The Seasonal Reading Challenge discussion
GETTING TO KNOW YOU
>
The Future of SRC
message 151:
by
Alice
(new)
Aug 05, 2010 02:06AM
That other group is very weird! The front page is exactly the same as this. I think the best thing to do is to be quiet about it, not mention it to GR, because we should then be able to start a new group for us without changing the rules. If we put all the details for the August Challenge just on that new group and not on here. We won't be duplicating much from here at all.
reply
|
flag
Wendy UKHeather KS wrote: "Also... we could have a "template" way that we post. We have to post using the following (or different) info:
READERBOARD NAME:
TASK:
BOOK(S):
TOTAL POINTS:"
I was thinking that too Heather. It would make it easier for mods, and for us. We'd be less likely to make mistakes.
We could still put other stuff after the essential info, if we wanted to make comments about the books, or include book covers or tickers or anything. So long as the essentials were clearly stated first the mods could ignore the rest, and others could read it if they want to. Then we wouldn't need to sacrifice our individual expression, which like Sara Grace I enjoy, and I'm sure lots of other peole do too.
Erin (NY) wrote: "Thank you so much for keeping this group going. ...The other idea I wanted to throw out there... Why have only 1 big book allowed for 500+, 750+ and 1000+? I like big books but I found that I still stay away from longer ones once those slots fill up. Anyways, just a thought. ..."
More Big Book tickets would be possible with additional moderators.
I wouldn't mind helping moderate. I think it would be kind of fun and challenging. Which I always like a good challenge. :)
GR does take group plagerism seriously...there have been two groups over the last month, one where the moderator was kicked off of goodreads and new mods assigned and the other where the group was cancelled because they had word for word copied challenges from the Romance Readers REading Challenges group; the Paranormal Romance Group and several others
NEW RULES are still in work, but here's the latest draft (incorporates rotating 4 theme idea from Name That Challenge thread);6 AUG - Changed #6 & other tweaks:
see post 318 for latest draft of THE RULES
OK --the other group is an EXACT copy of this one. They added me, and I'm sure she'll pull me off now for posting this...but I wanted to see. It's every task, down to the word. The intro is different, but nothing else.We are putting WAY too much effort into re-writing the group if this blatant copying is allowed.
I wish I could "high importance" a post like you can an email.
However, the other lady DID have a good idea...posting each task under it's own category. Makes it easier to track completed activities than all lumped together in one big Readerboard. For example- all 5 point tasks together, all 10 point tasks together. I think it would benefit a group this large to do that...or to break it down even further and have each task be tracked individually. Then maybe have one moderator do all 5-points, another do all 10-points, and then send totals to one big spreadsheet moderator for totalling.
But from what Delicious Dee has stated they will probably get either kicked off of goodreads or asked to have a different moderator or something of the sorts. Especially since they are trying to collect money for something like this and have copied all the tasks word for word. I am sure somebody within this group has already turned them into the GRs powers that be.
What's the point of completely copying another group like that? There are plenty of ways to make reading challenges unique.
Laziness. Think of all the time you'd save from deciding on a task, writing it up, etc. Much easier to copy/paste a list and be finished.
But... why not just join SRC then? Then you don't have to do anything besides participate. Sounds like those mods are on an ego trip. Noticed both of them have their profiles set to private too.
I think these ladies are trying to make money though...whether or not for a library or whatever. What they have done is plain lazy and not worth it. Did anyone actually check the library website to see if it was real?
there is a thread on the goodreads feedback group, if someone is a member, I would suggest posting to it...its called group plagerism...most of it came out of the group i mention, but it would be worth posting, to bring to the attention of the GR guys...normally link this group...or the specific thread and then the one from the other group
El wrote: "But... why not just join SRC then? Then you don't have to do anything besides participate. Sounds like those mods are on an ego trip. Noticed both of them have their profiles set to private too."$$$$$$$$
Ah, somehow my eyes glazed over the monetary gain portion of it. That makes me even more angry. The consolation is that now that it's been discovered it can't survive much longer. Whoever caught it initially - good job!
