Improving the group

[Paul]

Agreed as well ☺

[Susan]

When JS's book was nominated and won, she did not nominate it. JS was also a functioning member of the group. She participated. I would have no problem if Brian or Isabella's books were nominated because they participate. It's the self promotion that bothers me. We don't know them as people so it is just annoying. I agree with the proposed changes.

Yes, Kevin, I owned a bar and nightclub in my younger years. Bikers did come and the local Hell's Angels to a liking to me. The president even told me that he could hurt people for me. I declined.

You guys made me blush. BTW, the naked rain dances were only a joke. Nobody wants to see me naked. Shudder.

[Barbara]

Theresa wrote: "I agree with you both, Seraphina and Paul. If an author nominates their own book I'd like to see the comment removed from the nomination thread and re-posted in the promotions thread after all it's..."

Theresa - I was wondering if GR has this feature. In another social forum I participate in (Ravelry which is for knitters etc.) moderators can "whoosh" posts into the appropriate place.
I think my job in academia influences my view of self-published work. In my job, we are evaluated on the number of publications and presentations we have that are peer-reviewed. While there are excellent books that fail to easily find publishers, the vast majority of self-published books are in that category because they just aren't that good. We are not the best judges of our own work.
Paul and others, I agree, I feel like the people who do this think we are chumps. And those of us who are participating members don't appreciated being treated as though we are not intelligent readers.

I tried to post this earlier but Goodreads wasn't "working". Now that I have caught up with the comments, I would agree to the proposed rules.

[Donna]

I also think a proposed "three strikes and you're out" is more than fair.

[[deleted user]]

As Susan says, participation is the key and like her I would have no difficulty with a book by Brian or Isabella being nominated by another member.

[Cathleen]

I agree with the changes, as well. Susan's background info is really helpful, as it provides some context to the earlier read by a member.

[Seraphina]

It doesn't necessarily prevent self promotion of books though in monthly nominations.That seems to me to be aimed at contacting individuals about your book outside of the threads.

[Seraphina]

Liking the clearly stated rules emma :)

[Kevin]

Fair play ladies.

[Trelawn]

Great job. That seems clear and straight forward.

[Colleen]

Good job Emma the wording is perfect .

[Colleen]

Then you both did a great job :)

[Cathleen]

Emma and Sara--thank you for dealing with this so fairly and clearly. Hope it didn't take too much time out of your days.

[[deleted user]]

Well done Sara and Emma.

[Susan]

Good job, Emma and Sara.

[Sara]

Thanks for the kind words guys. Emma and I had actually been discussing cleaning up the front page/clarifying the group guidelines for awhile. This recent discussion about authors nominating their own books gave us the push to finally do it!

[Allan]

Great work, Emma and Sara! :)

[Frank]

I agree the rules are clear and well written. Good job!

As for an author nominating his own work for discussion, that's just so tacky I wouldn't think a rule forbidding it would even be necessary.

[Barbara]

Emma wrote: "Ok mod hat off and private member hat on. I would pretty much agree with all the sentiments above. While a self nominated boom has never won and us unlikely to it is annoying since they don't parti..."

First, I support these rules. Thanks!

I have mentioned before I am in a face to face book club where we read TWO self published books by a member in one year. And now his wife is pushing his third. It is very difficult to be honest about a book when the author is a member of the group. I read the first book but skipped the meeting and didn't think the book was good. The second book I didn't even bother to read. I think this situation is awkward but some members want to be "nice" or supportive.

[Barbara]

Cphe wrote: "I wasn't going to comment but I do think that some things are a "given" i.e to not recommend your own book. I fail to see how an author doing that could be unbiased and it puts a strain on the grou..."

Whoa...that's awful. I read the Goodreads rules for authors Theresa linked to - sorry don't have the link - and authors must not message, contact etc. readers who criticize their books. Frank commented above about some things just being things people should know not to do, but sadly that isn't the case. It seems every semester I add rules to my course semester because of "bad" behavior. Example - you don't come back to class after break, you are counted absent for the day. It surprised me recently when a new member posted the same post, promoting her book, to several of our discussions. Again, as the GR's rules note, you aren't going to win a following or readers by alienating them.

[Isabella]

Frank wrote: "I agree the rules are clear and well written. Good job!

As for an author nominating his own work for discussion, that's just so tacky I wouldn't think a rule forbidding it would even be necessary."

Absolutely. It never even occurred to me at any time to nominate one of my own books - and I'd probably die of embarrassment anyway!

[Colleen]

I would think that authors would feel protective of their novels like parents about their children....

[Isabella]

Colleen wrote: "I would think that authors would feel protective of their novels like parents about their children...."

What - keeping them under wraps, Colleen? :) That's probably right for writers like me who lack the self-promo gene.

[Colleen]

:)

[Paul]

Can I ask that those who agreed so readily to the rules actually abide by them. We all duscussed these and bashed them out.
Also if someone points out a breach can members refrain from an attack . Read the whole incident before commenting.
I feel a few comments were unfairly direcred at me for pointing out that one of our rules was No member can canvas votes .

[Sara]

I think what we have here is a difference in interpretation of rule 8 "Neither an author nor any other member may canvass members to nominate or vote for a particular book." Specifically I think we are disagreeing about what the word "canvass" means.

