I know the majority is going with "let it alone." But I think these threads are not akin to a company bulletin board-- pretty much every poster will take the time to look at these posts, and there should be a concomitant consideration that people will make it worth their while.

What Shawn Said.

And, like what Plei said, I look at Press as the thread where things are posted that used to get spammed to every thread.

The premiere of a random TV show just doesn't cut it, for me.

I know the majority is going with "let it alone." But I think these threads are not akin to a company bulletin board-- pretty much every poster will take the time to look at these posts,

which is true of a company bulletin board too.

and there should be a concomitant consideration that people will make it worth their while.

sure - but that does not mean it has to be something every single buffista will want to see.

Also there is a reason press has evolved the way it did. At one time Buffista natter was something that could be kept up with. The Natter thread alone has grown past that point for most, not to mention Bitches, the second Natter thread. There is no longer any place you can put something where you can count on it being widely seen - except the announcement threads. If press starts getting overwhelmed, then you can start thinking about restrictions. But for most of us who skip (and I'll bet thats a lot) or who don't even read one of the two natter threads, it would really make the Buffista board less pleasant if press started getting less stuff.

I don't think press is being overwhelmed by political announcements or poetry contests, or openings of new boards. Don't see how at the currrent level of posting it is problem.

And if the level of posting ever gets to be a problem, then I think you may want to consider dividing it into two threads as several have suggested.

I will point out that arguing about it in Bureaucracy has generated more posts than the past weeks posts in Press. And again what is being complained about is something that has been there almost from the first post in Press.

And quite frankly, if a Buffista publishes an article on-line, I would like to seen it announced in Press. The odds are I may miss it if the they simply put it in Natter. It seems that telling them not do so with seriously inconvenience a bunch of people who are skippy mcskimmerson. And I don't see how allowing them to continue posting in Press inconveniences you. It seens more an irritation of principle "by god that stuff doesn't belong in our precious Sunnydale Press' than any practical loss. Whereas skimmers and skippers actually stand to have the community become a more difficult place to be part of if it is restricted.

Fewer than 30 posts from the 13th-20th. Does not seem like anyone is going to have trouble keeping up with press.

Allyson, of course you aren't hurting my feelings. You're saying that the deathmatch notices don't apply to you, so you ignore them. I think that's an excellent way of dealing with things that don't apply to you.

Again, I say that if it's too much of a burden to skip posts in Press, quick posts on real-life meetings of a subset of Buffistas, Deathmatch notices to another subset of Buffistas, political rally notifications to still another a subset of Buffistas, and etc., that those who find skipping irrelevant-to-them posts onerous should have an Important Notice thread where only News of Pan-Buffista relevance could be posted. That way they wouldn't be obliged to check the Not-Important-to-Me-News thread unless they wanted to keep up with hoi polloi.

Restricting posting of news or notes important to some because others aren't interested in it seems elitist to me.

Sounds (to me) like the majority of people are fine or at least will deal with Press the way it is. Even most of those who have expressed the opinion that some posts in there wouldn't pass their own criteria for Press are still willing to skip and skim, especially given the small volume of posts. That's how I'm reading the majority sentiment -- of those who have weighed in, anyway. In the absence of The One True Litmus Test, I think majority sentiment is the best we can expect and should be enough.

If that's not gonna work, then I'm on Beverly's train, because I'd rather weed through information to find what's relevant than not get it at all.

The last 4 posts pretty much sum up my feelings on the matter.

I'd really like to hear a rationale other than "kinda inconvenient" for why things as they have been (including Deathmatch posts) are an issue. And I'm not seeing any. "Against the nature of the thread" seems to be a big subjective that is never going to get any agreeance.

Restricting posting of news or notes important to some because others aren't interested in it seems elitist to me.

I completely disagree with the notion that thinking people really ought to use their best judgement before posting is elitist. I'm not saying restrict beyond how the thread is already restricted, I'm saying think first, then post. That's no different than how we treat things everywhere on the board. Nothing elitist about it.

Of course, to go totally flamebaity, I'm really anti-political posts in there, period, full stop, end of story, bang. Joss or DX could be running for president, and I'd be uncomfortable with it.

should have an Important Notice thread where only News of Pan-Buffista relevance could be posted.

I'm going to ignore the tone and treat this as a serious suggestion. Because after all, that's exactly what we did make.

I'm sorry about the tone, I did try to make it humorous. I'm frustrated with an attitude I don't seem able to grasp correctly, probably because I don't share it. I'd like to reach an agreement useful to all posters, and least inconvenient to most.

Because after all, that's exactly what we did make.

Thing is, there seems to be disagreement as to what kind of thread we actually did make.

I, for one, thought it was a thread where deathmatch announcements would go. Other people post job openings, peace marches, poetry readings, book signings, barbeques, and recalls.