Anya ,'Dirty Girls'
We open it up, we talks the talk, we votes, we shuts it down. This thread is to free up Bureaucracy for daily details as we hammer out the Big Issues towards a vote. Open only when a proposal has been made and seconded according to Buffista policy (Which we voted on!). If this thread is closed, hie thee to Bureaucracy instead!
A better question might be, how many people are actually going to participate?Hard to say. Even a show of hands doesn't really mean much. Could be it starts out popular and declines. Could be it starts out small and grows.
Also in the would rather give it a shot camp. Trial basis might be a plan. Six months, then put it up for a vote.
Any decision can be revisited after six months, including threads. We don't need to add a special thing for this thread, we just need to remember to think about it in six months.
Good proposal, Wolfram. This site might prove a good resource, if the thread passes, and we need guidance on how to structure it.
I think this is worth a shot, provided it won't cause technical issues. I would like to participate, if it gets off the ground.
Although I have no experience with this sort of thread on other boards, I don't think we're other boards. I have friends from other boards who have good experiences with their online book discussion groups.
Thanks to Mutant Enemy, we already have the [stick to this "episode"/break it down/pull it apart/see what's left/see what fits/where's the subtext/what's the subtext/what analogies does this story bring to mind/what tropes are used--are they used for good or ill/what's the message/what's the point] method of discussion down pat. Furthermore, we're a well read group, with a demonstrable, collective love of story.
The good books in this world—heck, even in English—are innumerable. Firefly only had 16 hours of material (and one not-yet-in-the-can film) and merits two open threads, right now. Only four hours of Wonderfalls aired (although people can download some, and others have had access to all--it still only amounts to 13 episodes), yet it has its own thread. In at least a small part, the anticipation of it prompted an entire thread devoted to one Buffista (not saying Tim doesn't deserve a thread, I voted for it, and think he does. I'm just saying that knowing that which turned out to be four hours of entertainment for most of us, did help influence people to approve the thread). We have a whole thread devoted to LotR's series of three, finite films. This isn't a personal slap at those threads, or a request to close them. I lurk in all periodically, and have posted and/or do post in all.
And really? Although Firefly, for its 15 minutes, and Minearverse, for "Wonderfalls" 15 minutes, fulfilled the "If We Build It, We'll Get a Huge Increase In Traffic" prophecy, the other threads mentioned above have not. I think where both Firefly and Minearverse are concerned, we can chalk up much of the traffic to the following:
Finally, from lurking in Literary, it seems like there is a need.* A subset of the regular posters in that thread need* a different sort of discussion than what is typical of Literary. However, another subset is quite satisfied with how the thread works, and it looks to me like those posters would be unhappy if the thread changed. There seems to be some palpable tension and unhappiness spilling out of this disconnect (and I do mean spilling out—I was made aware of it in an unrelated thread here). This tension seems to me to be between valuable members of this community (on both sides)—people who have been around a while (as opposed to people who are still learning how we work, and are trying to change us without knowing us).
Given all the books in the world, and all the bookish Buffistas, I just can't see it as overkill to have two book oriented threads.
That said, I appreciate that we have a controlled philosophy regarding the creation of new threads. I hate those boards where any user can start a new thread, any time his elbow itches. I only want to see us have threads that make sense for us. I don't think we need to be all things to all people. But I don't think our love of story is anything incidental to our identity.
* Granted, "need" is relative. None of us actually needs a message board to begin with. Even if "keeping in touch" is a need, we could all get free LiveJournal accounts, or leave for PF, or WXing, in the next two minutes. Certainly we don't "need" any thread. I am using "need" in the context of the discussion of what gets a thread, and what doesn't.
Cindy wins the Spicy Brains Award for today.
Any decision can be revisited after six months, including threads. We don't need to add a special thing for this thread, we just need to remember to think about it in six months.
What could be inserted (and I am just throwing the idea out there -- I have no strong opinion one way or another) is that the thread would automatically be closed unless it were reapproved with a vote of confidence after 6 months or a year.
I wanted to clarify something that I didn't put in the proposal. The book club thread idea was originated by Heather, here, just so credit is given where due.
mini-meara:
My initial thought is that this could be done in the current Literary thread. It's not high-volume most of the time, or at least not regularly, so I don't see why, say, the first week of a month couldn't include a focused discussion on a particular text.
flea said something similar when she seconded in B-cy. But if we get some serious participation that could get very annoying and distracting for the current occupants of Literary. Also, this thread idea was born in Literary but is not exclusive to people who post in Literary. I think there's a lot of folks out there who would embrace a thread like this who have never been comfortable in Literary.
insert standard infrastructure-based anti-proliferation argument here
snerk
I have no strenuous arguments to make wrt board load at the moment, because we currently have reduced traffic. I just want to make sure it's not disregarded entirely.
Some folks were asking about board load, and this seems to answer that question. The board can handle it - for now. Will this lead to problems in the future? I don't think so, but we tightened our belts once, and if necessary we can do it again.
Also, how would books be chosen? Calli had some great ideas in the Literary thread on this point.
I liked Calli's ideas too, but I don't think we need to worry about the how until we've settled the what. Book clubs exist, even online, so we'll find a way to make it work if the people agree to give it a shot.
A better question might be, how many people are actually going to participate?
A lot of people in literary were enthusiastic about it. That's all I have to go on.
Good proposal, Wolfram. This site might prove a good resource, if the thread passes, and we need guidance on how to structure it.
Cindy is da bomb.
I don't usually post in Literary, but I love to read and I think I would really enjoy a thread like this. One question - how far in advance would the books to be discussed be listed? I'm thinking that, at least for me, it would be very helpful to know several weeks or even a few months in advance so I'd have time to read.
Also, I like Jon's (I think) idea of having the thread automatically close if there's not support to keep it open.
Sure. Since we are so good at closing threads that have small yet vocal groups that hold them near and dear.
I don't suppose folks would hold the thread near and dear if it wasn't working. And if it is working then its doing its job. I think folks are pretty willing to do this on a "let's see" basis.
I don't suppose folks would hold the thread near and dear if it wasn't working
The idea of five people holding it near and dear and everyone else thinking it's not working isn't outrageous.
Threads build sub-communities. That makes them sticky.
One question - how far in advance would the books to be discussed be listed? I'm thinking that, at least for me, it would be very helpful to know several weeks or even a few months in advance so I'd have time to read.
I'm right there with you in needing plenty of lead time. I'd expect that we'll try and accomodate as many people as possible.