That thread ([Hypothetical] Could the boards be run (faster?) on a P2P format?) looked like it was going to be an interesting discussion. And the OP did put ‘[hypothetical]’ in the subject. So it goes without saying that “it’s not going to happen”.
You could have at least moved it.
honeydewgrrl I suggest you re-post it word-for word in IMHO
Is it your policy to close threads rather than move them? bibliophage
I agree it was dumb to close that one. I was looking forward to discussing how P2P could be used to implement a message board. It was purely a technological discussion perfectly appropriate for GQ, IMO.
I guess it was a reflex to close a thread with that Satanic evil ‘P2P’ phrase in it.
I had better not start an “I’m going to get laid tonight thread.” 
Considering the second thread you linked to, jwhee, started last year (and was closed/reopened then, too) – which “bad day” are you referring to?
I’m toying with the idea of opening new thread about ways to implement a message board using P2P technology, without specifically referring to the SDMB. Would this be allowable, mods?
I’d like some idea why exactly the original was closed before I do this. Please elaborate. Would asking talking about message board “in general” make it kosher? What exactly made the original unacceptable? “It’s not going to happen” doesn’t violate any board rule I’m aware of.
Wow. Closing that thread was beyond lame.
I would think that they would at least be mildly interesting in fostering discussion to make the boards faster; I think we can all agree that the hamsters are overworked and underpaid.
“SDMB”, “KazaaLite”, and “P2P” all in the same breath really set my teeth on edge. If it were a question about how to start a non-copyrighted bulletin board using the P2P concept without specifically endorsing Kazaa or the like then I wouldn’t have closed it (or moved it for that matter). If anyone wants to start such a thread in GQ, be my guest. But threads that appear to endorse Kazaa or contemplate messing with the Reader’s intellectual property rights will still be closed.
I don’t see how making the board P2P would have any effect on the Reader’s intellectual property rights. Not to say any implementation of this idea would be easy, but I don’t think that any application of P2P principles in making the SMDB boards faster would necessitate copyright infringement.