Quote:
Originally Posted by JSWolf
And finally, the problem of people voting and not reading and then I find the winning book not one I'll read but the second place book I might have read. So if the votes where the voter isn't planning on reading stopped, then the results would be more accurate and you'd know at least how many would be participating.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSWolf
Part of that problem is on the libraries. Any library that allows 3 week borrowing needs to drop that and only allow up to 2 weeks. Also, I think the number of holds should be increased given the lines. I think a hold limit of at least 50 would be good. It means then that when in line for not yet released books or in a long line, there's still space available to put other books on hold.
|
Jon, I appreciate the input, but let's stay on message. The fact is long waiting lists; we're not discussing library policies.
And I'm going to add, since this seems as good a place as any, the basic issue is one of commitment. We need people to be willing to commit to participating most of the time (because life can interfere). Frankly, if it's legitimate to say, "I won't read the first place book because I don't want to and I might read the second place book," that's the end of the club right there. This is where credit has to be given to the Lit Club; they show up. I'm not saying that anyone isn't welcome to drop in on a month-to-month basis, but right now we're trying to come up with a club where enough people would be willing to say, "I'll try the book if at all possible." This is where availability and length are critical.
Part of the fun of a club is the discussion, but I'd like to think that part of the appeal is to broaden your mind a bit. Yes, we want to keep selections reasonably appealing to enough people, but if people are only going to read what they'd have read anyway, there's much less point.