The Sword and Laser discussion
Renegade read section
message 1:
by
Ruth (tilltab) Ashworth
(new)
May 03, 2013 06:43AM
I'd like one. A lot.
reply
|
flag
In general, renegade reading posts (discussions of books not currently the main read) have been placed in the "What else are you reading?" section.http://www.goodreads.com/topic/group_...
Of course, but...wouldn't it be lovely if they had a place of their very own?And by 'wouldn't it be lovely' I mean 'it certainly WOULD be lovely, I will destroy anyone who disagrees with me, and I demand such a section be created at once'. Just so we're clear. ;)
Ruth wrote: "Of course, but...wouldn't it be lovely if they had a place of their very own?And by 'wouldn't it be lovely' I mean 'it certainly WOULD be lovely, I will destroy anyone who disagrees with me, and ..."
That's the spirit Ruth!
I'm not disagreeing. Just looking for a clarification. How would this section be different from a section where you discuss stuff you are reading that isn't the main pick? If you are suggesting a parallel reading selection I think this would be a bit complicated to host inside a book club with a main reading selection. Maybe a new sword and laser companion book club would be a better place for something like that.
Nick, I think the idea is to highlight a renegade read and give people who want to talk about it a bit of organization. Ruth brought up the idea in my Guidelines thread for the May Renegade Read wherein I asked people to preface their threads so we could tell what they were.
I agree with Ruth. And not entirely because of my fear of being destroyed
I can see both sides of it. If we do regular Renegade Reads I think it would be useful. On the other hand, this is the first since Jenny did a CloudAtlas RR the month before it was a selection.
Mod
I think the idea is to highlight a renegade read and give people who want to talk about it a bit of organization. Ruth brought up the idea in my Guidelines thread for the May Renegade Read ..."
Well technically it was my suggestion, but she's certainly the one to run with it.
I think it warrants it's own section, because it's organized. The what else are you reading is better for less formal things. I found it difficult for cold Days and Memory of Light. I think both would have benefitted from multiple threads.
A separate group isn't really practical. It's going to less obvious to people than a new section.
Then again, I've created my own group, for that very reason, but I mostly expect just my friends to participate.
Nick wrote: "I'm not disagreeing."Okay, good, you get to live. :P
Nick wrote: " How would this section be different from a section where you discuss stuff you are reading that isn't the main pick? "
Okay, some details then:
'What else are you reading?' fills with various threads along the lines of 'hey, who else just read...' and 'OMG new book by...' and 'suggestions for books like...' and all that kind of thing, which is great, but makes the section a jumble of stuff which is difficult to sort through if you just want to keep up with an alt read.
I see alt picks as an unofficial but popular choice a proportion of the forum have agreed to read together alongside or instead of the main pick. Not everyone will want to read them, but those that do will want to discuss them, so it makes sense for them to be apart somewhere where people can join in or ignore at their pleasure. Having an alt pick section will also mean that if someone is considering reading a book they know WAS an alt pick, they won't have to sort through every other book folk have mentioned to read up and get a gist of what folk here have said about it.
Ruth wrote: "Of course, but...wouldn't it be lovely if they had a place of their very own?And by 'wouldn't it be lovely' I mean 'it certainly WOULD be lovely, I will destroy anyone who disagrees with me, and ..."
Why can't more people state their positions as calmly and rationally as this? I find your views intriguing and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Seriously, might be something to look into.
I think that's be a good idea (not be because I fear a repriasal from Ruth - I have no fear!). It's be nice to find specific book discussion threads easier.
Dara wrote: "not be because I fear a repriasal from Ruth - I have no fear!"Check under your bed. Check under your car. Watch the shadows. I'll be watching...oh, wait, you agreed with me? Well, nevermind then, you're safe...for now. :P
I don't need the "What else are you reading?" section restated to me. I know what it is. My point is that you are basically advocating for a side pick section which requires a bit of moderation. This is why I suggested a companion book club since unless I'm mistaken the powers that be have nixed the idea of official side picks. I've been in the group long enough to understand the history.I see mass hysteria without a official moderator for side picks. I see this getting a bit complicated. But since everyone else is so gung ho over the idea I'll back away from comment and let everyone figure this out on their own.
It's just an extra folder. Why would that be a bad thing?
The way it is described this is more than a extra folder. Otherwise the other section would suffice for the needs described. If you really want organization of discussion I'd see it as being a new folder for each alternate pick.
