MobileRead For the 2016 categories, as a 1st step, can we....

[WT Sharpe]

What say we go this route?
• January is Second Chance.
• July is a Free-for-All: You nay nominate anything in any category.
• For the remaining 10 months, we nominate categories. At the end of two weeks or 30 categories, whichever comes first, we vote.
• For simplicity's sake, I'll assign the winners to their months afterward.

If everyone's happy with that, we can discuss exactly how the nominations would work. I was thinking of doing it like we do in the monthly nominations thread—with a second and third—but with 6 or more votes each instead of three.

[sun surfer]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

What say we go this route?
• January is Second Chance.
• July is a Free-for-All: You nay nominate anything in any category.
• For the remaining 10 months, we nominate categories. At the end of two weeks or 30 categories, whichever comes first, we vote.
• For simplicity's sake, I'll assign the winners to their months afterward.

If everyone's happy with that, we can discuss exactly how the nominations would work. I was thinking of doing it like we do in the monthly nominations thread—with a second and third—but with 6 or more votes each instead of three.

I love the simplicity. I like the cohesion but I want to offer an alternative to one part.

The last few years, even after democratic votes, people seem to not be thrilled with the categories. We've ended up with an odd mix and some strange omissions. Using your plan we could have the nominations and poll and then only take the top five as "certain". Then you use your judgment to round out the list, not with your favourites, but with what you think would make a well-rounded and good set of categories based on the five already chosen. I know this sounds partially undemocratic but completely democratic vote have led us to very mediocre results that it seems like hardly anyone has really liked as a whole.

My alternative suggestion is to keep the rest of your plan but instead of individual category nominations for the other ten months, people nominate an entire slate of categories, and the vote would be on the slate. No seconds or thirds needed but people should try to keep all members in mind when making their slates and they would need to nominate a full set slate (no "we'll have more votes for this or that" in any of the slates, just a complete set of categories). This would ensure that we'd end up with some sort of cohesive set of categories but with a majority vote still deciding it all.

Whatever you do, please don't put this pre-stuff up to a vote! After you hear what we think and take our thoughts into consideration, I'd much prefer if you just decide yourself how we're to go about choosing the categories.

[Dazrin]

You really want to do some work on this don't you?

As a suggestion to reduce the amount of work to tally votes, rather than nominating all categories we could start with a base set of categories and then nominate to fill in anything that is missing. That would significantly reduce the work load for whoever is tallying votes since there are some categories we can assume will make the final list before even starting.

Taking the list I posted in #39 here is the base list I would suggest if we go that route. This would still allow for 15 additional categories but already has some popular genres included. In this case maybe a total of 3-5 votes rather than 6+ would be appropriate.

• Adventure
• Classics
• Fantasy*
• Historical Fiction
• History (Non-Fiction)
• Horror
• Humor
• Mystery*
• Non-Fiction
• Philosophy
• Romance
• Science-Fiction*
• Thriller/Suspense*
• Travel (Non-Fiction)
• Westerns

* I intentionally left out some combined "Science-Fiction/Fantasy" and "Mystery/Thriller" categories in favor of the separate categories. We could add them back if nominated.

[Dazrin]

Originally Posted by sun surfer

Then you use your judgment to round out the list, not with your favourites, but with what you think would make a well-rounded and good set of categories based on the five already chosen. I know this sounds partially undemocratic but completely democratic vote have led us to very mediocre results that it seems like hardly anyone has really liked as a whole.

I agree. We really should have some way to keep the list as a whole well-rounded. If not exactly this way then some other way.

[sun surfer]

Originally Posted by Dazrin

You really want to do some work on this don't you?

One good thing about the slates option is that it would also be less work for him. There'd probably be 5-10, with I'd guess up to 15 at most. All Tom would need to do since there'd be no seconds is just copy them into one post and that's it.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Check out the movie. It's worth watching.

Thank you! I'm a read-the-book-first person, but if I like it, I shall check out the movie.

Originally Posted by Dazrin

I think I am misinterpreting your last statement issybird but I want to make sure since that will help me to see where I want to vote if it comes down to that.
.

