Literary The MR Literary Club • Welcome, Information & General Discussion

[HomeInMyShoes]

I like the just nominate something from a writer we haven't read the country from. It's simplest in my opinion and the least amount of work for those that run the club.

I also hope that the books that are nominated are by an author from that country and about the country as well. I was a bit disappointed that Fugitive Pieces won for my Canada month as it could really have been any country involved in migration from the war as opposed to something like A Good Man or Indian Horse in which the story is most definitely Canadian. It's partly my fault for putting it in the list in the first place, but it was widely available and wanted to make sure there was something available everywhere.

And, welcome to the club Lynx-Lynx.

Originally Posted by HomeInMyShoes

I also hope that the books that are nominated are by an author from that country and about the country as well.

I concur with this.

[sun surfer]

Originally Posted by sun surfer

Given the varying opinions so far, we'll try it for a short amount of time, say three months or so, and then I'll take an informal vote on its future by post in this thread and we'll go with the majority.

We've had bonus votes for three months now so it's time for reckoning. Unless there's an obvious consensus, I'll wait a month until 10 October to tally and we'll implement our decision from November on. If we decide to continue with them, we'll also revisit them next June with the yearly changes discussion. So, should we keep them?

Personally I like them and think their implementation has gone well. They generally don't affect the outcomes which is as it should be, and I like the idea of them being a subtle encouragement to participate in the discussion threads. What do the rest of you think?

[Bookworm_Girl]

I'm neutral. I was originally not in favor, but the implementation has been more positive than I expected.

[Bookpossum]

I agree with you sun surfer. I think the fact they are there provides us with a buffer if we need it, and indicates to people having a look that they are welcome but we want people to participate in the whole process, especially the discussion once a book is chosen.

As long as it isn't onerous for you, I believe we should keep the system and apply it where necessary.

[ccowie]

Originally Posted by Bookpossum

As long as it isn't onerous for you, I believe we should keep the system and apply it where necessary.

I feel exactly the same.

[Bookpossum]

Best wishes to everyone for a very happy Christmas and New Year 2016.

[orlok]

You too Bookpossum. And to all our MR friends.

[fantasyfan]

May all you wonderful people in the Club have a very Happy New year!

[sun surfer]

We’re nearing the end of our yearly cycle and will begin a new one in July, so the time for changes is once again upon us. If anyone has any suggestions, now is the time!

I have a few big ones to suggest we try:

*A new approach to voting - The bonus votes have gone well enough even though not everyone was a fan of them. However, they are a bit of a pain to keep up with, especially since they so rarely change anything. So, I’d like to do away with them.

In lieu of that, there is an approach that will still give each of us more power similarly to what bonus votes gave us, and also give us a new versatility in voting. Instead of having a regular poll, we will all vote by post. So, there will be no actual poll in the voting thread. Rather, each of us will need to make a post with our votes which will then be tallied.

This opens the door to more options in our voting and more control over our individual votes. However many official nominees we have in a month, that number minus one will be the amount of votes each of us have that we may cast. For instance, if there are five official nominees, each of us may cast four votes. If there are seven nominees, each of us may cast six votes.

As bonus votes basically allowed us to give two votes per nominee, the same will apply here. We can give up to two votes per nominee. So, out of our available votes, each of us may give a nominee zero, one or two votes. If you give a nominee two votes, then you will have less votes remaining to give to other nominees; e.g. if there are six nominees and you therefore receive five votes, if you give two votes to one nominee then you will only have three more left total to cast for any of the other five nominees.

You don’t have to cast all your votes in one post. You may use up some votes, then wait, then use more if you wish. In that regard this will be similar to how the nomination process has been. Similarly, you don’t have to use all of your possible votes if you don’t want to. You may use any amount you wish up to the limit.

For a group our size and with the closeness of many of our votes, this will hopefully result in a vote that gives each of us an easy and fair yet more nuanced say in which book wins.

*A new approach to nominating - The way we nominate books is an artifact remaining from me copying the general club format when I started this club, but it may not be the best way forward. Given our size and given the possibility of expanding voting to be a bit more like nominations were, perhaps it’s better to streamline the nominations themselves.

We will do away with supporting nominations altogether. Now, we may simply nominate a book and it will be an official nominee, with each of us allowed up to two nominations. This will make the nominations process much simpler. There is the possibility of someone nominating something that’s not literary but we will be able to sort that out in voting as we had been on rare instances in nominating. The same as before, if someone nominates something that’s definitely not part of the category then I may veto it (e.g. say a book from 2002 if the category is 19th century novels) but that will probably happen very rarely if at all.