Huh.
Most other groups I've been in have just set up one folder for any side or renegade reads. It keeps them from being flooded under in the 'What Else Are You Reading' section.
If they're asking for a specific folder for each renegade read, then I'd say no to that.
Most other groups I've been in have just set up one folder for any side or renegade reads. It keeps them from being flooded under in the 'What Else Are You Reading' section.
If they're asking for a specific folder for each renegade read, then I'd say no to that.
Nick wrote: "I don't need the "What else are you reading?" section restated to me."I didn't mean to insult you; I was just trying to explain my reasoning.
I don't see that having an alt book thread would make them any more official than they already are; they seem to me to be something that pops up from time to time based on popular opinion. I don't expect a very organised discussion for the book, and if there are more frequent alt picks I expect the section will become a bit messy, but at least that messy will be away from the other messiness in the 'what else are you reading' section. I was never in favour of a new folder for each alt pick for the reasons you state.
Also, Nick, sad though I am to say it, since I generally quite like you, destruction IS now winging its way to you, possibly on the wings of monkeys, but who can say? :P
The only thing that worries me with bringing renegade reads front and center is if they will then discourage those books from being main picks. We don't know what Tom and Veronica are planning and they let us nominate and vote for books some months. Discussing other books we're reading is great, I just don't want it to effect the official book club picks. And yes, I know there are tons of books out there for them to pick. But I have been trying to work my way through the backlog of old S&L books because I find the list to be a really great way to try out a lot of different authors and I hope that list remains unaffected by renegade picks.
I would actually suggest starting a variety of threads for different books where anyone reading that book who wants to talk about it can. If someone wants to start a discussion about any book they're reading they can do it there. That way it isn't just one renegade pick but a whole forum where you can discuss any book you want.
Shaina, I agree; I definitely wouldn't want to divert any attention from the main pick. I feel that by having a section of its own, any renegade reads could coexist happily in their own little place, left to run wild and easy to ignore and focus on the official book we are reading.With your suggestion, I'm not clear if you mean a section for any book people want to discuss (a section which can have various different threads within it, such as the 'wool' section, or simply one thread per book. One thread per book can already be done in the 'what are you reading' section. This is what currently happens with renegade reads, but I feel that if there is support for a renegade read, folks may wish to create more than one thread about that read, and that just clogs up the 'what are we reading' section. I see other books I'm reading as separate things in my head from renegade reads, so it feels natural to have a section for them.
I guess what I'm suggesting is whats already being done with the what else are we're reading section. I guess I think that giving any more attention to a renegade read seems unnecessary. we can see if I still feel that way after reading this months renegade pick. I haven't been here long, what has beed done threadwise for renegade picks in the past?
My group has a Side Reads folder. It's only used occasionally and mayhem and chaos has not broken out.Shaina wrote: "The only thing that worries me with bringing renegade reads front and center is if they will then discourage those books from being main picks."
There was a renegade read of Cloud Atlas in August/September last year and then it was the official book in October. T&V had known about it months in advance and let it go so I don't think they're worried.
Tamahome wrote: ""@tamahome - the textbook definition of the Texas saying "Big hat. No cattle."
I'd be happy if T or V just picked a book or two, even at random, out of the what else are you reading thread for the month and declared them the alt picks on the podcast.
Guys? While it's nice to talk about a section for the renegade read, how about we actually talk about tis month's renegade read? There are now more posts about an administrative, organizational point than about the actual book.
Chill out, Rick, it's only half way through the month! Not all of us read quickly. Personally, I got sucked into Wool, and have only read a little of Player of Games at the moment. I'll get to discussing it once I have something to say....And perhaps by then... :P
Ruth, First, I wasn't talking specifically to you. It's not all about you.
Second, my point is that there are no comments on the Renegade Read so the issue of organizing them is irrelevant.
Third, it's half way through the month and precisely one post not made by me has been put up. I'm fine if people don't want to talk about the book - but it IS halfway through the month and I want to remind people that the Renegade Read is out there.
Well now, I didn't assume it was all about me. I said 'not all of us read quickly'. I was thinking of other people among us that don't read quickly. I gave my reasons as another example, because if it happened to me, it could happen to others.And I don't think the issue of this thread is irrelevant because I think if there was a clear place to post, others would find it easier and be more likely to comment.
