Also? I know you're anti-hobbit, but any thoughts on adding an item asking Buffistas about rolling LotR into the Movies thread?

The size of LotR is almost the same as Movies, and will likely maintain that volume for another year (until some time after the RotK DVDs and suchlike are out). Dumping all that into movies is going to be a pain for the movie fans who don't care about LotR, and it's going to be a pain for those of us who are LotR fans who don't hang out in movies.

Sang Sacre

Well, there are still a few of us around who post there, and it's hardly a drain on resources. My main objection to it's going is that there is no alternative place to post the kind of material that goes into Sang Sacre. It's not fic, it's not show posting, it's not natter, it's not topic oriented. You can't fold it into anything else. As it stands, I don't think it's hurting anybody, so I'd just as soon leave it.

So you want discussions of old episodes of Angel to take place in Unamericans?

I think the thought is that those discussions will move into the main Angel topic, and that unAmericans who can't go into that topic can discuss the Angel that they have seen in unAmericans.

I'm having cut and paste issues on this computer. So please bear with me.

I have seen Plei's point and I'm totally good with that. I'll change it when I can cut and paste.

LOTR - I am virulently antihobbit. I'm fine with closing LOTR entirely. Also, I'm happy with it where it is. I've seen about equal amounts of people saying, yep, can it or GOD KNOW, especially with the DVD coming and the third. I'm happy to put it on and see how it gets voted.

Ditto with Sang Sacre. Don't hang out there and therefore dunno. But I can ballot it and see what happens.

This is true, but Americans don't have to go through Customs to get into the UnAmerican thread.

So you want discussions of old episodes of Angel to take place in Unamericans?

No I am saying there are still plenty of threads in which to discuss old episodes of Buffy and Angel, and at least one is UnAmerican safe for both shows. Buffy will lose its NAFDA standing, and be safe for everyone as well. There are places for everyone to get together without the risk of being spoiled.

I ask that only half-seriously; I still think you're being a little too gung ho on consolidation. I think we should take this more slowly.

I don't think cutting redundancies is fast. I think it's prudent. We have a Buffy thread. We have UnAmericans. We have Natter. Those three threads are safe for everyone who wants to talk non-current season ME. We have Atlantic Canadians. We have Angel. We have Bitches. Those are also ME show forums. Previously is a redundancy.

Natter fills the (currently) NAFDA thread, when there's nothing to talk about. But if people start bringing their old episode discussions there, then there's something to talk about.

This...

As it stands, I don't think it's hurting anybody, so I'd just as soon leave it.

and this...

I still think you're being a little too gung ho on consolidation. I think we should take this more slowly.

Are very important points. Even if we need to remove threads eventually to help solve the problem, getting rid of threads that are getting extremely minimal posts is going to have ZERO net effect on the problem, and will only serve to upset the people who do want to keep those threads around, even if they almost never get posts.

It's not a drain, I think we should keep it.

I think the thought is that those discussions will move into the main Angel topic, and that unAmericans who can't go into that topic can discuss the Angel that they have seen in unAmericans.

The UnAmericans have seen the old episodes of Angel. When Buffy went into syndication, some of them expressed the desire to discuss them as they were shown, and they couldn't do that if they were discussed in the NAFDA thread. That's why we created the (then) BuffyBackstory thread.

The size of LotR is almost the same as Movies, and will likely maintain that volume for another year (until some time after the RotK DVDs and suchlike are out). Dumping all that into movies is going to be a pain for the movie fans who don't care about LotR, and it's going to be a pain for those of us who are LotR fans who don't hang out in movies.

DX - I posted a lot in LotR, when TTT was coming and was new (and possibly again when I got a highly legal copy of TT). But there is also an awful lot of Natter when things get slow. Not all the volume is truely LotR related. I love that thread. I still lurk. But I'd adapt if we moved to Movies. (The movies residents might hate us, though.)

LOTR - I am virulently antihobbit. I'm fine with closing LOTR entirely. Also, I'm happy with it where it is. I've seen about equal amounts of people saying, yep, can it or GOD KNOW, especially with the DVD coming and the third. I'm happy to put it on and see how it gets voted.

Kat - I'm pro-hobbit and would still like to see it go on the ballot, and let people vote it down if they don't want it closed.

I think we're getting an awful lot of "No, not my thread here. And while I think that's a valid argument as far as campaigning goes, I don't know that it should exempt a thread from the ballot.

Sang Sacre

Well, there are still a few of us around who post there, and it's hardly a drain on resources. My main objection to it's going is that there is no alternative place to post the kind of material that goes into Sang Sacre. It's not fic, it's not show posting, it's not natter, it's not topic oriented. You can't fold it into anything else. As it stands, I don't think it's hurting anybody, so I'd just as soon leave it

Well, I get this. This is something we used to do on the Bronze, but it wasn't nearly so organized and continuous. I can see why people want to keep it open. I guess I personally don't think it needs to go on the ballot, and if it does, I'll vote to keep it open, for those who love it.

Previously is a redundancy.

I don't disagree that it's redundant for Buffy. There are no new episodes, so of course the main Buffy thread can fill that need.

If you felt that the Previously thread has been redundant since it's inception, then I disagree, but you get points for consistancy. I believe that when there were both old and new Buffy episodes, the Previously thread wasn't redundant at all. It was a central place where all users could focus on old episode discussion without getting spoiled for the current season. Now that Angel is going into syndication, the Previously thread should serve the same role for Angel.

WRT the Previously thread, I'm not seeing the problem with leaving the ballot as is and then seeing how people vote on the issue.

I do think that, at 11 items, it's long enough. I think we can hold off on other considerations like Sang Sacre and LOTR. I say that as someone not invested in either. But I will say that Sang Sacre offers something that can't be found elsewhere on the board.

Are very important points. Even if we need to remove threads eventually to help solve the problem, getting rid of threads that are getting extremely minimal posts is going to have ZERO net effect on the problem, and will only serve to upset the people who do want to keep those threads around, even if they almost never get posts.

Well, Monique is telling us in another thread (or here, I've lost track) that it's like a diet. Little things add up. But as far as Sang Sacre is concerned, because it's so unique, point taken.

eta...

If you felt that the Previously thread has been redundant since it's inception, then I disagree, but you get points for consistancy. I believe that when there were both old and new Buffy episodes, the Previously thread wasn't redundant at all. It was a central place where all users could focus on old episode discussion without getting spoiled for the current season. Now that Angel is going into syndication, the Previously thread should serve the same role for Angel.

Previously does not fill any need that can't be filled in any number of other threads - even for old Angel episodes. Nothing precludes us from moving the talk to UnAmericans, to Natter or even to Buffy. That's why it is a redundancy. The "central meeting place" is habit, not need. There are now other meeting places and the only thing people need to make them "central" is to make it so.