In terms of the threads named in this discussion other than Boxed Set, I don't see the need to close them just because they're low traffic.

In terms of Boxed Set, I don't see why Chuck should be in there, but I can't speak to Kings or Cupid, since I don't watch those. Those do seem to be two types of shows where it's not clear to everyone that they belong in Boxed Set, though.

I can see where AU shouldn't automatically mean Boxed Set - I mean if physics and biology work in Kings the way they do in our, uh, U, and the fact that it's an AU isn't part of the meat of the show (as in, addressed directly within the story) then maybe it's just a drama. I mean, BSG was a drama, but they had FTL drives and cylons. But then I think of Jericho, and I confuse my own argument. Did we discuss that in Boxed Set? I think I'm having an AUstential crisis.

And sure, if I had thought about it logically, Kings (for example) is fantasy and that's the second F in SFF, but it just doesn't feel like the same vibe as (what I thought were)the other shows discussed in there.

so, we're discussing SciFi v. SyFy (Mansquito!) ;)

what ita said about an all whitefont discussion thread. especially if we're talking "one tv show thread to rule them all" it would be unweildy and much like Natter for me if we put every single tv show in one thread.

In terms of Boxed Set, I don't see why Chuck should be in there

Chuck works for me in Boxed Set simply because he's walking around with a computer in his brain. i could also see the argument that it would work just as well in Procedurals.

I've decided my AU argument is dumb and slippery slope. AU=fantasy? Is that reasonable?

Oh, yeah, I guess the computer in the brain is sort of sci-fi. (Or is it??)

Yeah, I'm no longer using the thread, but based on the premise and the whole computer-in-brain thing, BS is where I'd expect to find discussion of Chuck.

In bureau Megan joked:

Or didn't joke. I don't know.

I also joked that I wanted to rethink the bucket threads, which was seconded and thirded, and you see where that has gotten us. I think the lesson here is that I should not be joking in Bureaucracy. I guess it’s sort of the security checkpoint of our Buffista airport.

I don't want to subscribe to the thread to discuss one show out of however many others that are being discussed.

This was definitely where I was coming from with my original comment. I’m not trying to take TV out of Natter, I’m trying to keep some of it in there. I find that the different bucket threads has made the TV conversation more and more disjointed to me. My counts were not trying to justify closing as much as to generate conversation about what those numbers meant. For me, 3 posts here, 3 posts there, adds to the disjointed feeling. Clearly they are working for some people. But I wonder, has the comedy thread generated discussion that wouldn’t have happened in Natter, has premium cable become a community, etc.

Isn't this more a problem of TV marketing than a problem with the site? I mean, if we can't tell what genre a show is before it airs (hello Kings, looking right at you), then it's not going to be clear where it goes, but changing the thread structure around isn't really going to fix that.

Which is why I suggested that it might be better to see how something is initially discussed in Natter, to see if it fits in with Boxed Set, because (however wrong-headed) I think about in the same way Jesse does.

I just went into Boxed Set to see about Kings, and it really hadn't occurred to me that there would be Chuck in there, too! I think part of my problem is I feel like the shows in BS are "fannish" or something, which I realize is not necessarily any part of the thread charter.

And sure, if I had thought about it logically, Kings (for example) is fantasy and that's the second F in SFF, but it just doesn't feel like the same vibe as (what I thought were)the other shows discussed in there.

to see if it fits in with Boxed Set

I still don't understand how you define "fits in with Boxed Set." It doesn't take discussing Cupid to decide if it's sff as much as it takes discussing the genre of Cupid. I don't get what Natter discussion of the episodes can reveal.

it takes discussing the genre of Cupid

Okay, but where would you propose that discussion take place? As Jess notes, it's not always obvious before it airs.