When I posted the link to this other group, I did so to show we don't need to completely overhaul the SRC, which we all truly love. I don't feel it is necessary to turn them into GR for group plagarism. There are lots of groups on GR with similar ideas, themes, logos, etc.... I find it to be a compliment to Cynthia's talents that a library chose her group to copy; and the challenge is found on the library website. I'm all for supporting this library using our challenge to encourage its patrons to read. It's a small, private group, which does not pull participants away from our group. GR is big enough for both of us.
the point isn't that its similar, its that according to someone who posted, it is word for word the same which is plagerism...a librarian should know better...that gets under my skin!!ETA - to me, private groups occasionally make it appear as though there is something to hide...especially a group such as this where it could be of interest to others...I am a member of several private groups, but they are private more for legality (under 18 not allowed) than subject matter...if that makes sense
I think if it were a compliment to Cynthia's talents, it would have in the description on the front page that she was their inspiration. The wording makes it sound like it's an original idea, which it is not if they are using the same tasks that SRC is using. Above all, it's poor form and still feels dishonest. As a librarian (as Dee points out) it should be common sense to clearly state all references.
It kinda skeezes me out that there is a copy cat group. Ick! Making money off of these challenges is just sorta smarmy. The fun is in the choosing of the books and the reading, the expanding our book horizons! Plop. (The sound of me hopping off of my soapbox).
I agree with El on this one. As librarians you should know better as to what is considered plagerism. These ladies are in all intensive purposes wrong in everything they do. They need a wake up to reality of what they are doing.
Erin (NY) wrote: "Thank you so much for keeping this group going. I would be happy to move to a new group to make it easier on you guys!Ashley wrote: "I'm not sure if this is the right spot, but is there any way t..."
I agree with Erin (NY). I would like for us to be able to claim a "big book ticket" for every 500+ page book. I tend to steer clear of "big books" even if it's something I really want to read because they hinder my overall point/task goals.
Birish wrote: "Erin (NY) wrote: "Thank you so much for keeping this group going. I would be happy to move to a new group to make it easier on you guys!Ashley wrote: "I'm not sure if this is the right spot, bu..."
If you look at post 159 in this thread it looks like PJ already added it as part of the rules. There will be 1 ticket for every 500+ page, 2 tickets for every 750+ page and 3 tickets for every 1000+ page.
Haha I knew I was spelling it wrong...it looked too short.
Actually, it looks like PJ is offering multiple tickets for reading the larger books -- not offering a ticket per large book. I believe what Ashley is asking for is a direct relation of 1 '500+page book = 1 ticket' for each book. Therefore, three 500+ page = 3 tickets. I tend to agree with that. If someone wants to read 5 500+page cooks, why not offer 5 tickets? And if PJ keeps the rule at a 1000+ page book gets 3 tickets, what's wrong with someone getting 15 tickets for reading 5 1000+ page books? More power to that person having the patience to get through those.
Meghan wrote: "Haha I knew I was spelling it wrong...it looked too short."I'm sorry, I've never done that before online. I hated, when I was an adult, when my mother corrected my grammar or spelling. (But I did think in this case we should get it right. ;o )
Christine wrote: "Actually, it looks like PJ is offering multiple tickets for reading the larger books -- not offering a ticket per large book. I believe what Ashley is asking for is a direct relation of 1 '500+pag..."That was what I intended. Changed to:
"Players may earn tickets for each Big Book read: ..."
Thanks!
Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "Meghan wrote: "Haha I knew I was spelling it wrong...it looked too short."I'm sorry, I've never done that before online. I hated, when I was an adult, when my mother corrected my grammar or spe..."
It is ok I hate when I spell wrong. That is why I love Microsoft Word for correcting everything. My computer at home will let me know when I spell wrong on here too, but since I am at work things tend to get missed.
Wendy UKMeghan wrote: "Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "Meghan wrote: "Haha I knew I was spelling it wrong...it looked too short."
I'm sorry, I've never done that before online. I hated, when I was an adult, when my mother ..."
I just thought it was one of those funny American spellings!
LOL, Wendy! You folks in the UK are the ones who have funny spellings! ;-)
pjreads wrote: "Christine wrote: "Actually, it looks like PJ is offering multiple tickets for reading the larger books -- not offering a ticket per large book. I believe what Ashley is asking for is a direct rela..."Thank you!!!!
pjreads wrote: "That was what I intended. Changed to: "Players may earn tickets for each Big Book read: ..."
..."
Thanks!!
Wendy UKElizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "LOL, Wendy! You folks in the UK are the ones who have funny spellings! ;-)"
True! That's why I thought 'plagerise' might be the American spelling .... simplified
Alice wrote: "That other group is very weird! The front page is exactly the same as this. I think the best thing to do is to be quiet about it, not mention it to GR, because we should then be able to start a new..."That would not work as pjreads and Sandy have already asked and we were told that we cannot start another group like that. I happen to know, also, that Goodreads is being very sticky on this issue.
