In the party analogy, the multiple threads is like me sitting at the middle of a long table. Many different discussions are taking place in different sections of the table, but I am trying to participate in them all. I am left with a fragmented sense of discussion, covering all topics that interest me, but without the greater sense of social ebb and flow of an actual conversation.

I'm in natter like I'm at a party, i.e., I barely talk to anybody even if I listen.

I am more participatory in the individual threads which are like smaller conversations which is where I would be more comfortable in real life.

I am ita and Kat and Jess and Liese, except for the being offline for months bit.

Me too, except that it's hours and not months for me, and it always makes me a little sad when it's easy to catch up after several hours away.

The more I think about it, the less keen I become on moving ALL the tv talk out of Natter. It's true lots of us want to talk about tv, but we also want to talk about cats, babies, and lunch, and not everyone is interested in those subjects either. From a certain POV, spinning off a broadcast tv thread because people want to talk about it makes as much sense as spinning off Cats, Babies, and What's For Lunch.

I'd miss tv talk in Natter if it all went away. I kinda miss reality tv talk in there already.

When Natter is busy, I ignore it completely. I check the end to see what's current, then look elsewhere. The long meara-posts that summarize everything always strike me as clunky.

I'd rather have TV talk that's able to follow a thought for half an hour than be part of a "TV-baby-politics-car trouble-TV-cat-work discussion-TV" stream of consciousness. I don't understand what's so difficult about looking in another thread for more conversation. It's a chance for *more* conversation, not just streaming data-ticker conversation.

I don't understand what's so difficult about looking in another thread for more conversation. It's a chance for *more* conversation, not just streaming data-ticker conversation.

Not when the other thread contains spoilers for multiple other shows that you don't want to be spoiled for.

And it's also disjointed conversation, if you're me, because what's on my mind at any given point in an evening is exactly, "Man, my dinner was gross -- OMG, did you see what just happened on TAR -- I am so not prepared for my meeting tomorrow."

I don't understand what's so difficult about looking in another thread for more conversation. It's a chance for *more* conversation, not just streaming data-ticker conversation.

I think over years and years of proliferation arguments that this just doesn't carry a lot of water. People like natter and a secondary thread will not be the equivalent of having "natter for people who are on their computer all day" and "natter for people who are on nights and weekends."

I really liked having the network drama thread. I prefer TV talk outside of Natter, where I can find it easily. Although I usually watch at broadcast time, as far as I can tell no one else is in my time zone, so if I try to discuss in Natter, I'm usually too late.

That said, I can really understand this:

If we think Natter and Bitches as the de facto social souls of the board, each new thread is like a horcrux (NERD!) that splits that soul a little more.

This is my antiproliferationista stance in a geeky nutshell.

It was also helpful to see the relative busyness of Natter over time. I think that part of my issue may be based on how busy Natter used to be, rather than how busy it is currently. This means I need to think more about my opinion on the proposed thread.

You know, most places in life, it's hard to change people's minds. I love that, while we tend to have strong opinions here, we tend to listen to each other with open minds and hearts. It's kind of beautiful.

schmoop

Yes on a new thread with no strong opinions about the breakdown of what shows go into it. I agree with Denise's comments (and Kristin's and quester's and and... many others that I'm too busy/lazy to go back look up names), and I'm glad this will go to a vote and not a BS consensus, since the dedicated Natter folks who don't like the idea seem to be the most vocal so far.