Exactly -- we're about halfway (or a little more) through the last Buffy thread -- when that's done won't all Buffy discussion occur in Previously -- and as I said, I think that Angel repeats will naturally be discussed in Previously too.

That's not what's been proposed. All Buffy discussion will be in the Buffy thread regardless. If the Previously thread stays, it will be mostly for the syndicated run of Angel, although there will surely be some crossover talk. If the Previously thread gets voted out of existence, then the Angel rerun talk will be folded into the main Angel thread.

We should probably remove the NAFDA designation from the Buffy thread, no?

But if people truly feel that we're being inconsistent or talking out of both sides our mouths or whatever, then I don't know what to tell you, other than maybe Fangeek isn't as good of a fit for this community as we had hoped it would be.

I just want to say that I don't feel that, and I don't think it's the general feeling on the board. I understand that you're being slammed with hard, often redundant questions, and you're doing your best to answer them. I'm sorry if my questions last night in any way added to your frustration.

But why do it that way? It makes more sense to let Buffy die-out, move all previouslies to the Previously thread -- maybe we can include discussion of other syndicated shows w/o new episodes in the Previously thread too? It could be Previously on Buffy, Angel, Highlander, Due South, Farscape, Firefly (assuming no new Farscape or Firefly stuff appears.)

The slashy new stuff -- OC, Smallville, Alias could be on one thread too.

SBs are Nafda -- will anyone care if SBs and Natter are consolidated that we will be discussing Spike on Angel before anyone else sees Angel?

t edited for NAFDA spoiler

It's the redundant questions, spread over three threads, that's most worrisome.

A Press post explaining what's happening, and how to help, would be most helpful.

You want I should draft this?

I keep my downloads set at 100, FWIW.

I think quickposts, timelies and numbersluts contribute to the overall hominess of the borad.

If mandating 50 to 100 posts per and jumping autorefresh to 30 minutes will let us keep the little sillynesses, I'm all for it.

If the code can be tweaked to make it even less a problem, wooo!

But I like us; I like the little posts, the long posts, the weird posts and even the nitpicky posts, the long arguments and the quick birthdays.

Anything that can be done to keep the flavor of the Buffistas without bashing away the nuances would make my day.

It's the redundant questions, spread over three threads, that's most worrisome.

Part of the problem is our server issues have a lot of facets. Some are affected by programming, some by posting habits, some by thread-proliferation/clean-up. There's a reason we're talking about this in Bureau, BBaBB, and here. It all overlaps.

A Press post explaining what's happening, and how to help, would be most helpful.

You want I should draft this?

I can't speak for anyone else, but - yes, please.

Daniel - this discussion is pretty centered on Kat's proposal to do some housekeeping (get rid of lesser used or redundant threads).

But why do it that way? It makes more sense to let Buffy die-out, move all previouslies to the Previously thread -- maybe we can include discussion of other syndicated shows w/o new episodes in the Previously thread too? It could be Previously on Buffy, Angel, Highlander, Due South, Farscape, Firefly (assuming no new Farscape or Firefly stuff appears.)

I (and others, but I'm not sure whom) would like to see Buffy continue (at least for a while) to have one thread called Buffy (and continue the NAFDA numbering). Now, we've never been on-topic thread cops. As long as someone wasn't spoiling anyone else, all topics were usually fair game in the show threads. Natter is only forbidden in Press and Beep Me, and "discouraged" in the other right hand threads. I don't think anyone would stop people from talking about Angel reruns in the Buffy thread. I do think it would be fitting for the Buffistas to maintain a Buffy thread. (Perhaps someday, it will die, and we'll feel differently.) Heck, we have 3 Firefly threads and there were 13 episodes? Hasn't due South been out of production for a long time? I do not understand why, in a time when we've been asked to be more efficient, Angel needs a unique Previously, when the Angel reruns will be fair game in so many other threads.

But why do it that way? It makes more sense to let Buffy die-out, move all previouslies to the Previously thread --

So your preference is to keep Previously as a thread and delete the Buffy thread, correct?

What this says to me is that we both agree that the two threads are redundant, it's just some folks want to get rid of Previously and some want to get rid of Buffy. It's up to the proposer, Kat, to decide which she puts to the vote. So far, she has opted for Previously, which means that if you really want to see the thread stay, you vote against closing that thread.

maybe we can include discussion of other syndicated shows w/o new episodes in the Previously thread too? It could be Previously on Buffy, Angel, Highlander, Due South, Farscape, Firefly (assuming no new Farscape or Firefly stuff appears.)

ooh, I'd be very much against this. Too close to repurposing it as a general syndicated thread, something that hasn't even been suggested up to now.

The thing is, Daniel? xposting that in three threads? It's the sort of posting that if curbed, would be helpful to actually keeping the board safe, as I understand it. Doing away with redundancy is a way of doing our part to conserve resources.

I think there's a strong emotional/historical feeling to wanting to maintain the Buffy thread line. That's where we started. I'd much prefer having the sole thread of BtVS discussion be labeled "Buffy" than "Previously" (with all due respect to SA's experience on the boards).

If you stop discussing removing threads that cause people to be upset because they want to keep them, then you're pretty much going to stop all such discussions, aren't you?

I'm sorry, I had to run out to lunch, and wasn't here to say that I think I was misunderstood in what I was saying about Sang Sacre...

Farscape, Smalleville, and due South seem like good threads to look at for consolidating because they see a small but steady volume of posts.

Cutting Sang Sacre seemed to me to be excessive because the last post in there was made in July, as part of a very small spurt.

The slightly larger spurt before that was for a few days in June, and then nothing until the first part of May.

I exaggerated and said there would zero net effect, but this was meant in comparisson with Farscape/due South/Smallville. I was not clear on that. But with the miniscule volume of posts it generates compared to even low volume threads, the point I was trying to make was that in that one specific case, the loss of color did not seem to equate to the gain in resources when looked at from a cost/benefit perspective.

Also, I have exactly zero personal investment in Sang Sacre, and I'm sorry I gave the impression that I was defending it because it was a pet thread.

I greatly appreciate everything Monique and Kristen have done for us, and I'm very sorry that this has been such a pain.