[Quix]

Would there be any merit in starting a new thread every 500 or 1,000 posts as in the old days?

Easily doable with cross links etc.

[liberallyconservative]

I don't know; I kinda like keeping everything all together, but I know as the thread got longer and longer, it did take awhile to refresh. What does everyone else think?

[Oorang]

As fast as this thread moves I think every 500 or 1000 would be way to early. It's a hassle having to jump between two separate threads to check old posts/links, etc. If the mods let us, I say leave to say, 5,000 or more.

I sure am posting more tonight than I usually do. I must be feeling, well, "chatty".

[swarthyguy]

To keep the thread size down, start a daily threat matrix thread.

Early risers welcome. Cutoff point 6AM Eastern, could be started by insomniac westcoasters.

Again, a tip of the hat to the security services, who, IMO, certainly stopped some attacks in the CONUS/Europe - ANd very good that Mush survived the hits (IMO, the kickoff for a new wave).

Apart from the Egypt charter flights and the continuing attacks in Iraq, the jihadis plans were aborted.

Not noticed much here, but India's Republic day celebrations went off without a hitch after a cell of jihadis was busted with plastique explosives, RPG's, guns etc. in New Delhi itself, where the parade and festivities take place.

It's time to cheer and be confident, come what may.