I don't think what Allan originally did in just mentioning that a particular title was in the poll rose to the level of canvassing. The new member had mentioned being from Belfast and having an interest in Northern Irish fiction. It was reasonable for Allan to assume that she might be interested in knowing an Northern Irish book was up for the vote this quarter. It's not like he PMed 50 members of the group urging them to vote for a particular title.

I believe that in the past several times on nomination threads folks have discussed the merits of various titles. In my mind, the intent of the "rule" is to prevent authors or their personal friends from unduly swaying the nomination/voting

I can, however, see how based on the current wording of rule 8 Paul felt Allan was in violation of it. Perhaps we should further clarify the term "canvassing" to avoid further misunderstanding.

I would also suggest that if people see posts they feel violate the "rules" that they bring them to Emma and/or I's attention first. We can then either determine that (1) The post is fine, (2) It should be deleted, or (3)That it should be retained but that the posts author should modify it.

I believe we all have the best of intentions when commenting, but sometimes conversations get overheated.

[Paul]

If directing someone to a vote and pointing to one canditate in the vote and asking them to vote for it is not canvassing please tell me what is.
Saying i misinterprer what canvassing is is a bit insulting to be honest.
I'll leave it at that. Sorry for pulling up trouble.

[Susan]

Paul, I did not see the exchange but I am going to give you some background. We had an author join and nominate his own book. Not only that he had four or five of his friends join and vote the book. That was canvassing. Declan, removed the book and the participants went away.

Allan telling a new member that we do have an interest in N. Irish literature is only an encouragement that there will something here that she will like. I call that nice. Allan has always been enthusiastic about sharing book recommendations and my reading life is richer for it. He has nothing to gain. I don't think he really cares what book wins. He will read what he likes or what I strong arm him into. BTW, he did not even nominate the International.

[Barbara]

Emma wrote: "Susan thanks for providing the history behind the rule.

However can I ask everyone that we just draw a line under the matter. If everyone starts weighing in it will turn into a thing. In future i..."

Thank you Emma and Sara!

[Sara]

So the past couple months we've had people nominate books that the group have already read. Last month the book accidentally even made it into the list of titles we voted on accidentally. Thanks to Barbara for catching that we read the Hobbit in December of 2012. That was before my time or Emma's time. We've had a total of 73 reads and many new members in the last year, so it's become more and more likely that someone will nominate something we've read before. To help rectify this problem I'm going to suggest (if Emma is ok with this) that when her or I does the nomination post, we include a link to the group's "read" bookshelf and ask that folks double check that their nomination hasn't be read before. Is everyone ok with that? It shouldn't be too burdensome for folks to do, and it's far easier than Emma and/or me checking multiple books.

[Colleen]

Sounds like a good idea.

[Susan]

Great idea, Sara.

[Paul]

Makes sense ☺

[Trelawn]

Seems sensible to me.

[Seraphina]

Sounds like a plan

[Barbara]

Sara wrote: "So the past couple months we've had people nominate books that the group have already read. Last month the book accidentally even made it into the list of titles we voted on accidentally. Thanks to..."

I forgot the group has a "read" bookshelf, but recalled I'd read it for/because of this group:)

[Isabella]

A great idea, once I realised that it was a 'red bookshelf' and not a 'reed bookshelf'.

The English language, eh!

[Barbara]

Isabella wrote: "A great idea, once I realised that it was a 'red bookshelf' and not a 'reed bookshelf'.

The English language, eh!"

Ah yes - they should not be spelled the same way - so confusing!

[Trelawn]

I would like to put forward the suggestion that we reduce the number of days for nominations to 3 days max. This month the thread opened on Saturday and there has been nothing doing on the thread for about 24 hours with another day to go til voting. If we dedicated 3 days to nominations and the same for voting if would leave plenty of time for tie breaks, acquiring the winning book etc. At this rate I can barely remember what was nominated in the first day or two and any interest aroused by proposed books starts to wane by this stage. Thoughts?

[Kevin]

Or else a nomination limit so that the nominations close as soon as they are filled? It would cut the waiting time but it could add unnecessary work onto Sara and Emma's current busy schedules.

[Colleen]

I like the three day limit ...,

[Seraphina]

I think that is putting pressure on the girls. Sara prob put up the poll on the day that she had time to do it and nominations have always finished on the 25th with voting ending @28/29th.
It's tying the girls into doing up the nomination link on a certain day which may not suit them with other commitments

[Donna]

Emma, I would say whatever makes it easiest for the mods. It's not like you do this for a salary or don't have a "real" job. :)

[Sara]

I like Emma's idea.

[Trelawn]

Emma that sounds great. My reasoning was just that the whole thing is becoming a week or more and taking more time than is necessary. That said, I don't have to organise it. If Saturday nominations suit you and Sara then that seems fine to me.

[Paul]

Polls starting on a Saturday should work well all round then as more people will be on at tre weekend. It makes sense.

[Sara]

I see no harm in trying it for next month! We can always go back to the old way if it doesn't work out.

[Trelawn]

Thanks guys :-)

[Trelawn]

Or girls even :-)

[Trelawn]

Wow quarterly polls already? This is going to be a quick year. Time is flying by.