Lyra, for your "whatever else people suggest," I'd like to throw in Joan of Arcadia. There are a bunch of us who watch it, but I'm not sure how many (it may not end up being chosen).

That's why the proposal says that if the show is canceled, the thread is closed.

Which might work if the show was cancelled within two weeks of opening the thread. But I fear that, if get a few months into it, the post-cancellation/thread-closure talk will turn into the old "subcommunity! subcommunity!" argument.

Then again, although Lost may not be picked up for all 22, its ratings are pretty good.

They were great for the premiere. But it's not a good sign that only 55% of the people who tuned in for Part 1 of the pilot were interested enough to tune in for Part 2. If it holds steady for the next few weeks, ABC will probably ride it out. But if it continues to bleed viewership, I'm not so sure about it's future. Which brings me to...

I tend to prefer to find out whether a show has legs (and consequently, whether those legs have any discussionworthiness in them.)

This. I think it's important to give a show a few weeks and see what happens before bringing to the table a proposed thread. Maybe it will be cancelled. Maybe the third episode will suck so hard no one want to talk about the show anymore. Maybe it won't suck and it won't get cancelled but after another week or two the new show smell will wear off and discussion will quiet down considerably.

Good point, Lyra Jane. Actually, I do agree with you, that "It's not you can't talk about it; you just have to talk about it in Natter" is a way of instituting a Sudden Death thread closing. I just wonder whether people will get sour grapes about it if/when it does happen. Just as Atlantic Canadians morphed from a show-thread to a people-thread, and squawked when it was suggested it be closed, I wonder if other show-related threads mightn't eventually consider themselves a community.

I think this is less likely to happen on young shows that get cancelled before they've completed a season. So, possibly academic for now, but it may eventually become an issue.

if get a few months into it, the post-cancellation/thread-closure talk will turn into the old "subcommunity! subcommunity!" argument.

I get the fear, Kristen. I just don't see what we can do about it, unless we want to either leave all threads open forever, which is obviously unworkable, both in terms of bandwidth and as a community. I'd like people to know going in that the thread may be closed, rather than feel like it's suddenly being sprung on them.

I think it's important to give a show a few weeks and see what happens before bringing to the table a proposed thread.

I hear that, and I'm trying to figure out how to best word a ballot item that will allow people to express that view. It could be something like:

5. When should these threads, if any, be started?
a. Now. now. now.
b. In November, after we have a chance to get more of a sense of whether they will hold our interest.

If the b's have it, we can do a gut check on the original results after sweeps.

I need to get back to work. I'll check in again later.

I just wonder whether people will get sour grapes about it if/when it does happen.

Oh, probably. And if it's to a point where it could tear apart our community, we could decide that constitutes "exceptional circumstances." I just hope it doesn't come to that point.

if get a few months into it, the post-cancellation/thread-closure talk will turn into the old "subcommunity! subcommunity!" argument.

I get the fear, Kristen. I just don't see what we can do about it, unless we want to either leave all threads open forever, which is obviously unworkable, both in terms of bandwidth and as a community. I'd like people to know going in that the thread may be closed, rather than feel like it's suddenly being sprung on them.

I share Kristen's fear, but (if I were writing the proposal, and I'm not), I'd just spell it out. "In the event that the show is canceled, it will be closed. If the board experiences problems, and we need to close threads, this thread will be as vulnerable as any other, and will not be saved by claims that it is a sub-community."

I think we should do that for every new thread, now and forever (amen) though. We have Natter, Bitches, UnAm, and Atlantic Canadians. I'd like us to actively discourage amnesty on the basis of subcommunity for any other threads.

In the event that the show is canceled, it will be closed.

No quarrel, though we may want to define "canceled" to exclude syndication (if a threaded series gets that far).

I'd like us to actively discourage amnesty on the basis of subcommunity for any other threads.

I'm not sure I understand this. That seems fair in the sense that no thread is sacred. But if it means that new threads are the first to go if the board needs resources, I'm not sure that an active newer thread should be axed to allow an inactive older thread to continue.

But it's not a good sign that only 55% of the people who tuned in for Part 1 of the pilot were interested enough to tune in for Part 2.

I'm not sure where you got those numbers. 18.7 million peple watched the first part - 17 million people watched the second part. And the repeat on Saturday night was the highest rated show of the night.

I'm all for any type of television thread - whether it be general or show related. I would love to be able to talk about Lost somewhere.

17 million people watched the second part.

I read something yesterday about the second part only getting 10 or 11 million viewers.

Not that I'm obsessive about ratings or anything (hah!), but here's what USA Today had to say:

Lost averaged 18.7 million viewers for its Sept. 22 opener; an encouraging 90% of them returned for last week's second episode. Another 9 million (mostly new) viewers tuned in Saturday for repeats, handing ABC another nightly win.