I'm pretty anti-poliferation. I post about it, inspite of getting shat on for it on a regular basis and I'm irked that I feel compelled to defend myself.

Huh. This was enlightening to me, at least as far as how heavily perception influences things.

I'm stunned, seriously bowled over, that Kat feels shat on for her anti-proliferation stance. A feeling that seems to indicate a feeling of being in the minority, or at least of feeling beaten up all the time.

This seems so strange to me, as someone who was against some of the thread consolidation we did and who is not anti-proliferation. To be perfectly honest, I've always felt that creating any thread is an uphill battle, only because of the anti-proliferation camp, who has (to me) always felt like the most powerful lobby on the board.

I guess power, as well as being crapped on, is somewhat in the eye of the beholder as well.

Which is not meant to imply you're not beaten up for your opinion Kat, just that I have perhaps overestimated just how much pull the anti-proliferation stance has.

And yet, still.... It's the one argument guaranteed to come up in pretty much every thread proposal.

---

the most powerful lobby on the board

Don't you measure that by results? Results like, say, new threads?

---

Don't you measure that by results? Results like, say, new threads?

I was measuring by, among other things, vocality and consistency, and the general impression that more threads have been voted down than approved. Are those numbers wrong?

Not to mention that I count the massive thread consolidation as a huge victory for the anti-proliferation camp.

---

So, carry on, without that last factor. It's irrelevant.

I'd need to go back and recheck, but I'm fairly sure that though you were the most articulate in laying out your position, you weren't the only one who felt that way. And if you're no longer subscribing to Literary, then it is relevant, because you and the others were there first, were participating and talking and swapping recs and posting links to articles and all the rest.

I wasn't getting what I wanted out of it, so I didn't participate -- well, boo hoo on me. That doesn't give me the right to repurpose the thread and make it a place where you don't go. If anything, it makes me want a separate thread even more; freewheeling, non-twisty and gnarled discussion and recommendation-swapping are a totally valid thread purpose, and it makes me profoundly uncomfortable to think that anyone with a longer and deeper history with the thread isn't there anymore.

I apologize like mad if any of that, or anything else I've said, sounds patronizing. I don't value the bones-and-marrow discussion of one or two pieces over the more wide-ranging general book-riffing, but the overall vibe I got from the kerfuffle was that although there was interest in both kinds of discussion, a lot of the long-term posters did not feel at ease with both kinds. And, given that, I personally would feel more comfortable, less like an intruder or interloper or intellectual bully, having a separate thread for each kind.

Hopefully with plenty of crossover between the two, but space for each.

I'm probably still stating it very badly indeed. More apologies.

---

I'm thinking that some of the arguments that were anti-general tv thread are applicable to using the literary thread for a book club thread too. I so don't want to hunt them down.

---

What JZ said.

---

And if you're no longer subscribing to Literary, then it is relevant, because you and the others were there first, were participating and talking and swapping recs and posting links to articles and all the rest.

Oh lord, I was not planning on participating in any of this.

Sweets, just for reassurance, and speaking only for myself: this really, really is not a problem. OK? Truly. If a book club thread would allow people to go on about whether or not T.H. White really meant to use an allegory of Nazi Germany in The Once and Future King, or whatever said book happens to be, I'll vote for the thread in a heartbeat. I won't go within a country mile of it, but I'll do my best to make sure you guys get to have it.

And, regardless of outcome of this particular discussion or vote, I'm out of Literary. Truly. Not speaking for Aimee, or anyone else who may have my feelings about crit; just speaking for me.

I don't want to be there again, period. So it doesn't arise.

---

Lobby? Camp? Group of people sharing a basic opinion?

Two of those terms are a little more polarising than I'd have used. As far as I can tell, we've had Music, LotR, Minearverse, Firefly, Firefly Spoilers, Great Write Way, Technology -- all formed since we got here, no?

I don't expect everyone to have the same paranoia over board performance that I do -- I take every delay personally. But I think tossing around terms like "lobby" and "camp" are a little much.

---

I was measuring by, among other things, vocality and consistency, and the general impression that more threads have been voted down than approved. Are those numbers wrong?

I believe so, yes. Most threads that have been proposed and remained proposed until a vote occured have been created.

---

Board not called Bookistas, to be blunt.

Not called Cinemistas, LotRistas, Comicsistas, Technoistas either, and yet it accommodates those all nicely. I think it does, anyway. It’s not like books and Buffistas are unmixy things.

I think there's a false assumption that Bookclub would generate a mass of traffic akin to showday and post episode watch and posts. A slow, but steady, influx of commentary seems the more likely possibility.

Why is one a false assumption and one a likely possibility? Closest thing I see is a show thread – we all agree to have a book read (episode viewed) by a certain date, and then we talk about it, most heavily on the date and a few days to a week after. Also, even if it does create a slow and steady pace, that’s all the more reason I’d want it in a dedicated thread – so I’d have a big bunch of back-to-back posts.

discussions threatened to swamp Natter...so we have a thread for that

Is this the only valid reason for creating a new thread? Doesn’t seem to be to me.

So, I figure it this way. If I'm thinking about voting for a thread, is it one that I would send more money to keep us on a dedicated server for? Is it a thread that fills a need not filled elsewhere?

Those are good criteria. For me, the answer is yes, I’d pony up more money to keep us on a dedicated server (actually, I feel this way anyhow) for what I anticipate being a good thread, a book club thread. Is it a thread that fills a need not filled elsewhere? Well, it seems to be. There is no book club, and people who inhabit Literary acknowledge that they don’t have lengthy discussions about one book at a time.

Also, FWIW, I want a dedicated thread, because I think it will be easier to follow, and it will make me happier to have it work like a show thread. I cast no aspersions and pat not the heads of anyone in any thread (unless asked to head-pat for comfort) anywhere with regard to the type of discussion that they have had, do have, or will have … or don’t have, or have been accused of not having.

I just want a book club. You can talk about ‘em however you want, using whatever language and terminology you choose. And there’d better be a good sci-fi read in the queue at some point. IJS

Also? I just did a whole combo color, font size thing in the abbreviated way DX showed me last week, and I’m kind of proud if it worked. Which it didn't. Until just now. Carry on.

---