SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion
Group Business
>
Rules for Nominating Books - a rewrite
date
newest »
newest »
You could also take the opportunity to add guidance on who is eligible to vote. That doesn't matter for people who have been in the group a long time, but it does matter for folks who are new or less active. Something like,
You are welcome to vote if… [?you are a member of SFFBC and you intend to read the monthly pick if your nomination wins. ? ]
Bonnie, the rules are (mostly) from before my time, only slight edits have been made since I've been a mod. I'll read through this when I have the spoons to concentrate. (This to say that I am not personally emotionally attached to these rules, so I'm open to changing them if needed.)Anyone reading this, I guess I'd like to know what are the things that are the most confusing to you about nominations? What would you like to know? What isn't clear, what's missing? From the original rules that is, you can see them in this month's nomination thread, which I won't link to because the thread will be deleted in a month. It's in the Group Business folder.
Also I have to say that most people never read the rules, so they're pretty much only there so that we can point to them when we ruthlessly say no to a nomination :)
Mod
We'll discuss if we can use this as a template, with a few alterations :)
Anna wrote: "Bonnie, the rules are (mostly) from before my time, only slight edits have been made since I've been a mod. "Oh yeah, I forgot I was going to put the actual existing rules here too, so can compare:
--------------------------
1. All members can make only one nomination each.
2. Nominations must be in the format [book link] by [author link] and must include a brief reason why the book is nominated for the theme.
(Eg. I nominate Magician by Raymond E. Feist for the theme of fantasy dealing with multiple worlds. Set on the world of Midkemia it deals with an invasion of aliens from the world of Kelewan via rifts in space and time.)
3. Nominations which do not include those two requirements will not be accepted.
4. The poll will be posted after the thread is closed and nominations checked.
5. Nominations cannot include books already read by the group or books which are not the first in a series, or a standalone, unless allowed by the theme.
6. Each member can second one nomination.
7. After 7 days the books with most seconds that meet the requirements will go into the poll. The amount of books in the poll will depend on how many are nominated and seconded but will be no more than 5.
8. Nominations will not be accepted if we've read that author within the past 24 months
9. As per the poll we ran, authors may not submit their own work for nomination.
10. No children's books, although YA is allowed.
11. Short fiction and novellas are not eligible and the book must be a minimum of 170 pages.
12. Graphic novels or comics will not be accepted, unless allowed by the theme.
After the end of each nomination period this thread will be closed and all further discussion about the nominated books will be on the poll. Before the start of the next month's nominations this thread will be cleared. The list of nominated books will be copied to a recommendations thread.
***The moderator's decision is final***
Mod
I think we may as well get rid of the rule demanding a brief reason why a book has been nominated unless 'we' are going to start enforcing it.
All books nominated by Ryan DM (me) automatically make it to the monthly poll.
Mod
Ryan wrote: "I think we may as well get rid of the rule demanding a brief reason why a book has been nominated unless 'we' are going to start enforcing it."*sighs dramatically*
Mod
(I haven't slept or eaten properly and have a headache, so don't take this too seriously.)I think I'll change the rules to:
"There are rules but you won't read them anyway so we'll let you know if you broke them."
Ryan wrote: "Everyday I provide evidence as to why I shouldn't be a mod."No comment.
Mod
I still think two is plenty, and setting it at seven (Gaiman and UKLG) is ridiculous and doesn't stop the other thousand authors having all their eleventymillion books nominated.
Mod
I love a good new to shelf nomination theme, I don't even mind being DM bombarded by people who think the group should read the same author every month.The top 10 authors have 49/345 books on the shelf.
(A few books have more than one author, so add a couple.)252 authors of books on the shelf
252 authors of books
put one up... what the f*ck?!
(still) 252 authors of books on the shelf
Should we put proposed rule changes in their own thread, and have this one for representation of the existing rules?Otherwise we might soon be bogged down in discussion about popularity, numbers of authors, what is YA, what the intent of the group is...
I don't think we need a thread for that, unless someone wants to get into the nitty gritty of something. I just want to know if you're the only one who wants to rewrite the rules, and if there's something else about the rules that we should take a look at while we're at it.I still think most people don't read them, so I can't muster the energy to be very enthusiastic about how they look :D I'm happy to edit them if people think it's needed though!
(Still have a headache, have only eaten lentil chips and coffee, still haven't slept. Probably sound grumpier than I am. All is good, genuinely want to hear everyone's opinions on All Things!)
