Mid-Series pB vs eB Dilemma

[unboggling]

oouu, so many opinions. oouuu, sookie stackhouse…. oouu, a sense of dry humor so caustic it really is funny.

I disagree that all that matters is the content. At the risk of appearing small-minded and superficial - no need to respond to that !! - I assert that packaging, look and feel, matter a lot. At least to me. There are different roles of "book user" being confused together here. One role is as collector of things (actually owning things), where to a collector with a large and growing collection packaging usually matters a lot. Another role is as a reader in many different flavors of reader. For example being unfamiliar with a particular author, where the packaging factor at least had to be partially successful in helping reader choose the book. The role of buyer - the process of evaluation and selection from all the reading material available.

My OP media-choice dilemma resides in choices of packaging and the potential of *un-standardizing* a mostly standardized collection. For which content is mostly irrelevant. If it didn't have the content I was interested in, I wouldn't have acquired it (or even wanted it) in the first place.

[wvcherrybomb]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

I suggest you stop fixating on unimportant aspects and just read.

And I suggest that if you don't understand how OCD - a very real brain abnormality - makes people feel then you should quit making useless, unhelpful suggestions.

Would you tell someone with cancer to quit fixating on being sick and expect the problem to be solved?

[unboggling]

Well, from my possibly OCD-fogged point of view, you say I have a brain abnormality? Oh no! Now where did I put that list of top neurosurgeons that I collected just in case I'd need it some day? It must be filed alphabetically in the "N" drawer of the Hypochondriac Lists File Cabinet...

[wvcherrybomb]

Originally Posted by unboggling

Well, from my possibly OCD-fogged point of view, you say I have a brain abnormality? Oh no! Now where did I put that list of top neurosurgeons that I collected just in case I'd need it some day? It must be filed alphabetically in the "N" drawer of the Hypochondriac Lists File Cabinet...

But, seriously it is a brain abnormality, or perhaps everyone else has the abnormal brains and OCD brains are normal? Whichever, there is a difference and we sufferers can't change it.

In any event, it's certainly ignorance for someone to say, "just don't be like that."

[unboggling]

wvcherrybomb, thanks for suggesting a perpetual excuse I can use when I have to:

"But I have a brain abnormality. I can't change it. My doctor at MR Forum said so. I counted your disparaging remarks, there were 23 in the past 15 minutes and the tic in your left eye pulses 113 times per minute giving a rate of 73.695652173913043 ticks per negative remark. Do you want to know how many ticks per instance of biting sarcasm you displayed? So go away and let me reorganize this or that right now!"

heh

[unboggling]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Then again, I don't have OCD.
...
I mean, what are you going to do, wait 40 years before reading the Harry Potter books?

Re Harry Potter, yes I'm waiting. Isn't there some big legal squabble in progress? Originally I wanted the series in MMPB but only the first 3 were released as MMPB. After that, I was waiting. Now there seem to be no HP eBooks available.

Re you not having OCD, are you sure?

[CWatkinsNash]

Originally Posted by unboggling

wvcherrybomb, thanks for suggesting a perpetual excuse I can use when I have to:

"But I have a brain abnormality. I can't change it. My doctor at MR Forum said so. I counted your disparaging remarks, there were 23 in the past 15 minutes and the tic in your left eye pulses 113 times per minute giving a rate of 73.695652173913043 ticks per negative remark. Do you want to know how many ticks per instance of biting sarcasm you displayed? So go away and let me reorganize this or that right now!"

heh

Wow. Okay, I see what happened here. In one of your posts replying to me, you stated...

@CWatkinsNash. Yes, "my OCD."

...quoting my reference to my OCD. Then Kali comes along and says...

Then again, I don't have OCD.
(snip)
I suggest you stop fixating on unimportant aspects and just read.

...leading to wvcherrybomb telling Kali that it's unhelpful to tell someone with OCD to just get over it.

You seem to have assumed it was directed at Kali's comments to you, but I got the feeling it was more about the overall statement due to the fact that there are people with OCD on the forum.

