Okay, I am posting this here and in Bureaucracy and then I am not darkening the door of either of these threads again for a few days. Trying to have the same conversation in three different places is making me nuts. You have a technical question, you can find me in Board or via email.

First off. Stop. Panicking.

I am allowed to panic. That's my job as your webhost. I am supposed to freak out when you're consuming too many resources. You are not allowed to panic. I think it's somewhere in your TOS. Look at the fine print. People with the servers are allowed to panic. No server, no panic.

Next, can we please only discuss changes that have a snowball's chance in hell of a) getting voted in and b) not adversely impacting the entire community? I felt like we were on the right track for a while there discussing what threads could be combined or eliminated with as little pain as possible and then *bam*.

There are 34 open threads right now. There has to be some reasonable way to compromise and combine/delete some of those. Note use of the word reasonable.

Think about the way that you use this board and ways that you can use fewer resources. Set your posts per page higher. Click on "Read New" instead of going back to the main page between threads [It cuts one connection out of the equation]. Respond to several people in one post. Stop talking about closing Bitches/Natter.

If people have technical expertise or know someone who has technical expertise, come forward. ita's passing around copies of the code to anyone who wants it so we can get some second opinions.

I feel like in 24 hours we have gone from one extreme [let's add threads!] to the other [let's drive away half our core community!] and neither is helping the situation. There is some middle ground there that will allow these discussions to be productive. Can we please get back to that?

But that doesn't make your point stupid.

Thanks, babe.

I was just getting concerned because I didn't want people to panic over my suggestion.

Sean, you might want to visit Bitches, where people are not panicking but worried.

I'll stop in as soon as I get to work, and try to explain that it was an inspired, but utterly idiotic idea.

The different between Fan Fiction and the other threads is that no fic is actually posted there. That makes it work safe, and it means that no one has to page through posts and posts of fic in order to get to discussion. I know this comes up every time, and most people don't post in any of those threads, but Fan Fiction was opened for a different purpose.

I'm sorry, Dana. I did think of that having to page through posts, but thought that most of us will have to do that in combined show threads, or to talk about show X in Natter, so that didn't sway me. However, I didn't think of the work-safe issue. Certainly, the content of a lot of fic isn't going to be work safe, so KAT - please disregard that section of my suggestion, and adjust my total from 10 to 9.

eta... I struck "Fan Fiction" from that suggestion and adjusted the totals in the earlier post. Thanks for the heads up, Dana.

Kristen, I don't think anyone's panicking.

No, that's not right: I feel like the very possibility of closing two high-volume threads has caused a bit of an overreaction so that few people are hearing what I'm saying.

Nobody really believed Sean and I were proposing closing Natter and Bitches, right? But it was put out there because it's necessary to put all options on the table for consolidation in order to identify which ones won't work.

And the idea then resulted in Cindy's comprehensive list of options in post 3132. Yay, Cindy!

If we want to get serious about cutting, start with the stuff that seems extraneous. But it looks to me like folks aren't willing to even lose that.

Burrell, that's manifestly not what I said. Or it should have been manifest if it wasn't. I'm more than happy to cut what's extraneous, particularly if it will make a difference.

But -- and I'm sorry to keep beating this equine (it's not dead yet, I think) -- just because those of us who are in here talking think Natter and Bitches are the most important part of the board doesn't make it necessarily so for the 980 other members of the board. I don't think it's fair to them to categorically state that any thread is off-limits for closure at this stage. We should be open to all options until we find one that works best for the entire community, not just the vocal posters in the Natter and Bitches threads.

And, since I don't want to be misunderstood on this: I don't want to close either thread. I just believe it's important to keep all our options open while we figure out how to keep things moving come October 1.

And now I'm gonna shut up and get some work done. Days like this it's clear this place is gonna make me crazy.

Why do we think Oct. 1 is doomsday? Just b/c it's the Angel premiere and [casting addition] factor?

t edit That's a serious question, not sarcastic. Because it doesn't seem like the Angel premiere will blow us out of the water, especially with no more Buffy and, therefore, the loss of high-volume posting in that thread.

Just b/c it's the Angel premiere and [casting addition] factor?

I think that's the reason, yes. The post-premiere posting levels are pretty much guaranteed to be the highest they've been since we moved to Fangeek.

Because a) Kristen said so, and she's in charge of panic and b) yeah -- presumed uptick in traffic when there's a show actually on the air.

If we're honestly talking worst case scenarios, why not toss out just shutting the whole thing down? It seems only marginally more extreme than shutting down the core threads, but I don't think it's been brought up yet.

Or switching the code to something completely different, or rewriting it from the ground up?

There's lots of not!panic that's not been mentioned.

But we always handled an Angel thread before AND a Buffy thread.

I honestly don't think that the Angel S5 thread will be higher-volume than last season's Angel and Buffy combined.

Or am I really naive?