Adding a Heroes thread does have the possibility of adding load on the server. We could, in theory, add a whole new bunch of users who are Heroes fans. In a worst-case scenario, we could start attracting Heroes VIPs to the board, and increase the server load dramatically.

Do you really think that all that's holding the Heroes VIP's back from posting is that we haven't given them their own thread? That seems unlikely to me.

Given that Burrell, a long-time member, was unaware where we were discussing Heroes, yes I do.

Given that Burrell, a long-time member, was unaware where we were discussing Heroes, yes I do.

Are you replying to Rob? I haven't heard any word of Heroes VIPs knowing we exist.

We need to talk, then. Because I've been attributing slower query times to increased size of the table being queried. All the relevant queries are tuned as finely as I can get them.

But it's not clear how adding a thread increases the size of the table in a measurable way. I mean, Natter overwhelms any of the threads where proposing for the amount it contributes to table growth.

I thought Tom was replying about the necessity of the thread.

I don't think that the possibility of VIPs posting should have anything to do with whether or not we have a thread for a show. I wasn't aware that we had any connections that way to Heroes.

I think we should wait until we know it's fate before discussing closing the Veronica Mars thread.

I wasn't being serious about the VIPs showing up, I was just trying to highlight the "if you build it, they will come" nature of threads.

But it's not clear how adding a thread increases the size of the table in a measurable way. I mean, Natter overwhelms any of the threads where proposing for the amount it contributes to table growth.

Well, the adding of Natter increased the number of Buffista posts way more than we even dreamed.

I think the table's too full already, as designed. I'm not going to support a motion for whom one of the stated goals is to increase the number of posts. Not without some other compelling reason.

Aside from that, S1 is too early to be giving any show that's not "one of ours" a new thread, IMO.

I wasn't being serious about the VIPs showing up, I was just trying to highlight the "if you build it, they will come" nature of threads.

Right. The ability of posters to fill the space allotted has always been a plank of the anti-proliferation stance, VIPs or no. Build a movie thread, people will natter about other things and talk about movies more. Etc.

Now, looking at the Lost and Veronica Mars threads, I'm honestly not sure how true that is for shows that lose former glory-- they're not that active. The last thread we created, based on some back of the napkin numbers, gets about three posts a day. So I think it's not a good idea in general to create show-based threads-- they're not active in the long run and they rob other threads of variety.

Just following up on bon bon's post. The Lost thread was created on November 9, 2005 and it has generated 2956 posts in the last 16 months.

ETA: I'm mostly antiproliferation but I just provided the above as "fact" - not to support one side or the other.

BSG is going into a long long hiatus soon, isn't it? I don't see the point of a thread for a show that won't have new episodes until January 2008. (Not that this is really relevant.)

(Also, I sort of agree about Lost, but I'm two episodes behind anyway.)