I do like Bonnie’s rewrite. They are clear, concise and in a good sequence. I hadn’t read the current rules from beginning to end in while m, but I did again, when Bonnie posted them. They are a bit of a mess.
Bonnie wrote: "You could also take the opportunity to add guidance on who is eligible to vote. ... You are welcome to vote if… [?you are a member of SFFBC and you intend to read the monthly pick if your nomination wins. ? ]"on the Mystery Forum, if your book wins you are expected to lead the discussion - I've had to do this twice
I vote, but don't often read the winner if it's not something I'm interested in or if it's over $9.99 in Kindle format
Hmm, even I did it unconsciously, proposed a change!POX!
it doesn't affect me now. But it did when I was new to this group and to Readers Review. Was I supposed to vote? Not supposed to? etc.
I do remember being pretty perplexed by the whole process when I first joined. It took me a few months to truly understand how it functioned. I’m in another group that requires the nominator to “lead” the discussion. It’s pretty low-key and you’re not meant to lead any truly deep conversation, unless you want to. But it does mean that at least one person is guaranteed to participate.
Bonnie wrote: "You could also take the opportunity to add guidance on who is eligible to vote. That doesn't matter for people who have been in the group a long time, but it does matter for folks who are new or less active.Something like,
You are welcome to vote if… [?you are a member of SFFBC and you intend to read the monthly pick if your nomination wins. ? ]"
Voting guidelines are a good idea. It also annoys me no end in various groups when people vote heavily in favour of popular BOTM books they've read and liked, but then many of these voters mysteriously fade away when the time comes. I'd like to see a suggestion that people only vote if they intend to participate.
I'd like that too, but there are several things to consider:- Sometimes plans change. We start nominations 1.5 months before the book is scheduled, it's possible something prevents participation when the time comes.
- We have silent members who read the books and enjoy reading the discussion, but don't participate in the actual discussion. I understand that it might feel strange to some, but it's a perfectly valid way to be a member of this group! :)
- This is supposed to be a fun hobby, not a chore. We can't fine people if they failt to read a book they said they'd read.
It only annoys me when someone votes for a book they have no intention of reading, and then others who didn't want to read it feel like they have to slog through it. But there is no book that everyone will like anyway, so this would happen even if everyone read the books they vote for.
Fair comments, Anna. It is supposed to be fun, and we don't want to 'police' things. It's just a peeve of mine.
I totally get it! There's just not much we can do about it :/
it seemed that it was like that for people with The Steerswoman as we'd just done a buddy read a few months before. I voted for it because i thought people would enjoy it, but I didn't re-read it or participate much in the discussion
I appreciate Bonnie's cleaned-up rewrite, fwiw.
Mod
We will also make it clear that all members can nominate, vote and second. I know it's hard to see 100+ people vote for something and then only a handful in discussion, but such is the fate of online book clubs. And it's okay! Lurkers reading this, you are in our thoughts and welcome! Don't stop!
The next thing I encourage is turning this energy on getting additional noms and folks in discussion :D
I think t's good to mention that voting is not obligatory. At first, I felt bad anytime I didn't vote for some reason. Perhaps I didn't know there is so many other options. Now, I'm voting only for books I want to read. If it wins, I read, if not I check out other options. Sometimes I decide to read the book that won. Usually, there is a RR for something I voted for or an interesting BR proposition. Or I can make some progress to fulfill a challenge. There are so many fun activities here, I'm never bored even if I pass on both BOTM.
Aga wrote: "I think t's good to mention that voting is not obligatory. At first, I felt bad anytime I didn't vote for some reason. .."Wow, ok, that could explain a lot of those votes from lurkers.
(Not that lurking is a bad thing, as our lovely mods remind us.)
I've always assumed that a good percentage of the invisible/lurker votes are from people who want to see a particular book discussed. There could be several reasons. They could be genuinely interested in the book and read it with the group, but are too shy to participate in the discussion. Maybe one day they'll feel like popping in :) They might read it and not have anything to say about it. Or maybe they want to see if people like it and they think this group's taste is so immaculate that it's better than looking at GR average rating and reviews ;)
I'm sure it's all of those things. It has happened the same in groups that I moderate. But Aga's note expresses something I'd never thought of.
True, it never occurred to me that someone might feel obligated to vote!
Maybe it’s just me usually feeling obligated to do stuff with my "default volunteer" personality ;) But I WAS a lurker myself. So maybe there are more lurkers voting because they think they have to. And it’s easy to vote and stay a lurker.