This will make nominations easier for our small group while still retaining quality, and probably give us a larger selection to consider for the vote.

*Nominating and voting period timing - With nominations becoming simpler and voting becoming a bit more detailed, it will probably be better to switch the amount of days given to each. Before, we gave four to nominations and three to voting. Now we will give three to nominations and four to voting.

*The six non-rotating months’ categories are up for review - To refresh the process and to give us a chance to get used to the new process for nominating and voting, we’ll conduct the category selection the same as new monthly book selections. Each person may nominate up to two categories which will automatically go to the vote. Afterwards, the vote will be by post as outlined above and the top six vote-getters will be our new categories. Given the amount of time left before the new month, we’ll need to start this process in the next few days with a three-day nomination period followed by a four-day vote, so please keep that in mind so that you won’t miss any part of it.


So, what do all of you think? These changes would only be on a trial basis. As with bonus votes last year, we can try it for three months and then have an informal vote by post in this thread among members. If we don’t like it we’d scrap it, but if it works well we’d keep it. I do hope we try it out as I think not only will these changes be easier on me but may give results that better reflect our nuances.


Comments and reactions to any part of this post are welcome. After we get all this sorted out, we’ll be good for another year!

[Bookpossum]

Great stuff sun surfer! I think in particular dropping the need for seconding, thirding and fourthing nominations is excellent, as it will mean that a nomination made towards the end of the nomination period has as good a chance of getting up as one nominated just after the process starts.

While it might take us a little while to get our heads around the number of votes we have, I think we should be able to get used to that process without too much angst. If someone loses count of how many votes he or she has made, you would presumably just discount any that are over the allowed number when you tally things up. So if we had five votes and I accidentally put in a sixth vote, you just wouldn't count the last one I made.

On the categories, I'm assuming we can nominate any current category that we particularly like and want to see retained, as well as any new ones we might think are worth a tryout.

So a definite thumbs up from me!

[sun surfer]

Thanks Bookpossum.

Originally Posted by Bookpossum

If someone loses count of how many votes he or she has made, you would presumably just discount any that are over the allowed number when you tally things up. So if we had five votes and I accidentally put in a sixth vote, you just wouldn't count the last one I made.

Yes, exactly. Or say if someone voted for a nominee three or more times, only two would count.

I was considering how to request votes be made and think it may be best to just leave it how nominations were - however anyone wants to post as long as I understand that it's a vote. But if anyone is worried that they may get confused with their own vote count, they could arrange their votes, even across posts, as something such as 'Vote 1 - X nominee', 'Vote 2 - Y nominee' and so on to keep track for themselves.

On the categories, I'm assuming we can nominate any current category that we particularly like and want to see retained, as well as any new ones we might think are worth a tryout.

Yes, exactly.

[sun surfer]

Not much discussion so far but the show must go on. I'll have the categories nominations up within a day to make sure we finish it in time.

[Bookworm_Girl]

Thanks, sun surfer! I like the new nomination proposal, and it will help get more good books to the voting process. Undecided about the voting proposal. I prefer just a simple multiple choice vote.

[sun surfer]

I’m getting the categories thread together now. It may be a bit as it’s in between work and I need to write the new guidelines out for it, but it will be soon.

[ETA - The categories thread is now up!]

Originally Posted by Bookworm_Girl

Thanks, sun surfer! I like the new nomination proposal, and it will help get more good books to the voting process. Undecided about the voting proposal. I prefer just a simple multiple choice vote.

That's understandable. The problem with polls, such a small club and often very close votes is that a fly-by voter can change the results. It’s been rare enough but some regulars have been worried about this off and on through the years so it'd be good if we could find a better way and maybe this will help and still be fair and equal to all. This would also give us a bit more leeway in how we want to vote. This may not be as elegant as a poll but the advantages could outweigh that. I’m sceptical myself until we try it but once we do maybe people will think it’s simple enough and similar to the old nominations process.

In a way I feel like the priorities may have simply reversed. Originally, with the size the general club was in the first years, they needed a more detailed nomination process (the supporting votes) so that not just any book someone suggested would be up for the vote. Now with our club and the smaller size, we don’t need to worry much about that but, with our close votes, a bit more detailed voting process may be good.