MobileRead Discussion/Suggestion thread

[WT Sharpe]

The existence of political games is the very reason we need a six-month rule, and if there are not major objections from a good percentage of members, I'd like to implement it. Of course, between my memory and the necessary distraction of my regular moderator duties, I'll need some keen eyes out there to keep an eye out for repeats and bring them to my attention. So if there are no strong objections, here is the rule:

Any book that has received three nominations during a nomination period is automatically disqualified from being re-nominated for a period of six months.

Any objections?

[Nyssa]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

The existence of political games is the very reason we need a six-month rule, and if there are not major objections from a good percentage of members, I'd like to implement it. Of course, between my memory and the necessary distraction of my regular moderator duties, I'll need some keen eyes out there to keep an eye out for repeats and bring them to my attention. So if there are no strong objections, here is the rule:

Any objections?

I will not object.

As to keeping track... that's a doozy (sp?). The only suggestion I can think of, is to have a running post (maybe in the Book Club Selections List thread) of the nominees with either the month & year that each book was nominated or the month & year the book is eligible to be nominated again.

[sun surfer]

Thanks, Tom (and thanks Nyssa for not objecting ). That rule sounds good, with of course the exception of the second-chance month coming up in January.

I'd say, as far as keeping track, it'd just be up to anyone who notices to point out if a nomination is a repeat. Hopefully we have some keen eyes around here. I don't think we necessarily have to have a running list, but if someone wants to do one then go for it since it would make it a bit easier. It's not too hard though, if someone wanted to check on a title, just to look at the last six vote threads and the titles for each month would be on the first post/poll of each thread. I don't see it being a problem either way.

[caleb72]

I must've missed the political games.

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by Nyssa

I will not object...

Thanks, Nyssa.

Originally Posted by caleb72

I must've missed the political games.

Perhaps political is the wrong word. We had one particular book last year that was nominated in several different categories.

[Billi]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

So if there are no strong objections, here is the rule:

Any objections?

No objection at all (if it makes your work easier and cuts down discussions that lead to nothing).
But I find it an a little bit superfluous rule. I don't mind if someone wants to nominate his favourite book all over again, but I would look if it qualifies into the theme of the months.
To be more clear: I found it very strange that we had a book of the year 2000 or so in the classical month voting but I had no problem at all with that this book had been nominated in the months before, too.
But as I said, if it makes your work easier, go implement it.

[HomeInMyShoes]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Perhaps political is the wrong word. We had one particular book last year that was nominated in several different categories.

It was more an illustration of the difficulties in categorizing some things. In the end, nominators and voters will decide. If someone decides to attempt to get their buddeis to push through a marginal book in a category, that is just the nature of democracy and voting.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

The existence of political games is the very reason we need a six-month rule, and if there are not major objections from a good percentage of members, I'd like to implement it. Of course, between my memory and the necessary distraction of my regular moderator duties, I'll need some keen eyes out there to keep an eye out for repeats and bring them to my attention. So if there are no strong objections, here is the rule:

Any objections?

No objection, although I'm not sure how necessary it is. As long as we don't wind up bogged down in hassles of tracking what was nominated (which, as pointed out, is not difficult) and don't get strings of arguments about "well, I wasn't a member yet when that was nominated, and it's appropriate for this month's category too, and..." For which I have a profoundly "meh" attitude. If someone INSISTS on re-nominating a book, I'd rather let them than see the nom thread devolve into arguments. General politeness should keep the book unlikely to get three nominations, and the controversy should die down from there.

[Hamlet53]

I think the only one chance into the actual vote for any book, excluding of course the second chance category in January, is an excellent idea. As Sun Surfer points out it s not that difficult to track for anyone who cares to, and if no one catches it before the nominations close, well c'est la vie. I would rather have a clear rule in place than having a reason to allow arguments in the nomination thread.

[WT Sharpe]

Speaking of January, just a reminder that the first vote thread with 2012 in it's title goes up after midnight tonight. This is the Runner Up month, so there will be no nominations thread this month, but there will be Two Tier Voting in place.

[Nyssa]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Speaking of January, just a reminder that the first vote thread with 2012 in it's title goes up after midnight tonight. This is the Runner Up month, so there will be no nominations thread this month, but there will be Two Tier Voting in place.

I'm so excited for 2012 to get started, reading wise!

Have you decided yet, Tom, as to the lengths of both polls?

[WT Sharpe]

Yes.

[Nyssa]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Yes.

[WT Sharpe]

I'll post the thread with the poll instructions just after midnight. Basically it's a 4/3 solution; four days for the original poll, three days for the run-off between the top two contenders. (If the first poll results in a tie for first or second place, the second poll may have more than two choices.)

[Nyssa]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

I'll post the thread with the poll instructions just after midnight. Basically it's a 4/3 solution; four days for the original poll, three days for the run-off between the top two contenders. (If the first poll results in a tie for first or second place, the second poll may have more than two choices.)

Cool.

Does that shift our time line much? Will discussions still start on the 20th?