A new list for substantive posts?

[carolynwhite2]

Erin wrote:
The long, well-thought-out posts are my reason for
reading the list. The thought of a list made up entirely of short,
conversational posts gives me the shudders! 
(..)
My whole joy in the list is to go back through and search for the
wonderful long theories. Magic Dishwasher, ESE!Anyone, and anything
Elkins ever wrote are what make the list great. Conversations can
be fun, but for me there's nothing memorable in them, nothing to make 
you want to go back and reread. Or if there is, I immediately wish 
that it was consolidated into a larger, "proper" theory so as to make 
it easier to refer back to :-)

Shaun wrote:
(2) I find the suggestion that 'very large posts' with a 'lot of
research' making the list unwelcome to some people rather
offensive.

If people don't want to read a long post, that's entirely their
right and their choice. But I find it rather hard to see how the
existence of such a post, and the hours and hours of work that went
into it intended to try and give something back to the fan
community can somehow be unwelcome.

(3) If HPFGU had a 300 word limit on posts, then frankly, it would
become just another insipid, juvenile forum. Sure, often you can
say something relevant, and meaningful in a few words. But if
you're dealing with something fairly complex, it often takes a
while to discuss it - and one of the major strengths of HPFGU has
been that it's a place that allows for discussions of complex
issues.

Carolyn:
I agree so much with Erin and Shaun. Whilst I enjoy the chat, after 
you have been on the list a while, you long for well-informed 
substantive discussions. One suggestion to remedy this, which went to 
Admin recently from me and another member went as follows:

1. Start a new, separate list (open to everyone), dedicated to posts 
which set out to deliberately discuss key topics, rather in the same 
way as an organised chapter discussion. Eg, might take a subject 
like ' Shrieking Shack' or ' Death of Lily & James', or a meta-theme 
such as 'Evil', or a character.  Someone would be asked to write a 
substantial post to kick off the discussion, which reviewed past 
theories, gave proper references etc, but was opinionated and full of 
leading questions. 

2. Subsequent posts replying to the starter-post would be subject to 
certain rules - essentially aimed at ensuring they were substantive 
replies. To ensure that they were, all posts on this list would be 
continuously moderated, without exception. Rules would be about 
length, citation, adding something new etc, but TBAY-style would be 
welcomed and accepted as a way of expressing this. This would 
intentionally discourage the fevered, me-too short posts - this is 
not the place for them.

3. The idea would be to have relatively few threads going at a time, 
but in-depth and chunky discussion of topics. Anyone who didn't feel 
like complying with the response rules could go post on the main list 
in the ordinary way, referencing the source post from this new list.

The concept kind of updates the Fantastic Posts section in a creative 
way, giving people old and new a chance to read themselves in to a 
topic, and everyone a chance to put up considered contributions that 
moved a topic onwards. It is not exclusive of anyone, but does have 
some seriously tight rules, intended to limit post volume and 
maintain a high standard. It also stops these in-depth discussions 
getting lost in the swell of the main list.

To get it started, it should be possible to identify a nice long list 
of good crunchy topics, and give them to people to work on, so there 
is a continual series of new things appearing every week or month. 

Would anyone support this?

Carolyn