I posted here with specific concerns about the sustainability of a gaming thread and recieved exactly ONE response, from Nutty, saying "Oh, interesting."

And I don't have time to hunt down the specific posts and link to them, as I have to leave for work, but I know that I responded to your skepticism, Miracleman responded to it, Raq responded to it, and billytea responded to it.

At a minimum.

So right back at you too, Jess.

You know, I'm starting to think that at this point in our history, it might work better to focus discussion on just the specific proposal. It's when every single proposal turns into a broader referendum that people's feelings get hurt, IMO.

This is what I was trying to say above. Let's just debate the proposal. And if people have problems with the debating/voting process, they should bring it up in bureaucracy.

I'm with Jesse. I think there should be a proper discussion (not in this thread) about thread proliferation and other issues people have to see if there's a way of controlling it, but in terms of the proposal on the table - *I* feel when the discussion starts to get into bigger issues it loses focus and makes it hard to keep up. Although we'd really need to vote about changing the idea of Lightbulbs.

My impression is that a fair number of people popped up in the general conversation threads. But I didn't/don't participate in either thread, so I don't know how many new posters expanded their horizons and how many stuck to their original thread.

I am a part of the great Wonderfalls explosion.

Also, games totally have spoilers! SAMUS IS A GIRL, YOU GUYS. A GIRL!

I am a part of the great THE INSIDE explosion. Well, admittedly, only me and Jackal turned up for it I think. But still - Jackal's great.

I'm with Jesse. I think there should be a proper discussion (not in this thread) about thread proliferation and other issues people have to see if there's a way of controlling it,

God, I don't. Just because at least among the people who tend to participate in these discussions, opinions are pretty much set, so we get this "I think this is great!" "I think it's the worst ever!" like we've seen already here. So I say forget it -- stop trying to change anyone's overall opinion.

This is what I was trying to say above. Let's just debate the proposal. And if people have problems with the debating/voting process, they should bring it up in bureaucracy.

And yeah, megan -- your post what what led to mine.

I responded to your skepticism, Miracleman responded to it, Raq responded to it, and billytea responded to it.

I read through the following 150 posts trying to find responses before I posted that link, and I'm sorry, but I just didn't see any. There were two jokey posts about Hec, cats and baseball, and then a separate (but surprisingly productive!) discussion about testing gamer talk in Other Media.

I wasn't happy to see the creation of Minearverse, because I wasn't in a place where I could watch his shows real time (if not for years). So I couldn't go in there (spoilers), but several people I like reading spent more and more time in there, and less in threads where I was.

This happened with me and the Music thread, and also with Comedy and Procedurals. The conversations I was having in Natter and the people I was having them with are now simply missing from my board experience.

And there's my anti-proliferationist default setting in a nutshell.

I think our procedure is a good one (alebeit this time a bit of the "bureaucracy" portion of the discussion leaked into "lightbulbs").

I know little to nothing about gaming. And if periodic gaming conversations started poppin up in Natter I would start to figure it out with other half and un informed people. If there is a thread it will continue to be a mystery to me because going into a thread of "experts" is rarely fun.

Part of what is making my anti-prolif default kick in is that I haven't seen any gaming discussion that has begun to make a thread unweildy and started to (essentially) form a thread within a thread. THAT is when my anti sense backs down and says "yeah, time for a new thread. bye-bye _______ chunk of people"

And its still sad when that does happen. For the sake of sheer volume it probably was necessary to create the music thread -- but to this day I miss music in general discussion and there are several people (::kermit waves to Joe Boucher and Jon B::) who I rarely see anymore.

If, for example, we have a gaming thread Billytea may (between timezones and life busyness) disappear off the rest of the board.

If, for example, we have a gaming thread Billytea may (between timezones and life busyness) disappear off the rest of the board.

What if we get billytea to promise to stop by Bitches once a day?

Seriously, this issue seems to be of little concern to me. It's not like we only have so many posts we can use in a day and now billytea's gonna blow his quota in the new thread. I know I bop from thread to thread and rarely spend ALL my time in just one. The only threads I'm not checking out are ones in which I have no interest (Music...hey, I'm a freak, I listen almost exclusively to movie scores) and the TV threads (either I'm not watching the shows, don't wanna risk the spoilage or am not watching with enough interest to get my lazy fingers to type about it.) Other than that I'm in Natter, I'm in Bitches, I'm in Tech, I'm in GWW and Literary and etc. etc.

Gamers are obsessive, but not THAT obessive.