think the amount has squat to do with it.

They've made their persistent existence known in some way other than using bandwidth.

Sean, technically I could do numbers like the ones you mention, but there'd probably be a disconnect because unique visitors can be a muddier number than the ones we track explicitly.

When we were coming up with plans to discipline people (if necessary) some of these same fears were brought up. At the time it was, what if there are a bunch of new people who want to take over the board and try to get existing users banned or suspended?

We worked around that issue and luckily it hasn't happened. I'm pretty sure it's going to be the same thing with the voting issue.

If a lurker falls in the forest, do they make a post?

If a lurker falls in the forest, do they make a post?

Probably, but it would look like "QLKEN@!#$%KLNwlknffaalekqower~{:LKJHYGTRowfuck."

Because of the broken fingers and whatnot.

Technically I've heard of everyone, because I get to see the user lists and the registration emails.

Of course, I meant a generic "one," not you in particular.

Welcome, Ice. Thanks for posting.

So how about this for a poll, using tickyboxes check one:

The board is perfect as it is. Don't change a thing.

Splitting up the volume with multiple show threads dilutes the community.

Splitting up the volume with multiple show threads enhances the community.

I suspect it's too late, but I've been a Buffista since season 6 sometime (yes, I count the years that way, shaddap) and I couldn't choose any of those answers. I'd like a little more choice. Like...

Choose 1:

The board works well enough, now.

The board needs work.

AND

Choose 1

The board would work just as well with a few new threads.

The board would work just as well with more than a few new threads (but still a controlled number of them)

The board would work just as well with many new threads.

The board would work just as poorly with a few new threads.

The board would work just as poorly with more than a few new threads (but still a controlled number of them)

The board would work just as poorly with many new threads.

At various times tonight, Denise, bon bon, and brenda have all spoken for me, and I don't necessarily think they're agreeing with each other, so I'ma go watch TV.

At various times tonight, Denise, bon bon, and brenda have all spoken for me, and I don't necessarily think they're agreeing with each other, so I'ma go watch TV.

Cindy, is that also a ticky box?

So how about this for a poll, using tickyboxes check one:

The board is perfect as it is. Don't change a thing.

Splitting up the volume with multiple show threads dilutes the community.

Splitting up the volume with multiple show threads enhances the community.

This seems like it's addressing two separate things. 1) The board works fine, yes or no and 2) the voter's philosophy as regards thread proliferation.

Seems like what you're shooting for is:

Will splitting up the volume with multiple show threads negatively affect your use/enjoyment of b.org, yes or no?

Or similar.

Will splitting up the volume with multiple show threads negatively affect your use/enjoyment of b.org, yes or no?

Something like that.

We're trying to formulate a poll now and I think a simple question that leads to clarity on the main issue is the most useful.

But we're also looking at all the poll questions posited today and we could do a more in depth poll that gave a bigger picture of how people see the board and community.

I think there's value in that - but I would prefer to just establish that main question.

Because if we see it as a problem then people will weigh their votes differently.

I think what we need to move towards is people voting No on thread creation if they don't plan to participate in it.

Instead of thinking, "Well, I'm not going to use it but it doesn't strain our servers so why not let them have what they want."

Instead of thinking, "Well, I'm not going to use it but it doesn't strain our servers so why not let them have what they want."

Okay, but my own position is more complex than that. I don't particularly like scrolling past whitefont or discussions of shows I don't watch in Natter, but I can deal with it. I like the dedicated TV threads for the shows I watch, but there's only one TV specific thread...Heroes...that I subscribe to. (Granted, I haven't posted there in a while, but that's because I didn't manage to catch, like, the last five eps of the season.) But even that's cool, because I can either ignore the posts piling up or unsubscribe until I have caught up and not have to worry about being inadvertently spoiled.

So, I don't much plan on using TV-specific threads, but I like them. So should I vote "No"? And if I didn't even subscribe to the threads, but liked that they weren't in threads that I do read, do I still vote "No"? Because I can see that I'm benefiting in some way from their creation, even if I don't use them myself.

So perhaps it shouldn't be "Vote against threads if you're not gonna use them", but "Do you want the threads? If so, will you use them?"

And then count all the yeses and nos and if more nos than yeses, no threads.