And I find that pushing people to talk, in real life, certainly, tends to be greeted with silence. It's hard to think of something to say if you feel pressured to. I'm assuming folk will post when they are good and ready.
Unfortunately this thread is a prime example of why the renegade read would need moderation if it was its own section. Especially in a book club of this size, there are going to be people who disagree, misunderstandings, or altercations. Most of them will probably be resolved in an adult manner, but having a moderator ensures it.Personally, I feel we already have a section that covers it, 'What else are you reading'. There is nothing saying you can not title a thread there 'Renegade Read Discussion - May ' and have a discussion regarding an alternate book.
The only reason a new section might be required is if the renegade reads became popular enough to warrant it. As of right now there does not seem to be that much interest. I have seen way to many forums add sections that almost never see use; as a result all it does is end up adding clutter.
My suggestion would be to start making more formalized Renegade Read threads, see how successful it is, and if it becomes very popular revisit this topic then.
Also, a question comes to mind... who would pick the renegade reads? (Another possible reason a moderator might be necessary).
How about taking the suggestions from the first few days of what else are you reading of each month, then putting them to a vote. winner is the renegade read.
I'm also curious about how we pick renegade reads, it seems like one person decides and we all just go along. our pick a renegade renegade read :-)
Mr. Noah wrote: "How about taking the suggestions from the first few days of what else are you reading of each month, then putting them to a vote. winner is the renegade read."That may be way to organized for a renegade read. It seems to be much more of an organic anarchists movement rather than a democratic one.
Micah wrote: "That may be way to organized for a renegade read. It seems to be much more of an organic anarchists movement rather than a democratic one. "Seriously, you can't organize anarchy. A successful renegade reads the pulse of the group, strikes out on their own, and hopes others follow (or really, doesn't care.)
Rule number one is don't talk about Renegade Read.
Rule number two: make your safe word short and easy to remember.
Jenny wrote: "Micah wrote: "Seriously, you can't organize anarchy. A successful renegade reads the pulse of the group, strikes out on their own, and hopes others follow (or really, doesn't care.) "Like a honeybadger!!!!!!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Right that was hilarious. RIGHT? Guys? Guys? Guys? ahhhhhh man....I'll see myself out.......
The whole point of a book club is for everyone to read the same book, so we can discuss it.It would make more sense to have a parallel book club/group than to have a "renegade read" section.
If you are reading something else (plus), "What else you are reading" is the perfect place.
If you are reading something else instead... well, you are not really taking part in the club activity, are you?
Yeah, but "Renegade Read" uses alliteration.It's all Raarr! RAARR!
"What else are you reading" is simply too wimpy for renegade readers.
Rodrigo wrote: "The whole point of a book club is for everyone to read the same book, so we can discuss it.It would make more sense to have a parallel book club/group than to have a "renegade read" section.
If yo..."
Nah, Tom thinks we are cute when we do renegade reads.
William wrote: "This Nick cat's a negative Nancy."So anyone who doesn't completely agree with you is just being negative? My whole point is I think the current section is adequate. I'm saying no more. Flame on forums .. flame on..
Let's all apply Wheaton's law and go back to pressuring our lovely leaders to do more free work.
Mod
1) As Nick points out, please don't make this personal. Non name-calling conversations are the Sword & Laser Way.
2) Tom and Veronica talked about this thread in the most recent podcast (Bare your Sword section - 43:40). They go over both their pro and con feelings about the idea - so it's not a simple "let's do it" or "totally rejected" from them, they're going to need to consider it. Take a listen if you haven't so you can know where it currently stands.
Hmm, a thought occurs. Jlawrence, you and Becca are mods, but not currently picking books to read. Any interest in wetting your feet by making renegade suggestions?
Mod
Nick wrote:So anyone who doesn't completely agree with you is just being negative?"No.
I was trying to play with you.
I thought you'd catch the ball and throw it back, not let it hit you in the face.
And how can anyone consider "negative Nancy" to be name-calling?
That's ridiculous.
If I can't call people negative Nancy or turnip head, my post count will be cut in half!
Mod
The point is: discussion on these forums is precisely to allow many different opinions to be expressed - about the topics at hand, not about the participants of the discussion. Calling someone negative adds 0 content to the discussion, but *does* open up the potential for misunderstandings/flame-war-flamethrowers-guttering-to-life, etc.
Now please carry on non-turniphead-filled discussion of the issues at hand.
That's pretty condescending, Jlawrence, but at least you didn't call me a name.
