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.

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

Regarding Kings, this is more or less what happened. I x-posted about the show before it aired in both threads to test the waters - the conversation in Natter died, but flourished in BS.

I also joked that I wanted to rethink the bucket threads, which was seconded and thirded, and you see where that has gotten us.

If you really don't want it, you can withdraw the motion, can't you?

Regarding Kings, this is more or less what happened. I x-posted about the show before it aired in both threads to test the waters - the conversation in Natter died, but flourished in BS.

I didn't know you did that. It was smart of you to do that.

I'm with ita on not understanding the confusion about what falls under Boxed Set. SFF seems a fairly bright line to me.

I used to think it was a clear line, too. Because I know what I consider SF. But at this point I'm convinced that "you know it when you see it" is not functional. It's obvious to me that Cupid is not SF. It is obvious to ita that it is.

Past examples, for whatever help they may be:

From Bureau, Aug 2007

What about Bionic Woman and Sarah Connor? Even though they could technically be called sci fi, they don't seem like they'll have that Boxed Set vibe. Trying to sort that out in my mind, I see sort of an AU going on in BS type shows. I think of those more as "normal world, but with robots".

i've always assumed that anything sci-fi belonged in Boxed Set and therefore Pushing Daisies, Sarah Connor Chronicles and Bionic Woman all fall into it.

I could see putting [Medium] in Boxed Set, what with the psychic (Dead Zone is there).

I don't really see Medium as a Boxed Set show. Dead Zone is more BS because it actually has a sci-fi element of Johnny touching people and having "visions". Allison is just your average, run of the mill psychic.

Well, since it's been on for at least a couple of seasons and has never come up in Boxed Set (that I remember), I wouldn't think Medium would be a Boxed Set show.

From Boxed Set, March 2008

So, we talk Jericho here?

I think here works. Post-apocalypse = sf, anyway.

Why? I mean, I'd assumed Jericho was sf, but I can't support it with an actual argument. Did the nuclear bomb going off in 24 move it into sf status? If NY isn't destroyed (bear in mind I'm not up to date--so maybe it has been since) is it an apocalypse?

Jericho has an SF premise, but I don't consider it to be an SF show because the episodic plots are straight drama. And yeah, unless they've established that the rest of the world went away, some US cities getting nuked doesn't equal post-apocalyptic to me.

From Boxed Set, June 2008

Venture Brothers here or in comedy?

I've seen discussion in Comedy, so probably best to continue it there.

We used to discuss VB in here, I thought. I've never been in Comedy.

Last season some people discussed Venture Brothers in Natter. Some discussed it in Boxed Set. Some discussed it in both places. Some probably discussed it in other threads that I don't read.

(I was too lazy to get names & links, but just so it doesn't look like I'm citing myself, the last posts on Jericho & Venture Brothers are both me. 'Cause that's why I remembered the conversations.)