This seemed to be a discussion topic more than a voting proposal.
I thought the point of lightbulbs was to hammer out a formal proposal based on discussion (or not, if it didn't look like it made sense to have an official vote).
I asked in Bureau:
Can I propose rethinking the TV structure in general (the bucket threads, but also Boxed Set) or do I have to have a specific plan ahead of proposal?
And ita responded:
Whatever you propose now is what you propose now. You can add or remove stuff the whole time Lightbulbs is open. But I'll need some sort of text to kick things off with, and that has to be what people second and third, etc.
In this case, it doesn't seem to make sense to vote on the bucket threads since no one really expressed interest in closing them.
It doesn't seem we can solve the issue of what exactly goes in Boxed Set (or other buckets) except through trial and error. I think there are people for whom the current structure doesn't work, but, beyond what has been suggested about clarification via lists in the slugs (or elsewhere), I haven't seen anything that might work. Whether that is something that would need to be voted on is unclear to me.
I don't see the problem in discussing where a new show will go when the genre is unclear to people.
Where does this get debated then?
Usually someone asks in Bureau or Natter.
I thought the point of lightbulbs was to hammer out a formal proposal based on discussion
Sure. I would have been more inclined to discuss the issue in Bureau long enough to see if there was something a little more specific to bring to Lightbulbs, but whatever. Different strokes and all. It got the seconds.
Well, and isn't part of bringing something to Lightbulbs to discover if there really is a valid proposal or a viable solution? One of the options is to totally drop the subject, which it looks like we're heading for.
I do like the thought of updating the thread headers to reflect the shows being talked about. I didn't even realize Leverage was being talked about in Cable Drama since there wasn't anything else I was going in there for at the time. I'll be back for Mad Men, but a lot of Leverage talk passed me right by. Fortunately, folks were also talking about it in Natter, which finally piqued my interest enough to check it out. Once I realized there was more Leverage talk in Cable, I headed right on over.
Could we come up with a system where every 4 months (May, September, January) we modify slugs to reflect what's being discussed?
I do think it would be helpful to have the tv slugs modified more frequently to show what's being discussed.
Personally, I am often far behind but don't mind being spoiled so I visit the bucket threads and skip over or read as desired. If I have a question about where something is being discussed I ask in Natter. But just one user, and feel it is not wasted time or posts to discuss how other people's board experience might be improved.
Yeah, I don't think there's any need to formalize a process to update the slugs. To date we've just updated them on stompy whim, right? I would rather see us just update as reflecting current usage rather than dictating it, and we can do that whenever it seems necessary (that is to say, more often than quarterly if needed). I realize Boxed Set's slug for one is woefully out of date, but I think in general we've been marking things as we go along.
I mean, it's marked where Dollhouse goes, and where Firefly is, but people still asked, recently. I don't think that a process to update them is really needed. We can just be more proactive.
To date we've just updated them on stompy whim, right?
I think not only stompy whim, but you should do it unannounced and see how long it takes for us to notice. Or, ya know, wait until somebody requests a change.
you should do it unannounced and see how long it takes for us to notice.
A Stompy rickrolled the music thread's slug (or header; I disremember which), and I'm not sure how long it took people to notice.
And I'm not sure which evil Stompy did it.
t casts suspicious glances towards Stompies
