Good. I need something to read this weekend.
Why wouldn’t you just watch both episodes and post your combined observations to the new thread?
I’m pretty sure the thread titles made this clear, and when twickster locked the thread about the premiere episode, she mentioned that there was a new one. I’ve edited her announcement to add a link to the new thread.
Because we’ve never had to before. And some people get testy seeing stuff from a previous episode in a “new” thread.
You know what would be nice? If posters not in the US, where sometimes shows run a few weeks behind, could add something to a discussion of an episode in that episode’s thread. Can’t do that if it’s locked. I’ll have to go put commentary about the premiere ep in the second-ep thread and then get spanked for being off-topic or hijacking or something.
Seriously, this comes across as someone doing something without thinking and, instead of saying “oops, didn’t think of that” when a side effect is pointed out, sticking fingers in ears and pretending not to notice.
I must be reading the wrong threads. In any case have I explained this at all? People were talking about the 10/3 episode in two threads, which basically meant there was a duplicate thread situation. Threads about old episodes of TV shows are not going to get locked as a matter of course, but if a discussion of one episode is being split between two threads, the older one is likely to get locked so the discussion is just in one thread.
For both of those threads, someone reported the duplication of threads and asked that the older thread be locked. I went ahead and did it because it made sense to me – esp. with a new show like Terra Nova, it might not be clear that it was going to be a “new thread every week” show and not a “one thread for the season” show.
I don’t feel strongly about it. If someone would like me to reopen the thread, you could go about that by, I dunno, asking me to reopen the thread?
twickster, Cafe Society moderator
Sadly, this seems to be a recurring theme with the moderation around here lately.
Then the posts about episode 2 should have been moved to a new thread. Why that requires locking the episode 1 is why I’m confused. And you keep saying that’s a likely outcome as if it happens all the time. I don’t know how many times I have to say that it has NEVER happened before you’ll believe me (or do the search yourself and see the proof).
Because I don’t think you’re correct that this has never, ever happened before. This is how we handle duplicate threads, a lot of series are discussed in an episodic way, and this can’t be the first time this situation has come up.
That would probably be good. It’s why I created this thread after all.
What if you haven’t seen the latest episode yet, and still want to discuss ancient history from eight days ago? Going to the new thread would kind of ruin it.
Edit: Directed at Marley, who seems to think if you’ve seen one episode, you’ve seen 'em all, or at least should have.
Justin, with due respect, you’ve had my support in this thread until this post, which was disingenuous.
If you’d created the thread to accomplish this goal, it would have been titled, “Twickster, please unlock week-old TV threads and stop locking them going forward” or some such.
Knead
What if someone else asked this question and I answered it in post 22? 
Maybe I got this wrong and I looked at this situation in a way that seemed obvious to me but really wasn’t so obvious. I saw these closures as similar to closing duplicate threads, or (to use an example from another forum) the way threads about the Iowa caucuses might be closed after the candidates have moved on to the next contest - where it makes more sense to close the older threads and keep the active part of the discussion in the latest thread. I felt I’d seen this in past threads, but at least with regard to TV I can’t find an example.
Not to mention, if you try to discuss an older episode in a new episode thread, everyone will get all pissy about hijacks.
Justin_Bailey said that, too, but I can’t remember seeing it myself. I admit I don’t watch a lot of TV drama but I can’t think of an example from the Sopranos or 24 threads I participated in, for example. Ah well.
Bolding mine.
Why lock a thread when the conversation is not contentious? Who does it hurt if there are simultaneous discussions on Terra Nova or Iowa caucuses in different threads. Logically, if the discussions are the same then they’ll coalesce into one thread and the other will sink with no need for locking. If they don’t coalesce, it’s because they’re two different discussions that deserve separate threads. I don’t understand this pointless housekeeping that you guys love to do. If you leave things alone, they’ll work themselves out.
I saw that and it didn’t answer my question.
You seem to be concerned about why Irishman wouldn’t just watch both at once, as if that addresses what someone should do if he didn’t for whatever reason. For one, what if he didn’t feel like watching both? But what I was thinking of is the possibility that someone doesn’t have DVR (I don’t) and only caught one episode.
I think it depends upon the nature of the discussion. If it’s “Hey, guys, I just watched episode 1 and I think that …” in the middle of the episode 5 thread, that’s hijacky. If it’s “Well, back in episode 1, so-and-so said this, and it seems that now we know what he was talking about,” obviously, that’s not.
Sorry, I thought that part was implied.
It’s been reopened:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14323857&postcount=197
I think the mods are making too much of this. The old thread should be re-opened. It’s a no-brainer to me that it was a mistake to lock it in the first place.