Delicious Dee the book slut wrote: "there is a thread on the goodreads feedback group, if someone is a member, I would suggest posting to it...its called group plagerism...most of it came out of the group i mention, but it would be w..."I am a member of that group and I did report them. The GR staff will take care of it.
El wrote: "But... why not just join SRC then? Then you don't have to do anything besides participate. Sounds like those mods are on an ego trip. Noticed both of them have their profiles set to private too."This is the MO for the spate of these groups that have begun appearing in GR. They are always private, and the mods profiles are always private. It is sad and ridiculous. As Delicious Dee said, GR is very serious about not allowing this, and I am sure they will handle it shortly.
pjreads wrote: "NEW RULES are still in work, but here's the latest draft (incorporates rotating 4 theme idea from Name That Challenge thread):THE RULES
1. Everyone is welcome and can join in at anytime during a..."
Just wanted to give you feedback on a couple of things I particularly like:
1. the clarification that only one book can be partially read before the start of the challenge.
2. I like number 16. That is the reward that I always look forward to the most.
One change though. On number 19 shouldn't it say -- "The players who get to create 25 or 30 point tasks are NOT eligible for the 20 point tasks and the Midway 50 point task (one task per person per challenge).
Oh, I guess it is implied in the One task per person per challenge, but it might be nice to clarify for dummies like me that only read the first part, lol.
Sara Grace wrote: "Umm, I did check out the website for the copycat group and it would seem that they are an actual library. I know they copied and really shouldn't have done that but...you are actually shutting down..."Good point Sara Grace, but nevertheless, it is against the goodreads rules. I don't think GR shuts them down immediately. In the other cases, they tried working with the group and explaining the policy first. Could be that they will explain, the group with make changes, and it will not result in closure of the other group.
Although, I have to echo, I think it was El, who said, they could have joined this group and still used it for their fundraiser.
Wendy UK Meghan wrote: "Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "Meghan wrote: "Haha I knew I was spelling it wrong...it looked too short."
I'm sorry, I've never done that before online. I hated, when I was an adult, when my mother ..."
I just thought it was one of those funny American spellings!
ha ha that's funny!
Does anyone know if Cynthia has anything to do with this other group? She may have decided to duplicate this one to raise money for the library. Is it the library she works at? Just a thought that may be worth checking out.
True Sara Grace, I hadn't thought of that.
I didn't see her on the members list, nor is she one of the mods, unless she changed her name and profile here on GR.
It doesn't look like it's the same library - the other group seems to be out of Texas and Cynthia's profile lists her as being in Virginia.
Sara Grace wrote: "Umm, I did check out the website for the copycat group and it would seem that they are an actual library. I know they copied and really shouldn't have done that but...you are actually shutting down..."Also there are plenty of libraries out there that take the time and effort to make up their own challenges. There are many ways that they can make their money without using something like this. If they really wanted to start something like this for their library they could have found another way. From my knowledge these people would have to give the money to the library first. Since Christine was able to join with no problem you would think they would collect the money and names from the people first before accepting them on the site. And it looks like they may have used it before. On the site did you notice that it said Spring Reading Challenge.
pjreads wrote: "NEW RULES are still in work, but here's the latest draft (incorporates rotating 4 theme idea from Name That Challenge thread):THE RULES
1. Everyone is welcome and can join in at anytime during a..."
I REALLY like the way the New Rules are worded. These seem to make perfect sense and easy to understand. Sometimes I am not the smartest cookie of the bunch but everything you have makes perfect sense to me. :)
I'm happy to help in the new group however you need it. I don't have the time, if I'm really honest with myself, to be a Moderator. But if you have smaller tasks (just being in charge of tracking Big Book tickets or Goodreads authors, or monitoring a set of Help Threads, or something like that), I am your girl. Just let me know!
Lyn M wrote: "pjreads wrote: "NEW RULES are still in work, but here's the latest draft (incorporates rotating 4 theme idea from Name That Challenge thread):THE RULES
1. Everyone is welcome and can join in at an..."
Thanks. Someone suggested only 25 point tasks and we wrote everything that way originally. Didn't get it all changed to fit the new idea of an easier way to have 30 point tasks.
I like the new rules. They are all very clear and easy to understand.
The Seasonal Reading Challenge
Books mentioned in this topic
Daughter of the Forest (other topics)The Girl Who Played with Fire (other topics)
Authors mentioned in this topic
Neil Gaiman (other topics)Stieg Larsson (other topics)
Juliet Marillier (other topics)
