Here's how most of the bucket threads got created:

Open temporary, TV-focused threads, so we can see if other shows inspire good discussion, in an environment somewhat more categorized and TV-focused than is Natter. They will only accommodate discussion of those shows which do not already have a TV thread home at Buffistas.org. These are not pilots for new threads; they're just space to experiment, so they are offered as a package deal. They are temporary and will be closed on June 1, 2007. White fonted TV talk will still be allowed in Natter.

When it's all over, if we choose, we can have a somewhat better-than-hypothetical conversation in Bureaucracy about how/if/whether we should try to accommodate a wider range of TV discussion, outside of Natter, and if that's even possible to do, in a way which respects and enhances our community.

Network Drama: for discussion of dramatic programming on those networks generally available, even to those viewers who do not have cable TV -- ABC, CBS, The CW, FOX, NBC, and PBS.

Cable Drama: for discussion of dramatic programming on cable TV outlets which are not currently covered in our Premium Cable thread. (Drama is split between Network and Cable for the duration of this experiment, because an all-inclusive drama thread might be too big, and not conducive for sustained discussion, and because people's viewing habits differ).

Comedy: for discussion of scripted, fictional shows (think The Office, Scrubs, HIMYM etc.).

Non-Fiction TV: for discussion of non-scripted (a.k.a. 'reality shows') programming, documentaries, and the like.

I'm with Austin, tiggy, le nubian and Fay. Hardly ever poke my head into Natter. And, like Theo, I think the usage Megan posted for the TV bucket threads is healthy.

ita, cable drama of course! :-)

I can't remember what happened last week, much less where a discussion took place 2 months ago.

I'm in total agreement with ita w/r/t this particular discussion.

On the 21st of June 2007, we voted on an original cable drama thread.

And then on the 26th of August 2008, a vote was had for a Procedurals and a Comedy.

So those two survived a great deal of discussion to get brought into the world, in two rounds.

I didn't see a separate vote for Non-Fiction but I'm sure I missed that, and Network Drama never flew.

Ailleann, we're good on space issues as far as those bucket threads go--they were never going to be a problem because of too much resources used. The question (I think)--are too little resources used?

And lo, we are hit by thread inertia. Unless specifically mentioned in the creation proposal, we as a community get very used to the threads we have, and it will most surely take more justification than I've seen so far to shut them down.

I'm comfortable with the level of usage that megan posted, since it's clear that they are being used and if people want discussion, they know where to go.

I agree.

Based on that, I would be inclined to close all of them.

In fact, I'm not even clear on what level of use would be acceptable for megan to think they should stay open. 50 posts a month? 100?

Minearverse, for example, has relatively healthy use, but it's generally discussion about crafts or soap operas.

Now, I *want* Minearverse open, so this is NOT a suggestion to close it; I'm just using it as an example. But it seems to me that a low-traffic thread that's being used for its intended topic, even sporadically, is a better candidate for keeping than a higher-traffic thread that is wildly off-topic a large amount of time.

Not a comment on the merits of the proposal, and maybe this has been covered in Bureaucracy.

But I'd like to suggest that the vote be structured to vote yes or no on keeping each thread, as opposed to a single vote on all threads. That way, people who may want to keep some threads and close others aren't forced into an all-or-nothing choice. Because, if level of posting is a factor, it's easier to justify closing Comedy and Premium Cable than Procedurals and Cable Drama.

I guess I'm not seeing the argument for closing these threads. They do get used, if not heavily--which frankly I think is a feature, not a bug. I can't get into B.org during the work day. As a result I can't even hope to keep up with Natter except very occasionally; the volume of posting there makes me not even try.

That there is 40 or 50 posts in Cable Drama or whatever, or in Boxed Set, makes me happy: I know I have a hope of catching up and even participating.

The only time I have ever caught up in Natter has been holidays or the start of a thread. If the discussion of a show was there, I would never see it. I'm good with that if I am the minority experience, but from Consuela's post, maybe I am not.

I am very rarely caught up in Natter, and I wouldn't know if a show was being discussed there or not either. I feel guilty skipping through Natter just to find a discussion of a show because it seems rude to the community that posts regularly there, and often times by the time I watch a show on my DVR, several hundred posts have passed and it seems useless to add my opinion. However, in the show threads, it's easy to keep up, and I don't feel weird adding a comment even a week after a show has aired.