Ginger, that's a great quote. I'm going to add it to my post above, so we have all suggestions together (for future reference).

Thanks for the slug/description clue, Jon. I feel like I ask that all the time. I don't know why I always fail to keep the two straight.

We want posts to be not so google-able. We're following Google's stated rules for blocking their spiders, but their spiders don't seem to be playing by the rules.

(I know we just had a post inexplicably show up on Google, and so this is iffy, but...)

So in theory, the main page/message center slugs and thread titles/names are Google-able, and then anything in the thread (including thread description) should not be? Is that so (or at least how it should be), Jon?

If we don't want this thread to be a draw (because of resource concerns), then maybe we should avoid the terms book club and reading group.

I think, until we work out the particulars (and figure out why Google is outing us, and if/how we can avoid it), the slug and description should not be too detailed. When we settle into a routine, we can get more 'splainy.

Suggestions:

slug: One book in all the world. A Chosen One. Once a month, unless/until we say otherwise. Come. Read. Discuss.

description: A thread for focused and uninhibited discussion, one book at a time. Books will be chosen in advance.

Wolfram, are you around? Did you have anything in mind?

Who's really going to come and join us because of a book club? Is that really the sort of thing you break into an established community for?

I don't think you need to go to arcane lengths to hide it.

So in theory, the main page/message center slugs and thread titles/names are Google-able, and then anything in the thread (including thread description) should not be? Is that so (or at least how it should be), Jon?

Yes.

If we don't want this thread to be a draw (because of resource concerns), then maybe we should avoid the terms book club and reading group.

Are we really worried that this will happen? t edit or what ita said.

Okay. Thanks ita and Jon.

If it is not an issue/that said, do those suggestions go to arcane lengths? I am still hesitant to get specific, until we know how we're going to work the thing.

It's a book club. Call it a book club. We get hits for specific things, most all of them related to fandom. Even if people are looking for a book club, there'll be pages of appropriate hits before they'd get to us.

I love Cindy's slug, whether coyness is necessary or not.

Wolfram, are you around? Did you have anything in mind?

Just got here. I'm thrilled the thread vote carried, but I really have nothing in mind as far as thread titles and slugs. (Although I am partial to The Hellmouth.) Like P-C, I really like "Isn't the point of computers to replace books?"

Hec had a description suggestion in the voting thread which we can play with:

This thread is a focussed discussion group. Please refer to [link] for the current topic, and upcoming book discussions. While natter will inevitably happen, we encourage you to treat this like a virtual book club and try to keep your posts in that spirit.

re: the book club.

Whatever. Call the thing Bob. I just want to get on with the talking of books.

That's a good description, Wolfram. How about the slug? The title/name? Any preferences?

eta...

Wait, weren't there concerns about discouraging natter (since we only do that in the right hand threads, and the FAQ says natter will happen)? Was Hec's suggestion suggested to quell those concerns, or did it raise them? I've lost track.