Actually, I've seen enough people unhappy about various incarnations of "skip to the end" that to me it's one of the unspannable chasms between various parts of the board culture that have been rearing their ugly heads lately.

I'm not sure you mean what we mean by that, Sean. We've been putting in jump tags that let people skip our SPN W&Ps by skipping to the last post. As far as I know, that's the only time they've been used on the board.

---

Actually, I've seen enough people unhappy about various incarnations of "skip to the end" that to me it's one of the unspannable chasms between various parts of the board culture that have been rearing their ugly heads lately.

I'm not sure you mean what we mean by that, Sean. We've been putting in jump tags that let people skip our SPN W&Ps by skipping to the last post. As far as I know, that's the only time they've been used on the board.

AHA! See? We were talking about completely seperate things!

I haven't been in Boxed Set in forever, so I had no idea this convention had been started. "Skip to the end" meant something completely different to me. I was associating it with the admonition I've seen often, particularly in regards to bucket vs. single show thread that those who only want to discuss one show included in a bucket thread should just scroll past or skip to the end, despite repeated protestations that doesn't work for them.

---

I've been silent so far because I've given up on being able to post about TV here for awhile. After our last long conversation about bucket vs. no bucket (and I'm a big dork because I can't help thinking OH NOES, THEY BE STEALIN MAH BUKKIT! whenever we talk about this), I gave up. I accepted that because I can't keep up with all of the Boxed Set shows and yet really don't want to be spoiled for them, I couldn't talk about them here. Not saying that with resentment--will of the majority and all--it just is what it is.

But I'll say how I'm feeling right now just so that I'm not one of those snivelly people who whines about How Things Are but never speaks up when it counts. I'm not trying to stir up more trouble--like Deena said, the whole conversation makes me sad. I hope that those of you who feel strongly in the opposite direction know I care about you, and I believe that you care about me. This isn't personal, even though it's feeling a little right now (at least to me, and it seems a little to Deena too since none of us like to see our peeps sad).

For the record, I think SPN should have its own thread. But I think that every show that is "media-fannish" (if I'm understanding the definition) should have its own thread. I know, that's not how things are done here, and I get that it is an unpopular stance. It is how I feel, though, unpopular or not. I don't understand how having a separate thread could ever be exclusionary if everyone who wants to join can. I don't see why people can't post in multiple threads about multiple shows. I think we would find that more people actually start discussing TV on b.org if they didn't have to worry about being spoiled. I think that cross-pollination would still happen, i.e.

Wow, character X reminds me so much of character Y on Show Q--do you see it?

Totally.

I don't watch--is it good?

If you're liking this season of Show Z, you should definitely catch up with Show Q.

...etc. Only much more graceful and witty like Buffistas are.

Again, not sure if it's worth beating that dead horse any further. I get that people on the board have very strong, very opposing viewpoints on this subject, and I know that the chance of having many more single-show threads is not likely. But in terms of this particular show thread proposal, I guess what I'm wondering is this: Would the people feeling like SPN can't be removed from Boxed Set no longer post in Boxed Set if SPN is removed? Or would they have two conversations--one about SPN in that thread, and one about other Boxed Set shows? Isn't that what the board always did with Buffy and Angel? Because if the answer is the latter, then I think more single-show threads will definitely make more show-posting possible for more people. If the answer is the former, I guess I'm just confused. I understand wanting to talk about shows obsessively--hey, I'm here too--but I truly believe that our community is too strong and too vibrant to be splintered by something as simple as subscribing to a few more threads. I love the fact that we can talk babies in one thread and Cylons in another and vampires in yet one more without missing a beat. I truly believe we would continue to do so even if the SGs had one thread, BSG another, SPN a third, and so on. I would also love if the conversation didn't move so fast that I could come back to the thread when I have time to talk again a few days later and not have to sift through 200 comments about another show to find where the one I wanted to discuss left off.

Essentially, I’m just feeling like Deena is: overwhelmed. I can’t keep up with all of the conversations even when I’m on vacation, so I know that as the fall TV season starts alongside school, I’m going to be even more lost.

So. I really want to be able to post about the shows I am able to watch, so I will vote to create a new single-show thread whenever I can. But like I said, this is just how I feel about the situation. It's not personal--I just don't want to be complicit in my silence (for either side). For what it’s worth, (continued...)

---

( continues...) that’s where my head is right now.

---

I don't think it's a chasm or a case of some board members being pushed somewhere so much as different styles. I don't see anything other than personal preferences bumping up against each other, which happens in any group of more than, well, one person--it doesn't feel to me like a huge difference in the board itself. People would naturally rather have things set up in the way that is best for them, and that "best" is different for each person. It always has been.

We Buffistas get passionate about culture, not only consuming it but analyzing it, discussing it and squeeing about it. That passion spills over into getting passionate about HOW we analyze, discuss and squee over it. Personally, I think that the negative here is actually the positive-- the wide variety of ways that Buffistas approach TV and discussion and even daily life is the thing that makes this board a wonderful place to spend time. Like always, we'll vote on this issue and then try whatever gets the majority vote--and that will work better for the majority than the minority, but in the end we'll work it out. Some things on the board are set up the way I wanted, and other things the vote went the other way, but it isn't a judgment on me and my personal preferences when I "lose"--it's a large group of folks trying to set things up so most of those folks are happy with each choice, and actually succeeding most of the time.

---

Personally, I think that the negative here is actually the positive-- the wide variety of ways that Buffistas approach TV and discussion and even daily life is the thing that makes this board a wonderful place to spend time. Like always, we'll vote on this issue and then try whatever gets the majority vote--and that will work better for the majority than the minority, but in the end we'll work it out.

I'm with the super sexy Scrappy. It doesn't make me sad that Different People Like Different Shit. I'm fairly confident that the board really truly seriously tries to accommodate as many people as possible but it's never going to be 100% and that's okay.

Instead of sad, I actually feel heartened by this discussion because it's heartfelt and serious and thoughtful and respectful and I like that about us.

But now I've lost my clarity on the matter. I'm just not sure.

It's funny, I had contemplated proposing a W&P thread before but hesitated because I thought it would get shot down.

---

I don't think it's a chasm or a case of some board members being pushed somewhere so much as different styles. I don't see anything other than personal preferences bumping up against each other, which happens in any group of more than, well, one person--it doesn't feel to me like a huge difference in the board itself.

Okay, "unspannable chasm" is voerstating it. But it does seem to me that there are a couple of unresolved issues that crop up over and over again, and that maybe if we could just find a sideways to come at them, we could resolve these issues.

And I sometimes wonder (especially after this conversation) if we aren't invisibly beholden to our past in ways that are complicating these issues.

---

if we aren't invisibly beholden to our past in ways that are complicating these issues.

We call that "board culture."

---

Snerk.

---

And I think Kat might be on to something, as far as no longer including a "No Opinion" choice. I'm abstaining from the vote completely.

I don't know that that's the answer either, though. I've voted no preference on issues before because *I* have no particular preference and would like to throw my support to the majority. If I knew what the majority of people that do have a preference for this particular issue wanted, I would vote that way. But, since I don't, I will probably vote no preference so that I will count toward the minimum number of votes needed, while the people that do have a preference can be the deciders. Not caring what the outcome is doesn't translate to me not caring whether there is an outcome or not. Does that make sense?

---