Even though IKEA makes me laugh like a loon - and I was pro when kat first mentioned it - I now think it's a bad idea. I voted against on that question because we're trying to avoid a general TV thread, so I think we probably want to be really blunt in the title. I liked Anne W.'s suggestion:

"Due South/Smallville/Farscape--Why, yes, the slash is intentional"

Discussion of our favorite Mounties, Chicago cops, millionaires, aliens, astronauts. and the men who love them. Immortals, archaeologists, and Air Force types are also welcome.

...but it sounds like maybe some of the Farscape folks are uncomfortable with the slashiness of that? (And maybe that's why people keep saying that Farscape doesn't fit? I'm so used to slash by now that I'm practically blind to it, so that'd make sense out of my confusion.)

I would like to ask that people who actually post in at least one of the three topics get to make the call on the topic name, FWIW.

I am entirely too fond of lingonberries.

Ooh, I got addicted to lingonberry jam in college when apparently the club chef bought a whole bunch of the stuff - I have no idea why, but we were eating lingonberry jam all year. Yummy.

Beverly, I think we decided that a general TV thread was likely to actually increase posting volume, which would be Bad.

Can we let the people who use the threads decide on the title?

This seems fair to me. It's what we do in Bitches, after all. Even though I'm not crazy about the IKEA name, I'll go with it if it's what the other thread denizens would prefer.

Okay, I'm way behind on the undesirability of a "general tv thread." What's bad about that?

The worry is that a general/genre/cult TV thread would get much heavier usage than a FS/SV/DS specific thread.

Well, my feeling was that everytime I asked a question in Lightbulbs I got shut down -- that the discussion was a place to let off steam on a ballot that was already decided.

Well, my feeling was that everytime I asked a question in Lightbulbs I got shut down -- that the discussion was a place to let off steam on a ballot that was already decided.

Huh? I'm sorry you felt that way sumi, but not all the questions passed so I don't think it's fair to say that everything was already decided. I didn't vote for the Sm/DS/FS consolidation either, but that's the way it goes.

I'm saying that the ballot was decided and therefore the discussion was moot. Not the vote.

Didn't someone suggest a month of seeing how the threads worked together and then discussion a change?

Beverly, a general TV thread was proposed and discussed in Lightbulbs. I'm Nilly-impaired, but there ought to be a link in press for it.

As for non-slashiness of the FS thread -- well, there *has* been slash talk there. It's not a m/m free zone or anything. It may just have been easier for those that don't care about slash to skip over it, is all.

I have to admit I'm a little mystified by the "but I don't like that! I don't want it posted about in here!" (and I'm not referring specifically to the consolidation opposers -- it pops up every now and again around the board). It could be that I read too many threads to start off with, but just about every one discusses stuff I have no interest in. Which is when I skim. Sometimes it dominates, and I'd rather it'd stop, but it always has. I don't think it's happened to a degree where I felt that other topics had become verboten, and I sincerely hope that it won't happen with this particular consolidation.

It's pretty obvious that the tenor of the consolidated thread will be different (inasmuch as that can be separated from the topic), and I am sad that this will bother people.

But I voted yes, anyway.

Well, my feeling was that everytime I asked a question in Lightbulbs I got shut down -- that the discussion was a place to let off steam on a ballot that was already decided.

I think in part that's a function of having the proposer have ultimate authority over the questions, fwiw. There seemed (to me) to be a fair amount of consensus over the fact that Farscape was at best an awkward fit with the other two. But that's not what the proposer chose to propose. My feeling is that for people who aren't in any of those threads, it didn't seem like a big deal, so they chose consolidation over leaving things the same. People who actively participate in those threads seem to feel differently - but as small threads, it didn't have a lot of impact.

Can we let the people who use the threads decide on the title?

I think having a thread name that is indiscipherable affects the board in a larger sense.