By this standard, there are a half-dozen threads that can be closed today.

Threads that are close to 10,000 posts?

The distinction between closing a thread and not opening a new thread after the current one reaches 10,000 matters to me. If we do open a new thread, closing it after 400 messages or whatever would seem less organic to me.

Threads that are close to 10,000 posts?

I don't understand the logic here. It's reaching 10,000 posts because people have been using it. There are other threads that will never reach 10,000 because they are rarely used. Using 10,000 as the decision point ensures that you will kill off threads that get modest use long before you kill off threads that get almost no use. Why is that a good idea?

It's odd, but I think that closing the Firefly thread is something I want to do as a huge fan of the show. Keeping it open just feels weird.

This is where I'm coming from.

The thread is not dead, just slow. Firefly posts pop up consistently at least several times a month.

See, to me it seems that the show hasn't been discussed for quite some time. Now it's references to craxyfen and bits of interviews of actors who seem to be tiring of talking about the show. It's just sad, and I'd rather it not get even more sad.

eta: Which is not to say that those post are unwelcome. I just wouldn't find it so sad if they were in Minearverse, Natter, Boxed Set, or wherever.

I'm all for killing off threads with slower activity than 1000 posts a year, but if you want to make an argument why Firefly is different from those, those threads had evergreen subjects, whether fic, Minear shows, premium tv or whatever. This one is about something that is fixed and done.

I agree that it seems like the majority of recent posting is more about FF fandom than FF.

I do have to say I'm getting weirdly defensive at people actually saying the kind of "you should have your own thread so you don't sully ours with your nasty show" stuff about FF that SPN folks were perceiving in that discussion. Some are more serious than others, I think, but it's a line of argument that I really have no sympathy with.

I agree that it seems like the majority of recent posting is more about FF fandom than FF.

And when the SPN watchers did that (arguably), they got their own thread.

Not the same thing. I don't mean FF posting is about fic or stuff like that. I mean it (seems) to be largely "this is what was posted on some other board today".

(And, speaking for me only, I don't see the FF and SPN issues as being more than peripherally related.)

I don't think that was why the Supernatural thread was created. I don't see the relevance in comparing the two threads. Spn is an ongoing show that generates a lot of discussion.

And when the SPN watchers did that (arguably), they got their own thread.

No. Whether it was a true issue or not, the perceived issue there was too much SPN. Here, it's too little.

I know it's a recent wound, and still a sore spot for a lot of us -- it's still a very sore spot for me, even though I'm apparently totally SPN-immune in both the loving and hating directions. But it's a bad analogy for the current debate, and I don't like to see "but it still sucks about that other kerfuffle!" when the analogy doesn't work. Because, you know, the whole "should we have a natter thread?" thing is still an active memory, and before long we're on to "this television! it rots your brain! you shouldn't do that!"

(man, massive x-post should teach me to stop listening to myself talk.)