Some hard numbers, based on threadsuck and scrolly wheel:

(I suspect one reason Eureka has not pinged as "too busy" is that it aired thus far during a fallow period for other Boxed-Set appropriate shows. No competition, you know? That was by design on Sci Fi, but we can't count on that continuing.)

First mention of Heroes, Sumi describing schedule, #985, Sept 5, 2006

A discussion/W&P of Eureka begins 5 posts later (with Colin involvement), petering out into Plei's scary fascination with Kissinger and other topics about 1135. So, say 150 posts over 2 days, with low-grade posting continuing after that, mostly in Eureka but also news of other shows, a bit of SGA chatting durign an episode, etc. The following week's Eureka episode begins in #1263. So, that's shy of 300 posts in a week, more than half of them oriented towards Eureka (and spurred in part by Colin).

The above is about the speed I am long used to, from Boxed Set. Talk, but not that much talk.

Another sample of episode-related posting: Heroes airs beginning (Nov. 13) #3579, begins to slow around 3677 two days later (total 100 posts), but continues spottily in the middle of almost every other show being new/aired that week: there is Who, Torchwood, Supernatural, etc. The next Heroes episode (i.e., passage of 1 week) begins at 3846, i.e. less than 300 posts in a week.

Supernatural watching-week: Jan 18, 2007: begins at 5456, then there's BSG and Dresden Files talk; Heroes talk starts at 5600. The following Supernatural episode begins at 5757. The following Heores begins 5887. So: a week including Supernatural (and other shows) = 301 posts. A week including Heroes (and the same other shows) = 287 posts.

THis was only 6 weeks ago; shall I keep looking for comparisons?

Looks to me like the problem, numbers-wise, is the fact all these shows air at the same time. They do not empirically raise the number of posts per week by themselves, but they do make the thread feel more active.

It seems like not a natural outgrowth of the proposal, and doesn't deal with the same problems, but, rather, in service of a Unified Theory of Television. Basically, I don't find discussion of those shows to be broken. And it's a significant (in my book) step toward General TV, which I am not a fan of.

Nutty, I agree that the issue is probably more scheduling than strictly volume, which ties back into the whole fear-of-spoilage problem.

It seems like not a natural outgrowth of the proposal, and doesn't deal with the same problems, but, rather, in service of a Unified Theory of Television. Basically, I don't find discussion of those shows to be broken. And it's a significant (in my book) step toward General TV, which I am not a fan of.

Yeah. What Debet said. And really, I figure if either the Eureka fans or the non-Eureka fans want Eureka out of B.S., someone will propose moving it (ditto BSG, SPN, Dr. Who, etc.).

Theo has proposed we give Heroes its own thread. The rest of this discussion is really part of another (unproposed) proposal. I'd really like to see us keep this simple. I've enjoyed learning different people's understanding of B.S. and mediafannishness and it's interesting to see what we're talking about when, but I hope we go back to the simple proposal for now. Sometimes I think we should only talk here for two days.

Sometimes I think we should only talk here for two days.

Whether Theo decides to keep to proposal to just yea-or-nay on Heroes (which is up to her as the proposer), I'm glad we haven't kept it that simple, and I'm especially glad that we built in room for longer discussions. Without time to hash things like this out, we'd end up with a lot of dying single-show threads (we hatessss them!) because 42 people thought it was a not-too-bad idea at the time. And that would suck a lot.

The overall shape of the TV discussion post-ME has been a shadowy thing in the background of every new single-show thread discussion (we hatesssss them!) and every prolif-vs.-antiprolif drawing of lines in the sand. And even if it is to be a vote on the Heroes thread, this discussion is still valuable -- not just as a look into other Buffistas' minds, but as something that will (at least for me) inform my sense of what this community is and wants to be. I'm not all that invested in any one particular structure for the TV discussion, but we owe it to ourselves to examine the question and not just cut the conversation short.

The rest of this discussion is really part of another (unproposed) proposal.

Most proposals go through changes because of the discussion in this thread. Not always, but it is not uncommon for somebody to either expand or contract the scope of their proposal.

Sometimes I think we should only talk here for two days.

These discussions in Lightbulb are really the main place anymore for us to address bigger issues about General TV threads, or what defines us now that Buffy's off the air, or how to foster interesting discussion.

It's not like they're divisive, and I don't think they muddy the issue. If people circle around and decide to keep their original proposal that's easy enough.

xposty with Amych

I don't know if that's a necessary standard for this argument.

It was claimed as an impetus, and therefore I think it's worth examining to see if it holds water.

They do not empirically raise the number of posts per week by themselves, but they do make the thread feel more active.

I can't be the only one here that likes that, can I?

It was claimed as an impetus, and therefore I think it's worth examining to see if it holds water.

We've got Nutty's count now. Which suggests NonDominance. Possibly even Parity with a side of Scheduling Gridlock.

Right now, the bigger issue for me would be that having too many shows in one group thread multiplies the chances that people can't enter because they'll be spoiled. No matter what combination you use, if you discuss as many as 8 or 9 shows, then you start blacking out more and more people who would like to participate in discussion.

My gut feeling is that there's a balance to be struck between single-show threads and broader bucket threads. Maybe Premium works - in part - because there are only four or five shows in discussion and they're never scheduled on top of each other. Maybe Boxed Set worked best when there were only three or four shows to be juggled at any one time.

I suspect that's about the right balance to maintain cross pollination and thread vitality, but not veer into excluding people with spoiler fears or swamping the discussion with one show dominating. (Which may not be happening in BS, but was why we moved LoTR out of the movies thread.)

swamping the discussion with one show dominating

Didn't Nutty's numbers imply this wasn't so?

I have to admit, I'm bitterly against all splits now. I wasn't before--I was rationally against it.

You're fucking with my synergy. Don't make me cut you.

Going back to one of Nutty's posts:

Reasons for wanting a Heroes thread:

# It's not mediafannish like the other Boxed Set shows

# It overwhelms the thread for people who don't watch it

# There are spoiler issues for people who're up to speed on that and not the other BS shows

# The discussion is hampered by being in BS

Just to put the record straight, I'm pretty sure I've cited #s 1, 2, 4, although not in those words, exactly, in my original proposal. I hadn't even considered #3, but it's a valid point indeed.

In fact, I do think that it's both media-fannish AND more general-purpose fannish, much like Buffy et alia in their heyday. I think the show has a breakout broad appeal for our community (not that I want us to become known as Heroistas) and thus my moment of epiphany the other morning, that the show has hit enough momentum that it would best be served in its own thread.