Well, we may not have parted on the best of terms. I realize certain words were exchanged. Also, certain... bullets. But that's air through the engine. It's past. We're business people.

Mal ,'Serenity'


Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!  

We open it up, we talks the talk, we votes, we shuts it down. This thread is to free up Bureaucracy for daily details as we hammer out the Big Issues towards a vote. Open only when a proposal has been made and seconded according to Buffista policy (Which we voted on!). If this thread is closed, hie thee to Bureaucracy instead!


megan walker - Apr 08, 2009 7:30:27 pm PDT #9008 of 10289
"What kind of magical sunshine and lollipop world do you live in? Because you need to be medicated."-SFist

Rethinking the structure and/or continued existence of the following bucket threads: Boxed Set, Cable Drama, Comedy, Procedurals, and Premium Cable.

As a follow-up, some counts:

Posts since 1/1:
Procedurals: 500
Cable Drama: 190
Comedy: 155
Premium Cable: 39

Posts in the last year:
Procedurals: 1753
Cable Drama: 1335
Comedy: 711
Premium Cable: 654

Based on that, I would be inclined to close all of them. Although I could see an argument for keeping procedurals since it’s theme-based, and the case-of-the-week structure might mean a different tolerance for spoilers, as with the reality thread.

As for Boxed Set, I guess in my ideal world, we would see what kind of discussion shows generate (and how much) before moving them there.

X-posted with Bureaucracy


§ ita § - Apr 08, 2009 7:40:30 pm PDT #9009 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

we would see what kind of discussion shows generate (and how much) before moving them there.

What sort of shows? And what sort of discussion warrants a move?


megan walker - Apr 08, 2009 7:50:35 pm PDT #9010 of 10289
"What kind of magical sunshine and lollipop world do you live in? Because you need to be medicated."-SFist

Well, to take the example that started this, Cupid, I don't see the need to decide right away if it's a fit for Boxed Set until we know how and how much people are talking about it.

Again, I'm coming at this from the angle that I don't really want to be in Boxed Set on a regular basis and see what pops up there. I'd rather the default be Natter.

Wasn't Boxed Set kept because of that community's culture?


§ ita § - Apr 08, 2009 7:59:56 pm PDT #9011 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

But what is your criteria for adding a show to Boxed Set? A quantifiable volume of discussion? High? Low? You're moving away from a bright line, not towards one.

I don't see a reason to disband Boxed Set--I think it has a proven function in keeping like discussion together, and the precise reason for keeping it doesn't negate that.

I could see an argument for keeping procedurals since it’s theme-based, and the case-of-the-week structure might mean a different tolerance for spoilers

Boxed Set is theme-based...


megan walker - Apr 08, 2009 8:11:34 pm PDT #9012 of 10289
"What kind of magical sunshine and lollipop world do you live in? Because you need to be medicated."-SFist

I've never considered closing Boxed Set. It's a question of what goes there. From the discussion today, it seems that that is not always clear.


§ ita § - Apr 08, 2009 8:17:30 pm PDT #9013 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

I have no idea how to convince someone that mythology or time travel fall under science fiction and fantasy. It seems so well-defined to me.

I don't see the benefit to making it some sff instead of everything we agree is sff. Are you keeping Cupid out because you don't want it there, because it gets too little discussion, because it gets too much discussion, because you didn't know it was there, because it's not sff? I absolutely don't get the rationale for muddying the waters further, especially if the reason is that they're already a little muddy.


megan walker - Apr 08, 2009 8:38:14 pm PDT #9014 of 10289
"What kind of magical sunshine and lollipop world do you live in? Because you need to be medicated."-SFist

I don't see the benefit to making it some sff instead of everything we agree is sff.

It's not clear to me that everyone does agree on what is sff. Just today a few shows were mentioned that people weren't sure were Boxed Set. I thought the confusion merited a re-examination of the TV issues. But maybe no one else cares to start that up again. That's fine.

I have to get packing, but I'm eager to see if other people care to weigh in on this over the next couple of days.


§ ita § - Apr 08, 2009 8:55:33 pm PDT #9015 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

If everyone doesn't agree what's sff, then discussing that seems a lot more reasonable to me than repurposing the thread.


Consuela - Apr 08, 2009 9:01:52 pm PDT #9016 of 10289
We are Buffistas. This isn't our first apocalypse. -- Pix

then discussing that seems a lot more reasonable to me than repurposing the thread.

Word. If Cupid is good, and I end up wanting to talk about it, I'm screwed if it doesn't fit in Boxed Set. Which is fair, I guess, if everyone decides it's not a genre show.


§ ita § - Apr 08, 2009 9:07:46 pm PDT #9017 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

You know what? Megan said she wouldn't have watched Leverage if it hadn't been discussed in Natter. Why was it discussed in Natter when it had a perfectly good home in the Cable Drama thread? Because people brought it up there. That's all it took. It was still discussed in Cable Drama, and by some of the same people.

But there's no rule saying any show can't be discussed in Natter, as long as proper spoiler-fonting is practiced.

As far as a genre thread goes, I can't see any good reason not to have it be home to all genre shows, and I don't see any reason for us not to discuss what is and what isn't genre. Keeping some shows formally out of it for reasons not yet articulated doesn't make sense to me.