If you don't have OCD, you could have simply said "Apparently there's been a misunderstanding. I don't have OCD." or whatever. "OCD" gets tossed around a lot by people who actually mean "I'm picky about ____", and for the most part it stopped bothering me long ago. But the implication that people with OCD walk around counting everything borders on ridicule. I don't believe you intended it that way, but it comes across negatively. OCD is a complicated disorder that manifests in many different ways and for different reasons. A large number of us manage it quite well. I'm certainly not a "counter" - I don't like math.

[unboggling]

Originally Posted by CWatkinsNash

If you don't have OCD, you could have simply said "Apparently there's been a misunderstanding. I don't have OCD." or whatever. "OCD" gets tossed around a lot by people who actually mean "I'm picky about ____", and for the most part it stopped bothering me long ago. But the implication that people with OCD walk around counting everything borders on ridicule. I don't believe you intended it that way, but it comes across negatively. OCD is a complicated disorder that manifests in many different ways and for different reasons. A large number of us manage it quite well. I'm certainly not a "counter" - I don't like math.

Thanks for the clarification. My intent was to poke fun at *me* not all people afflicted with OCD - if I came across otherwise I apologize. If I misinterpreted anything I also apologize. I know not everyone OCD is a counter, but sometimes *I* am. My worse affliction is manic depression, which in a manic state, combined with my mild OCD, results in me exhibiting counting behavior along with a need for reorganizing unimportant things that so-called normal humans wouldn't bother with.

[CWatkinsNash]

Originally Posted by unboggling

Thanks for the clarification. My intent was to poke fun at *me* not all people afflicted with OCD - if I came across otherwise I apologize. If I misinterpreted anything I also apologize. I know not everyone OCD is a counter, but sometimes *I* am. My worse affliction is manic depression, which in a manic state, combined with my mild OCD, results in me exhibiting counting behavior along with a need for reorganizing unimportant things that so-called normal humans wouldn't bother with.

Gotcha. We're good. I now see more clearly where you're coming from.

[Lemurion]

Personally, I think what really matters is whether you want to collect the series, or simply read them. If you're looking for a collection, then you may want to spend the time and money to get as close to a matched set as possible. If all you want is to read the books, you may as well just get whatever version fits your needs. I know that I've got one series where I bought the first volume in HC, got the second in paperback, and the third in ebook.

Another series, I only buy the matched trade paperback sets from one edition.

There's no one right answer, only the answer that best fits ones own needs at the time.

[OtterBooks]

I solve that issue by not reading series. Once in a blue moon I'll allow a trilogy, but I avoid like the plague any of the license-to-print-money endeavors consisting of a never ending stream of sequels involving some jerk looking for a sword. Usually he finds it after six books then suddenly realizes he's missing a hat. I also avoid anything that's written by two authors or involves vampires. Those invariably also require lots of shelf space.

[unboggling]

Otter, I kind of agree re collaborations, though I make exceptions. Re series in general, if the writing is average or better I enjoy them, reading each new series member is like returning home after a year or two. Re vampires, you're missing out on some good reads. Admittedly most of it is trash. But there are some great ones, such as Charlaine Harris's Sookie Stackhouse series - even better than the HBO TV show. And Laurell K. Hamilton's Anita Blake series. When I suddenly felt a bit bored with F&SF last year I found those and do not regret it. Much better than a lot of F&SF trash I've read.

[unboggling]

Originally Posted by Lemurion

Personally, I think what really matters is whether you want to collect the series, or simply read them. If you're looking for a collection, then you may want to spend the time and money to get as close to a matched set as possible. If all you want is to read the books, you may as well just get whatever version fits your needs.

I see your point. Reading and collecting are 2 different roles with sometimes conflicting needs. Primarily I started collecting because I figured I'd read the good ones again someday. I've weeded out my library, keeping only good ones, iteratively for over 40 years. What's left is pretty good indeed, according to my own likes and dislikes. But "collecting" isn't the main purpose. The main purpose for me is reading. So I'll have to think about your point some more.