I'd suggest we wait until we've determined the One True Angel Quote before we close the Quotables thread. Other than that, shiny.

1. That to reduce server load, Angel Spoilers, Previously, and Angel Quotables be closed and archived as soon as is feasible;

There's no evidence that closing these threads will reduce server load by a measureable amount. If that's the only reason to close them, leave them open.

So, um, I just want to make sure I understand this. The proposal is to create some new threads, the actual topics of which are TBD once we actually discover what shows, if any, generate enough interest to warrant it?

2. That the Buffistas hold a poll to see which, if any, TV shows have sufficient poster interest to deserve a thread. The format of the poll and number/percentage of votes needed to determine "sufficent interest" will be decided through discussion, as will the upper limit on the number of threads we can create.

I think the very first thing that needs to be decided is the part about "upper limit on the number of threads", or in other words, board capacity. In fact, I doubt much use will come out of discussing and selecting deserving TV shows until that issue gets resolved.

If they are closed and archived (a process in which I've been remiss), then not only will their volume magically disappear, but the posts table will be smaller.

I don't know that making the table smaller by 15K records will produce a measurable difference, because I haven't measured. But I had thought so.

we would have a separate thread for each show that is considered to be of sufficient interest, and that each thread would be NAFDA for its show?

That's my idea, though if the discussion turns it into something else, I would accept that.

if we want to discuss one show in comparison to another show (for example, if I am posting in the OC thread, but want to bring up something from JoA that I thought was relevant), what would the whitefont rule be?

What did we do when we had both Angel and Buffy (or Angel, Buffy and Firefly, or Wonderfalls and Angel) running? One-week grace period, right? That could work. (I have no real preference.)

The proposal is to create some new threads, the actual topics of which are TBD once we actually discover what shows, if any, generate enough interest to warrant it?

More or less, yeah. I know it seems kind of backwards, but I would rather we decide how many we can have and create/plan to create all new TV threads at once, rather than having to go through the whole proposal/vote process for "Lost" this week and "The O.C." in November and "JoA" in January, or whatever.

I have one question; if this fails, would it mean we could have no new TV threads for six months? Or just that we couldn't enact them under this process?

I think it depends where in the process it fails. I am assuming your poll will ask which shows people want a thread (singular/combo/whatever) for. If the turnout is lackluster, and you pull the proposal, it's as if it never happened. If you get to the point where you're proposing threads for Lost, The OC, and Joan, I'm imagining you'd have each thread a separate item on the ballot. I don't know. In that case, any one that failed would be a closed issue for at least six months--it seems to me.

I'm more interested in the poll than the thread proposal at this point. We keep talking about a new thread with some sort of tv focus or another, but never seem to have a burning need for any one in particular. I'd like to have a better idea if we all really want one, or just think we do.

More or less, yeah.

Huh. I guess I'm wondering why the rush to create many tv threads at once, instead of letting threads arise as the perceived need arises, but perhaps the logic is that a bum rush on the threads is the best way to circumvent the much mythologized anti-proliferationistas from nixing the idea.

Personally, I do not have an investment at this point in the outcome of the vote, but I do see this proposal as trying to reshape the board into a general tv board. That may not be the intended aim, but I suspect that it will be the ultimate outcome.

I was hoping we could do it all in one vote, Cindy -- that saying "I would like to discuss JoA" in the poll would count as a vote for a JoA thread. But that's just 'cause I'm impatient, not necessarily because I think it's the One True Way. Do other people want one vote, or two?

I'd like to have a better idea if we all really want one, or just think we do.

This is a big part of the proposal, too. It seems to me that continuing to try to consense about the type of TV thread wouldn't really get us anywhere; even if this fails, it will at least give us some signposts. (The signs may say "Dead End," but at least then we'd know that most people are happy with the status quo.)

perhaps the logic is that a bum rush on the threads is the best way to circumvent the much mythologized anti-proliferationistas from nixing the idea.

I don't consider it a bum rush, or think it will turn us into a General TV board, given that we're probably talking about fewer than four threads. But yes, I am trying to avoid having the same discussion over and over again for the next year. If everyone else feels repeating the discussion for every show is the best thing for the board, or feels repeated discussions won't happen, the proposal will fail, and there's no harm done.