the Buffy thread's been getting maybe five posts a week all year. By June, the Angel thread will drop to similar levels, and we'll be able to to get rid of Previously altogether. The quotable threads will also die down once the deathmatches end. Based on that, I see no reason why we couldn't start threads at some point in the next six months for one or two TV shows that don't currently have their own threads.

Why on earth would we close Previously? Angel and BtVS are still running in syndication, I assume people are still watching, not to mention all the dvd set-havers and watchers. There are still ongoing conversations about old episodes, discussion and dissection. It seems to me that the Previously thread would be the last to close. It's the last Buffy-ME-related showthread. And as long as it's active I see no "of course" reason to close it.

Buffista Fund for Impulsive Gestures

... kinda think this would be asking for trouble. I mean, we're talking about a fund to do nice things for Buffistas, right? Which is lovely, don't get me wrong, but it just seems like the possibility for upset and how-do-you-choose and who chooses what impulsive gestures to make... it feels to me like instituting a kind of formal financial award for being a Favorite Buffista As Defined By The Holder Of The Money. You know?

I do know. And I agree. I also agree with Holli, FWIW.

Why on earth would we close Previously?

I believe the idea is to keep the two main threads, but close previously. Since all discussion would be "previously" the main threads would be sufficient.

wiki wiki wiki wiki wiki SHUT UP wiki wiki wiki wiki

Kristen, you've earwormed me with the Black Eyed Peas.

We gotta take it slow/But we're still losing control....

Anyway, our choice seems to be (1) close the Previously thread, or (2) close the Buffy and Angel threads. I can go either way -- there's little enough traffic on the B and A threads that one thread could easily handle both. But the shows are what brought us together, and for sentimental reasons we need at bare minimum a Buffy thread -- which means an Angel thread, too.

Or we could save Previously for when other shows go into syndication -- but that isn't likely for a few years yet. At least until Wonderfalls makes it.

And for now I'm treating this as idle tossing around of ideas. We have at least a couple of months before we have to decide anything.

But the shows are what brought us together, and for sentimental reasons we need at bare minimum a Buffy thread -- which means an Angel thread, too.

Yes, this.

I believe the idea is to keep the two main threads, but close previously. Since all discussion would be "previously" the main threads would be sufficient.

This is what I was thinking. I'd rather keep Buffy & Angel as seperate threads than combine them into one Previously. As Fred Pete said, it's symbolic.

But the shows are what brought us together, and for sentimental reasons we need at bare minimum a Buffy thread -- which means an Angel thread, too.

Yes, this.

I'd rather keep Buffy & Angel as seperate threads than combine them into one Previously. As Fred Pete said, it's symbolic.

Oh, okay, sure. I thought the suggestion was to close Buffy, Angel AND Previously. My misunderstanding, sorry.

t spanks Beverly

ooh!

Actually, I'm no fun. The first (and only) time DH attempted a spanking in fun? I backhanded him across the chops, purely by instinct. We discovered that Bevvie don't play that. Just that. There are other things, though....

(/natter)

I was just thinking about that, incidentally. How much less regularly-named we are at b.org than we used to be in our previous incarnations. Since TT encouraged it, we tended toward the name-sounding names, even for pseudonyms.

I didn’t know this when I was registering, btw. Trudy told me about it at the LA F2F, and that was, like, a year after I registered. Looking at Cindy’s list of psueds, I’m guessing more than just me didn’t know the real name "tradition.” It’s a dandy thing, and I would have gone that way had I known. If it’s a desired thing, perhaps put a sentence in the FAQ and the reg page? Something like:

“Buffistas first coalesced at Salon’s Table Talk.Table Talk encouraged people to use their real names in creating a sense of community, and we’ve carried that tradition over to our board. Not everyone uses their real name, but you are encouraged to do so.”

I thought Lurkers = Pete, although it wasn’t making 100% sense (also keeping in mind that all I’ve had time to read since Sat. AM is F2F, Press, Beep Me, COMM, and this.), thought Victor = ferrets, had no idea about robots, and thank you for explaining why you changed your name, Frankenbudda.

The way we've done impulsive gestures in the past has generally been someone coming up with an idea, then quietly circulating and organizing it backchannel. I kind of prefer that, because we're not handing out anything in an Official Board Capacity; it's just people surprising their friends with cool stuff.

The problem with this is that not everyone finds out about it backchannel. I think I've heard of only one of the impulsive gesture type things beforehand. When I do hear about them after the fact, I wish I would have had a chance to contribute.

What Sue said.

I'm fine with (well, not totally fine, but mostly OK) people putting something in Press or wherever saying, "we're buying this person this thing for this reason, if you want to contribute, here's the paypal address." I'm less fine with having a fund the way people were discussing it. Too official.