I still think it’s more likely the lurkers want to vote, because who doesn’t love clicking on things! 😄
Allison wrote: "Yeah, I agree, it's much cleaner, with some tweaks :) We'll try out the more concise version next month! Thanks for the ideas and the draft!"HURRAH!!
I will have made an improvement in this world!
(I love making informational improvements.)
Please continue to let lurkers vote. There are many reasons why a mostly lurker like me votes in the polls.
Lurkers are welcome! 😄 But do let us know some of those reasons, it’s interesting!
I am not for fines or policing. I would be for guidance.
"We welcome you to vote...""XYZ are welcome to vote..."
When I was new and just joined a group, then got an email saying "Come here and vote" it was disconcerting. I mean I just joined, I am brand new, who am I to be telling longtime members what they should read, what if I...
Guidance.
Mod
I think this group is very nice and is welcoming to people.Thanks to moderators and nice people!
🤗
I like the rewrite, Bonnie! Thanks for taking the time to do that and share! In addition to those who don't read the rules, there are people like me who read them thoroughly, multiple times, and then another couple times before we post because we are worried we will accidentally break one. It's also possible that we never actually post because we are worried maybe there's a rule we missed or misunderstood and so maybe it's best to wait until tomorrow anyway...
All that to say that it's nice to have a concise version so it's easier to understand :) (and that sometimes I lurk because I'm anxious about posting)
Re: voting, where I live it takes a while for me to get most things, so I don't usually read books while they are the BOTM.
Also, sometimes I vote because there's a book I ~don't~ want to win, for whatever reason.
I agree with AMG. Internet is sometimes a scary place. I was a lurker for a year before I've joined my first discussion. I enjoyed reading discussions and reading books. I stopped lurking when I was sure that this is a safe place, everyone is so nice, and MODs are caring superhumans :) It was a phase that give me time to understand the rules and what is going on (because a lot is going on every month).
Stephanie and AMG, I know exactly what you're both talking about!We're actually just now starting to use a template of sorts for the BOTM thread starting posts. The idea is that the starting post has all the information about what's OK in the non-spoiler thread, etc. It's hard to draw the line, especially if I haven't read the book yet, so sometimes I might bark at a comment that wasn't spoilery after all. I'm super protective of people who want to experience their stories without knowing anything beforehand. Where that line is depends so much on the person and the story, so yeah, it's almost impossible to put into words. Take a look at the December BOTM thread starters and if you have ideas for how to make it clearer, do let us know! You can DM one of us if you prefer not to do so here.
If I've scared anyone away from the group by being too snappish in a non-spoiler/nomination thread, I do apologize!
And about anxiety deciding how you participate? Yes! I remember when Allison asked me to co-mod with her, and I went into an anxiety spiral about how I'd have to *discuss* things, until Allison promised I wouldn't have to if I don't want to. The same is true for everyone else. However you participate, it's enough and good! :) (If you follow the rules that is :P)
Mod
I understand! I still remember when I got told off in a non-spoiler thread (for valid reasons) and that's probably part of why I'm now so strict about it :)
SciFi and Fantasy Book Club
Books mentioned in this topic
The Steerswoman (other topics)Magician (other topics)
Magician (other topics)
Authors mentioned in this topic
Raymond E. Feist (other topics)Raymond E. Feist (other topics)
__________________________________________
1. Members can make one nomination each, and second one nomination each.
2. Format your nomination like this: [Book link] by [Author link], plus a brief reason why the book is nominated for the theme.
Example: I nominate Magician by Raymond E. Feist for the theme of fantasy dealing with multiple worlds. Set on the world of Midkemia it deals with an invasion of aliens from the world of Kelewan via rifts in space and time.
NOT ELIGIBLE:
* Books already read by the group
* Books by an author read by the group in the last two years
* Books past #1 in a series
* Children’s books (YA is allowed)
* Short stories, novelettes or novellas (< 170 pages)
* Graphic novels or comics (unless allowed by theme)
ELIGIBLE:
* Novels that fit the theme
* Standalone
* First in a series
* Adult or Young Adult (YA is less popular but is eligible)
Authors may not submit their own work for nomination.
At the end of the nomination period, eligible books with the most seconds will go into the poll. The amount of books in the poll depends on how many are nominated and seconded, but is usually five. Further discussion about nominations will be under the poll. This thread will be closed; nominated books will be copied to a recommendations thread (do we still do this?)
** The moderator’s decision is final. **