Interesting that it seemed that way to you. That was me who started one. If you're gonna bring it up, go ahead and bring it all up. And if you don't remember that it was me, was it really that Point-y?

I don't know what "it all" is, msbelle. It seemed pointy, in that Buffistas were joining an lj bookclub, but didn't try this one out. When this club failed to thrive, it seemed likely to me that the people who didn't think this thread was a good idea, and who had suggested other places to hold the bookclub when it was in the proposal stage, were probably right. That's also why I suggested closing it 6 months ago, or so. It seems to me, if this thread had been the right idea for b.org, it would have thrived. It didn't, or at least, it hasn't.

Thanks for the clarification, msbelle. I'm not sure what non-threaded discussion means, but I'm sorry this thread didn't appeal to you.

I know there were a lot of people who seemed very interested in the concept but NSM the execution. There was some blame put on the book selections not being as appealing to a wide enough group (not that there was anything wrong with the selections, per se.) Someone (libkitty?) had some excellent suggestions back in December or January to shake things up, but it was never followed through.

That being said, before we declare failure, who's up for giving this thread another go? We can spend as much time as we need discussing and consensing on what didn't work before, and finding some alternative approaches before we pick another selection.

It seems to me, if this thread had been the right idea for b.org, it would have thrived. It didn't, or at least, it hasn't.

Maybe I'm just biased here, Cindy, but it just doesn't feel like this thread is wrong for b.org. Since nobody in particular cares if we close it or not, how about we give it another go?

I'm with you, Wolfram, and think we should give it another go. My huge busy stuff is over, so I should actually have some time this fall and winter.

Well, we could try.

I bet all the people who were so mortally disturbed by the idea of this thread have forgotten about it.

I hadn't forgotten that it was here. In fact, I looked at it 3 weeks ago and thought, "interesting that after all of the hullabaloo about how literary can't be a place to discuss books, when a space was made it didn't facilitate it for very long."

It was on my mind to bring up what JenP brought up, but I was waiting for mid August when it would have been two months without a post.

it just doesn't feel like this thread is wrong for b.org.

If a thread goes so long without posts, and even longer without the type of conversation the thread was ostensibly designed for (because the last book you discussed was November? December?) then how can it not be viewed as not working within the context of the community.

Maybe I'm just biased here, Cindy, but it just doesn't feel like this thread is wrong for b.org. Since nobody in particular cares if we close it or not, how about we give it another go?

I won't propose we close it. I do think though, if this go-round doesn't work, we seriously ought to think about it.

I'm very curious as to why people are watching this thread with such eagerness to declare it dead. Why care so much? What harm does it do?

Who are you seeing as displaying eagerness, connie?

Who are you seeing as displaying eagerness, connie?

From Kat, just above:

I hadn't forgotten that it was here. In fact, I looked at it 3 weeks ago and thought, "interesting that after all of the hullabaloo about how literary can't be a place to discuss books, when a space was made it didn't facilitate it for very long."

It was on my mind to bring up what JenP brought up, but I was waiting for mid August when it would have been two months without a post.

I'm assuming she means me, ita. Because, Connie, I occasionally look through all of the things I'm subscribed to and to read the last thing that was discussed to refresh my own brain.

xpost.