This is one of the reasons I prefer just having every suggest a book or two, and then randomly picking from that list.

That's cool. Or when it comes time to choose the next book, we can designate a post number about fifty posts ahead, and whoever successfully numbersluts for it gets to choose the next book, and then you get about fifty posts in a row of people just posting "SLUT!" "SLUT!" "SLUT!" "SLUT!" "SLUT!" "IN YOUR FACE, TROLLOPE PIMPS!" Only then one month you'll have a tie as two people grab the same number, and then we go to a whore-off.

---

This is one of the reasons I prefer just having every suggest a book or two, and then randomly picking from that list.

So much "yes" as to be infinite.

---

Allyson, from way back:

Which is why I'm trying to hammer out a How, a simple, easy to apply How, so that I can enjoy the thing, too. I'm looking for the eureka of it, because otherwise I'd vote no just to avoid the mess. Is where I'm coming from on it. From a completely selfish standpoint, that.

This is going to be one of those things that we learn by actually doing it. We've had a number of good suggestions and a number of possible pitfalls. There's no way to predict what will happen, and some small element of this vote is going to have to be based on optimism and faith in the Buffistas.

That being said, I think that bullshit consensus (with the possible assistance of Mr. Poll,) at least for the first few books, is probably going to be the easiest way to get the ball rolling, and either the thead will work, or it will adapt to fit a new system that will work.

And Allyson, from not so way back:

Again, I'm a fan of bullshit consensus, and I'd be happiest (and I think it's sort of fun) for folks to sort of pimp for their favorite books, because then, there's all kinds of good recommendations, as well.

Yep.

---

Since the posting yesterday I've made quite a few changes in the proposal so I'm posting the latest amendment:

Proposal: To have a Book Club thread wherein a specific book (or books) would be discussed Buffista style on a specific time rotation. The initial basic structure for the Book Club thread (subject to modification as contained below) will be:

1) One book a month. The first 3 books will be chosen at the beginning of the thread by participants in the thread with at least a month of lead time for the first book, and every book thereafter. The method of choosing will be suggestions from participants, narrowed down by consensus and, if necessary, a Mr. Poll. Literary diversity will be encouraged. Only books that are readily available at your public library will be eligible.

2) Book discussions will not be officially moderated. "Benign" moderation in the form of discussion points, questions and suggestions from readers well-versed in the text will be welcome.

3) All the other details of the book club operation are flexible (including method of book selection, number of books per rotation, length of rotation, and length of discussion period) and are subject to change to suit the preferences of the thread denizens.

Purpose: The purpose of the thread is to accomodate an expressed desire by a number of Buffistas to have such a thread to allow focused and uninhibited discussion on a particular text as well as providing us with an opportunity and excuse to read and discuss books that may be outside our usual genre. And to have fun doing all that!

END PROPOSAL

The following clauses may be added to the final proposal if people think it would help allay some of the proliferation/resource concerns:

Possible clause A: (Auto-close) This thread will automatically close after 6 months unless a vote of confidence is taken to keep it open. The vote of confidence may be prefaced by a standard discussion period in lightbulb at anyone's request and does not require seconds.

Possible clause B: (First to go) At the exclusive discretion of ita (or her designee to monitor board resources) if any thread needs to be suspended or closed to conserve board resources, this thread will be the first one to go.

Also the following has been suggested as a suitable slug if the thread gets created:

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.

---

I hate that we're all getting so angry and snippy with each other.

I'm proposing something in the spirit of compromise. Because it is in the spirit of compromise, I am not marrying it. I'm proposing it, and that's it. It's up to you all to mull it over, and decide.

What if we set up a book club thread in the Buffista folder at PF, from today, until the end of August, and tried it there, first?

This is different than trying it out in Literary. It would have its own thread. It would be at a forum we--as Buffistas--do use from time to time, and to which we all have (or can instantly get) access. We could link it from both our links page, and at the top of the Literary thread here, so we wouldn't get lost.

If we agree to this compromise, we could:

• End this discussion right now
  

please hold your applause until the end of the post

• Put the ballot on hold until after August

• At the beginning of September (once the religious and civic holidays are done--whenever most folks will be here), we'd reopen lightbulb for ONE day only

For that day, the users of the thread would report back with regard to format, and how the discussion has worked, etc. For that day, people who still have concerns could ask questions.

