Specific markers of media fandom are what you're looking for? Well, I'm not sure how useful they are to this present conversation, but:

• Source-text lability. Most in media fandom have had more than one One True TV show, and will tend to be inclined to follow their friends into new TV shows just to maintain basic cultural competence. Sometimes this is serial monogamy; sometimes this is polyamory.

• Source-text diversification. As noted, I know quite a bit about Due South despite never having seen a single episode. Just to be able to converse in media fandom, that kind of knowledge base is more or less compulsory.

• Crazed interest in details of the source-text. This aspect is probably the furthest away from unique, when describing media fandom in distinction from other cultures, but it's a part of what's going on.

• Willingness to overthrow or fix the source-text. This shows up most concretely in fanfic, but is displayed in discussion as well: "But wouldn't it be cooler if...?" Most non mediafannish people I've talked to find this attitude thoroughly alien; what happened on the show is what happened on the show. For media fen, what happened on the show is raw material for all sorts of factual and counterfactual discussion.

• Collective squee. I secretly think that the reason Supernatural brings out the irritation in Boxed Set is because the collective and dogpiley nature of the show-love is something that non-media-fannish people in Boxed Set find weird and offputting. If you're in media fandom, and you see a collective squee going on, and you don't feel that way, you just say "This is not my beautiful cake" (tm shrift) and scroll on by. If you don't come from a social perspective where collective squeeing is normal, you think, "You people are all WEIRDOES."

• Shared history (esp. flamewars). This shared history is achieved by putting your time in, or by perusal of link clearinghouses like Metafandom or Fandom_Wank. This kind of shared history establishes social rules and expectations in re fanfic and vids (many); it provides perspectives on Active Problems in Fandom (e.g. misogyny in slash pairings; passivity and avoidance in racism discussions); and so forth.

• Lingo. Some of the lingo is specific to fandom of one source-text -- the portmanteaux for pairings -- but a lot of it is not -- I called it a "pairing" just now, you'll notice. Words like "gen" and "slash" and "h/c" and phrases like "OMGWTF" all come from media fandom. There is some crossover of lingo: see "HoYay," which is kind of a borderland term that popularized the concept of slash way beyond the abilities of the actual word "slash." (Similarly, it turns out that "squick" and "squee" come originally from online non-fannish fetish-writing culture, and got picked up from there into media fandom. And media fandom transmitted those words outward, such that they're reasonably comprehensible to most online cultures now.)

Mediafannish people have been Buffistas since we started calling ourselves the Buffistas -- we've always been here. That means a lot of little Buffista details are very similar to, or at least ballpark close to, media fannish details, since osmosis is bound to occur. But Buffista != media fandom, and vice versa. It's -- hey, Plei!! -- it's a Venn Diagram.

That means a lot of little Buffista details are very similar to, or at least ballpark close to, media fannish details, since osmosis is bound to occur.

One might argue that we're our own fandom. (But that's not involved with anything that's going on right now.)

I like vids too, P-C! As stated above, my board memory is woefully short, so... I feel like not a lot of people post vid links. (Though I think they should post more!)

Your explanation helps me a lot, Nutty. And I think I agree that while there is a lot of that in Boxed Set, it's not the only flavor.

That definition does help Nutty. I guess I still don't see how strong a presence that was or is in Boxed Set.

It was about changing the flavor, the tenor, the use of Boxed Set.

But still, I don't see how moving one show will do that.

Which a majority of people seem to want, so perhaps it's time to let it go, or move it elsewhere, bow to the majority.

I never said I wanted to change the flavor etc of Boxed Set, and I haven't heard anyone else say that either.

Again, an evolving board culture thing, and it appears to be a facet that's no longer valued nor wanted. Time to let it go, here, and find it or take it elsewhere.

How did we get from "SPN seems to be overflowing Boxed Set; perhaps it needs its own thread" to "Media-fandom is no longer wanted here"?

I appreciate Nutty's bullet-points definition. It seems that I'm a little bit media-fannish, about some shows. I find intense media-fandomishness a bit wearying, both to do and to watch, but that's my own preference. I don't see how media-fandomness or anyone's feelings about have anything to do with SPN getting its own thread or not.

Mediafannish people have been Buffistas since we started calling ourselves the Buffistas -- we've always been here. That means a lot of little Buffista details are very similar to, or at least ballpark close to, media fannish details, since osmosis is bound to occur. But Buffista != media fandom, and vice versa. It's -- hey, Plei!! -- it's a Venn Diagram.

It is! Hey!

Your explanation helps me a lot, Nutty. And I think I agree that while there is a lot of that in Boxed Set, it's not the only flavor.

It's not, which is one of the problems predicted by Sean back in the thread DX linked to from the BS creation.

I don't see how media-fandomness or anyone's feelings about have anything to do with SPN getting its own thread or not.

Media fandom, at least in its current evolution, is often about multi-fannish space. It's a lot less common to be a mono-fan than it once was, and with the majority of fannish discussion and fic-posting taking place on LJ these days, people are used to cross-polination. Putting SPN into its own thread will change that.

(I still don't know how I feel about the proposal, except that I want everyone to be happy. Happy!)

The more I think about it the more I suspect that Lee may be onto something with her fear that removing Supernatural from Boxed Set might screw with where media fannish discussion goes. Media fandom goes where the discussion is. While all the discussion is on Supernatural, the media fannish people will probably all go a Supernatural thread. The question is, will they go there while staying in Boxed Set, or will they leave Boxed Set behind? And either way, what will discussion do? We currently sustain media fannish discussion in both Fanfic and Boxed Set threads, so it's entirely possible to work cross-thread. But, there are two outcomes I would very much like to avoid:

A. Media fannish people leave Boxed Set for Supernatural/MF thread. Boxed Set talks about Show X. Supernatural thread talks about Show X. Two completely segregated discussions of Show X ensue.
B. Media fannish people stay in Boxed Set. Boxed Set talks about Show X. Supernatural thread talks about Show X. Two parallel and only partly-overlapping discussions of Show X ensue, leading to confusion and potential hurt feelings and misunderstandings.

The nature of media fandom is that it will be textually labile. If the Supernatural thread is media fannish -- and I think at present it will be -- then I guarantee that some topic-drift will occur there. How to legislate a situation where neither A nor B occurs?

ETA: I think I'm describing what Dana is describing, only I am saying it inside-out.

It's not, which is one of the problems predicted by Sean back in the thread DX linked to from the BS creation.

The thing is, the combination has mostly worked up until the last few months. It is the volume of talk, not so much the tenor.

I'll be over here with the rest of the mundanes.

That was way too snippy. I apologize.

My question is this: how is the discussion of SPN any different from the discussions about baseball that take over other threads? In my eyes they're the same sort of thing: something that a group of people like to burble enthusiastically about at each other, and that other people just scroll on by. If SPN does end up with a separate thread, does that mean that the next time swarms of baseball talk starts up, I should suggest to the baseball fans that maybe they should have their own thread?

If my question came off as snarky, that wasn't my intent. It's just ... it's the same sort of question to me.

how is the discussion of SPN any different from the discussions about baseball that take over other threads?

I would think it's because of the sustained and prolonged nature of the discussions. The Oscars can take over Natter, but the discussion happens once a year and is over in a night.