Bookpossum, I’ve been thinking over your proposals for about a week now while waiting to see if anyone else comments on our posts, and trying to work out how they could work well but I’m afraid I’m having difficulty seeing a simple way forward using them.
Quote:
|
As no-one has made any comment yet, I wonder if we could simplify this by deciding on having, say, four spots in the coming year for rotating nominations and leave the matter of pre-booking a spot to one side. If we end up with only three spots taken, we can always have a "free-for-all" sort of month, with everyone nominating one or two books but with no theme. As we know from the rotating nominations, it isn't necessary for there to be a theme in order to have a good choice of books.
|
There are a few problems with doing it this way that makes this more complicated and less flexible rather than simplifying things.
If we set aside the question of pre-booking months then we’re already leaving more work - and debate - for later. We’d have to then decide if we’re pre-booking and if we are then still do it but at a later date. Already this is adding more steps and more work later.
If we do decide to pre-book a set number of months, then there’s the problem of if not enough people sign up. If we take the simplest solution, an Open month and/or starting over with a new cycle, then we’re defeating the purpose of opening the most months possible for Region and Time Period.
If we decide to do it as before, asking for volunteers as the month arises on a set number of months, then that ignores your desire to pre-book, which desire of yours was the reason I came up with the idea I did for the rotating months. Also the same problems would still be present of possibly having unnecessary Open or new cycle rotating months taking up months that could’ve been used for Region or Time Period.
The only risk with my idea versus yours is that we may get five or six people volunteering for Rotating thus taking up more months next year than with your proposal. However I don’t really consider that a risk becaues if it happens I’ll be very happy at the participation.
Quote:
|
The only clear way to sort this out is to vote on it. One way to do that would be to put down all the current categories and have people indicate which ones they want to retain and which they don't. But in this case the vote would be for how many months in the year you would like to see that category.
|
Quote:
I would see doing this in two stages:
1. Agree on the various categories, with people nominating one or more preferred categories, those categories to include Rotating Nominations. (I thought I should put that in just in case people don't want to do them any more.)
2. Vote on how many months you want to devote to which categories.
|
I think instead of clearing things up this obfuscates things. I understand the beginning of what you propose but do not understand how you propose adding the totals up to decide how many months everything gets. I’ve tried working it out myself and see no way to do this without it becoming very complicated and confusing for all involved. Can you clarify how determining months would be achieved under this proposal?