The next day, we'd start the voting. This would add no days to our discussion and voting process. It would just insert a previously unplanned break somewhere in the middle.

In the meantime, people who have questions and concerns can watch how things work, for themselves--in real time.

This would allow us to:

• Choose our first book (or first handful of books)

• Set up some structure

• Get over the initial bumps (we know there'll be bumps)

• Wade through some of the administrivia, without harshing the mellow of the Buffistas who are strongly opposed to the thread

• It would also give the curious-but-not-sold some time to check it out

• It would give the supporters time to get it up and running

• It would give those with experience in book clubbing (either cyber or f2f) time to give us some pointers

• It would give our technicalistas more time to work on getting us off of MySQL and/or more time to get a truer picture of how much potential for trouble there is in any given new thread

• It would allow us to admit failure, if this really won't work for us

As part of this compromise, if the measure fails in ballot, but the people who want a bookclub want to keep going, we would be allowed to keep our thread open at PF, in the Buffista folder, under the Buffista name.

What do you think?

(Wolfram, please don't kill me. I love your proposal. I think it would be great to discuss books, in depth, with Buffistas. I love it so much, that I am floored that so many people I like and respect are so vehemently opposed to it. That gives me pause, because I do respect these people. I also do have concerns about lit agenda, and the leader role--because Buffistas are fairly independent minded. Regardless of all that, people--our friendships--our community? These are what is important, and much more important than any given thread. Plus, we might have a better picture of where we are with regard to our open tech issues, by then.)

---

I'm proposing something in the spirit of compromise. Because it is in the spirit of compromise, I am not marrying it. I'm proposing it, and that's it. It's up to you all to mull it over, and decide.

I don't think we need a compromise. The discussion period is working as we thought it would. People in favor of the thread have said so, people opposed have expressed their opposition, and undecided people ask for clarification from both sides.

Also (in a new spin on a popular argument) shunting contentious threads to PF in the spirit of compromise is a really bad precedent to set, in my opinion.

I, for one, would rather see this go to a vote tomorrow as scheduled (which will also end discussion on this matter for at least 6 months. Yay!)

Wolfram, please don't kill me.

Cindy, your need to find a compromise comes from a place inside you that is impossible not to love. Don't ever change.

---

Also (in a new spin on a popular argument) shunting contentious threads to PF in the spirit of compromise is a really bad precedent to set, in my opinion.

I think the precedent was already set when the F2F thread had to go there, after last Fall's consolidation, but I understand and agree with your point.

I, for one, would rather see this go to a vote tomorrow as scheduled (which will also end discussion on this matter for at least 6 months. Yay!)

I feel that way in large part too, and am happy to accept whatever happens. I probably fail to come across this way, but whenever something is proposed, whether it is something I love or hate, what I most want is for the will of the Buffistas to be decided. Thank you for considering the compromise, anyhow. You've already compromised a lot, and I admire that.

Wolfram, please don't kill me.

Cindy, your need to find a compromise comes from a place inside you that is impossible not to love. Don't ever change.

No fear of that. This old dog tries the new tricks, but... And thank you, you're sweet. Personally, I'm pulling for this to win. I will vote in favor of it. I think your updated proposal is good (and did not see it until after I posted my compromise proposal). Thanks for all your patience, and hard work.

FWIW, I am now in favor of the clauses you've added at the end.

---

I feel that way in large part too, and am happy to accept whatever happens. I probably fail to come across this way, but whenever something is proposed, whether it is something I love or hate, what I most want is for the will of the Buffistas to be decided.

Hec said it earlier too, and the same goes for me. If the thread passes I'll be very pleased and eager to jump in with the Book Club. If it fails to pass, I'll be disappointed. And that's it, no hard feelings.

---

I think testing the book club in Literary, where odds are strong it will fail, is a bad idea. The inevitable result seems to be the "this didn't work in literary, so why do you think it deserves its own thread" argument, which will just suck for everyone

Putting it on LJ or PF is less-bad, but will limit participation (I, for one, would be much less likely to participate if it wasn't on b.org), and I agree with Wolf about the precedent-setting.

It's worth pointing out that the only threads we have actually voted in, other than those involved in the consolidation in which some threads were repurposed, were Minearverse and Wonderfalls Spoilers. Everything else was started under bullshit consensus.

---

And we voted on Lightbulbs if I remember correctly, but I think you meant non-admin threads.

---