Thank you for your concern. Since the discussion's moved on, I'd like to let it go, but I appreciate your detailed response.

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

What say we go this route?
• January is Second Chance.
• July is a Free-for-All: You nay nominate anything in any category.
• For the remaining 10 months, we nominate categories. At the end of two weeks or 30 categories, whichever comes first, we vote.
• For simplicity's sake, I'll assign the winners to their months afterward.

If everyone's happy with that, we can discuss exactly how the nominations would work. I was thinking of doing it like we do in the monthly nominations thread—with a second and third—but with 6 or more votes each instead of three.

Sounds good to me.

Briefly, my objection to the slate notion is that a slate that's geared to a particular kind of taste might well be the winner if it appeals to a large subgroup.

Otherwise, I like democracy. If votes are limited, as I think they ought to be, it should leave room for most to get their top category or two or three. I think doing it at one fell swoop will avoid the problem of some of the weirder category choices that happened the last time.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

What say we go this route?
• January is Second Chance.
• July is a Free-for-All: You nay nominate anything in any category.
• For the remaining 10 months, we nominate categories. At the end of two weeks or 30 categories, whichever comes first, we vote.
• For simplicity's sake, I'll assign the winners to their months afterward.

If everyone's happy with that, we can discuss exactly how the nominations would work. I was thinking of doing it like we do in the monthly nominations thread—with a second and third—but with 6 or more votes each instead of three.

As long as September is either science fiction or fantasy, then I'm happy with the rest of this.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Dazrin

* I intentionally left out some combined "Science-Fiction/Fantasy" and "Mystery/Thriller" categories in favor of the separate categories. We could add them back if nominated.

No we cannot add them back in as they are not the same. It is an insult to put science fiction and fantasy together. Also, Would you honestly say an Agatha Christie book is the same as a Vince Flynn book? No way they are the same. So mystery and thriller also don't go together.

Please, no combining where it doesn't work and those two combinations do not work.

[sun surfer]

Originally Posted by issybird

Briefly, my objection to the slate notion is that a slate that's geared to a particular kind of taste might well be the winner if it appeals to a large subgroup.

Well, anything is a risk in some fashion, but I don't think that would happen, mainly because we'd stress that any slate should try to take into account all the members. For instance, look at JSWolf's slate suggestion from last year - he may be one of the more outspoken people here when it comes to taste and his list was well-rounded. You (the general you) might not love the list overall, but it had some categories you'd like and was cohesive.

[WT Sharpe]

I'm thinking a poll would show which categories are most liked. If everyone is ready, I'll put together a nomination thread. One question: 6 votes each, or 10?

[sun surfer]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

I'm thinking a poll would show which categories are most liked. If everyone is ready, I'll put together a nomination thread. One question: 6 votes each, or 10?

I'm up for either. I trust your instinct.

[issybird]

Six.

[treadlightly]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

I'm thinking a poll would show which categories are most liked. If everyone is ready, I'll put together a nomination thread. One question: 6 votes each, or 10?

Why not take the average at 8?

[Dazrin]

If we are voting on how many times we can vote, I will vote for 6. That will force us to decide on which categories we want to read since each vote will matter a little more that way.

[sun surfer]

I realise that I misremembered something. I blame it on being very busy today and happening upon this all of a sudden when I came to vote on the monthly poll, and then in my enthusiasm trying to think through and post quickly on limited time.

Today I was thinking that we'd already voted like this last year (after a longer and more complicated pre-vote process) and had had this result when in fact we voted only on the process and chose to keep the categories the same. My memories of the twelve separate category nomination threads from a previous year were blurring with it and our discussion a while ago on how to approach next year. Now understanding better, I am fully in support of proceeding in exactly the way Tom first suggested (not that it matters since we're doing it anyway but I wanted to clarify my opinion). I think it's a great idea and am excited to see how it turns out.

ETA-Also, thinking through it I'm with issybird and Dazrin on 6. It would be easier for Tom since it would be less votes from each person to keep up with and as Dazrin says it would force people to support the categories they most want.