Deena, I'm having a hard time explaining this, but I'll try.

Let's say we have 40 people who really, really want a thread on Monkeys, and 80 who don't see the point of it. Under consensus, the 40 might get it by wearing the 80 down. Under a vote -- and thread creation was a main function of voting as we visualized it -- it's proposed, seconded, goes to a vote, and fails. The 80 (who don't care) have outvoted the 40 (who do).

Now let's say we already *have* a monkey thread, and the 80 are saying "Why is there a monkey thread? I do not like it. Let us get rid of it." and the 40 are screeching "Noooooo! Do not hurt my precious monkey thread!" If it went to a vote, the 80 would squash the 40 like bugs. If it were talked out, the 40 might wear the 80 down (just as they did to get the thread in the first place, the filthy Monkey-lovers.)

Now, in an ideal world, people would abstain from votes abotu threads they don't use. I agree with that. But I think our rules for creating and deleting threads have to be consistent.

Isn't that the basis for the anti-proliferation camp?

Well, more posts do fill the database faster, but there are also some community/personal comfort issues, Wolf.

Look, thread creation, existence, and eventual archiving affects all of us because it takes up bandwith and there's only a certain amount of threads we can comfortably hold. So for content of threads, look to the posters, but for existence it's really up to the community at large.

I can see this argument, Wolfram being applied to thread-sprawl, but not to the constriction of active threads. If we're using the bandwidth for good, we're part of the community, and there's a demand for it, why cancel a thread for the sake of saving some bandwidth? It's that kind of logic that gets shows like Firefly cancelled. Shouldn't the board be responsive to the needs of the community? Isn't that why we moved to a semi-dedicated server? Are our bandwidth problems really that dire?

AAAAARRRRGGHHH!

Why are we fighting about this?! We were just talking about some housekeeping issues inherant in the end of Buffy. I don't think we should get rid of any current threads that are not redunantly Buffy.

In addition there has been talk of a) perhaps combining Due South and Smallville and b) adding a new Tim's show thread and a new "graduates of ME thread."

No one is going to close the Canadians.

No one is going to close the Canadians.

Crap. And here I was with my Close Canada! flag.

Why are we fighting about this?!

I dunno.

In addition there has been talk of a) perhaps combining Due South and Smallville and b) adding a new Tim's show thread and a new "graduates of ME thread."

Aye aye, capn. Can I propose a three-in-one?

I can see this argument, Wolfram being applied to thread-sprawl, but not to the constriction of active threads.

The issues are similar and the arguments apply to both. Obviously more deference would be given to existing threads over non-existing ones.

If we're using the bandwidth for good, we're part of the community, and there's a demand for it, why cancel a thread for the sake of saving some bandwidth?

Nobody's saying we should. Only cancel a thread if nobody's using it, or it's clearly redundant.

The point is that the Buffista community-at-large is more than capable of "doing the right thing" when it comes to existing threads that people care about, even if the entire community isn't active in that thread. But I would be very opposed to a subcommunity having greater voting rights on their thread than anyone else.

I'm not really talking about just the Canadians, though, Sophia. And I don't really want to argue about it more. It just touches some buttons I have with the whole way Bureau is nowadays. I really just came here to see how the name for Buffy race was going. I think I'll go back to my unsubscribed, ignorance is bliss ways.

And I don't really want to argue about it more.

I don't want to fight about it either. My concerns have been stated and I'll just leave them as they are. I didn't mean to sound hostile or to offend anyone, so if I did, I'm sorry.

I will say that with only 6 official Atlantic Canadians and over 700 subscribed buffistas, any vote affecting our thread would no doubt leave us in the minority. I understand though that this is not going to happen, something that makes me very happy.

I thought we'd gone into hypothetical what do we do in the future land (which, of course, always means trouble). I also didn't think we were fighting. I'm sorry if I helped raise anyone's blood pressure.