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.

Hmmm...now I'm going to have to try and remember where I read it.

I just don't see what we can do about it

I'm a big fan of waiting and seeing. I guess I don't understand what the rush is to open multiple threads for various shows. I'd feel a lot better if this proposal was about "this specific show has been generating a lot of discussion and I feel it warrants its own thread." As opposed to, "what shows would you like to see a thread for."

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.

I'm sorry, I meant that specifically with regard to "sub-community" status. Some threads are just us--our community. But every place people talk isn't a sub-community. I don't necessarily think newest has to be closed first. But I don't think every thread gets subcommunity status. I'd define it more than I did earlier, but I'm afraid I'd unintentionally leave out some subcommunity, and it would appear to be on purpose, even though it would be an accident.

I think I agree with Kristen here. I'd rather do this on a show-by-show basis, rather than, "Should we make new threads? Which ones?"

Ah, ok, Cindy. It sounds more like subcommunity status has to be earned -- I'm on board with that.

Lyra, if any threads are approved, I think we should wait 'til after sweeps to open the threads, too. And if a series looks sickly, we should probably wait 'til mid season.

As deep as the Firefly love is here, there were times (not so much now, because the film is coming) that I resent like hell that 13-16 hours of TV get 2 (and at one time 3) threads. Because it was Tim and Joss, and because the show so grabbed so many Buffistas, I get over it really quickly, but still... I would hate to see that, like with say Jack and Bobby. It could be here today, and gone tomorrow. I'd rather never have a thread, than have a thread for 13 episodes.

I resent like hell that 13-16 hours of TV get 2 (and at one time 3) threads

Wow. I thought it was pretty much a fait accompli that Firefly lay right in with our Joss/Minearverse mission statement. We can't agree on much, but I thought that was taken for granted that we will chafe at the bit and generate thousands of posts.

I'd feel a lot better if this proposal was about "this specific show has been generating a lot of discussion and I feel it warrants its own thread." As opposed to, "what shows would you like to see a thread for."

Well, but I think this came about specifically because Lost has been generating a lot of discussion in Natter lately, more so than any other new show so far. Am I wrong about that?

Wow. I thought it was pretty much a fait accompli that Firefly lay right in with our Joss/Minearverse mission statement. We can't agree on much, but I thought that was taken for granted that we will chafe at the bit and generate thousands of posts.

I think it does fit us. It has just been my personal itch, and again, it's only been at times. It hasn't been that we've had a thread for it, (and I know this is *my* issue, not *our* problem nor *our* bad thread decisions). It was an issue for me that we had two or three threads, when there were so few episodes, and when we were on a budget, so to speak.

My point in bringing it up has nothing to do with Firefly (may it live forever and ever) itself. My point is only that I'd like to make sure a general show (a non-ME show) is going to have a decent sized body of work, before we commit a thread to it. I'd rather we not open a show thread in October, only to have the show gone by January.