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.

Going back to one of Nutty's posts:

That's not Nutty. That's me.

Theo--what differentiates Heroes from SPN or Eureka in your mind? Do they warrant threads of their own too? If not, why?

Because that's what I'm missing--you take out one show because it's high traffic and has momentum, why not take all of them out? And then you're left with...well, no traffic and no momentum. If just one, why Heroes? I'd propose that Eureka is also general-purpose fannish, just judging by watching Colin at the West LA Roscoe's Chicken and Waffles. It's not your typical Sci Fi Channel crowd.

For me, Eureka is different because the seasons (the one that's aired and the one coming up) are much shorter. A Eureka thread would slow to a trickle for much longer periods than a Heroes thread would.

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

Probably in crosspost...

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

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

Pfft. Dude, I could take you out with a bag of microwave popcorn at this point. Do you have a krav defense against microwave popcorn yet?

::hides existence of nose plugs and air filtration masks from ita::

For me, Eureka is different because the seasons (the one that's aired and the one coming up) are much shorter.

I have no idea of the general appeal of Supernatural--is it different for you too?