Do we need a mod and rules?

[lemondrop]

I think one mod would be nice in case things get crazy.

The big rule should be that spoilers need to be marked.

Any thoughts?

[BravoBravo]

Agreed.

[msmerymac]

Thinking back to the Nest book club that this board is based on - if we have monthly discussions (like the Classics discussion) we should have a mod to make a sticky of the schedule and update it, and maybe to post reminders of when the discussions are happening.

I don't know if we're ready for a big reading challenge a la NBC (which is fine, I'm cool with just discussing books here for now and doing read-alongs), but it did seem like there was a lot of work involved in keeping things updated.

Oh, and maybe an FAQ? I know questions about ereaders came up on the old board a lot.

[dorothyinAus]

I agree that we need spoiler warnings. But it is sometimes hard to discuss a book without spoiling it for people who have not read it or are not to the part you are discussing. It can be inadvertent, and feelings can get hurt.

Rather than labeling threads as Spoilers, maybe we should title threads with a No Spoilers Please request when the original poster does not want spoilers, otherwise we'll assume that spoilers are a possible outcome of the discussions.

[lemondrop]

All good points.

I agree that the large seasonal challenges are too much footwork, and I'm not sure we have enough people to really make it work.

Coming up with another kind of challenge or something would be fun. I agree that the read alongs will be fun, and people can always start their own if they don't like the other book being discussed.

[bookbunny]

I like the at least one mod and "no spoilers please" ideas.

[whitepicketfence]

I think these are all great ideas.

Does anyone want to volunteer to be a mod? I can post on the mod board to get you set up with the proper permissions.

[angnshaun]

sounds good to me.

[lemondrop]

May 15, 2012 19:59:52 GMT -5 whitepicketfence said:

I think these are all great ideas.

Does anyone want to volunteer to be a mod? I can post on the mod board to get you set up with the proper permissions.

I'm interested in doing it. I just e-mailed EllieArroway about it.

I think we should see who is interested and have people vote if we have a bunch interested. I think 2 would be OK, but we only need 1 for sure.

[BravoBravo]

I could help. I am just going on vacay and moving cross country in June.

[amyb2332]

I don't dislike the "No spoilers please" idea but I'm so used to thinking about it the other way around (assuming no spoilers and flagging somehow when there are spoilers) that I'm afraid I might get confused for a while. Or at least until I get used to it! So I kind of like the idea of just doing a (s) for spoilers or (ns) for no spoilers in all post titles just so that everyone knows and you don't have to assume anything (if that makes sense). But I'm good with whatever everyone else likes!

[PinkSquirrel]

I think we should definitely have at least one mod. Two is probably better in case one isn't around, but one is probably fine. I'd be happy to help, but I'm also fine with others doing it.

For rules I think some means of alerting people to spoilers is the only one I can really think of.

[dorothyinAus]

May 15, 2012 21:15:30 GMT -5 amyb2332 said:

I don't dislike the "No spoilers please" idea but I'm so used to thinking about it the other way around (assuming no spoilers and flagging somehow when there are spoilers) that I'm afraid I might get confused for a while. Or at least until I get used to it! So I kind of like the idea of just doing a (s) for spoilers or (ns) for no spoilers in all post titles just so that everyone knows and you don't have to assume anything (if that makes sense). But I'm good with whatever everyone else likes!

I was thinking of it as going to work the day after the Superbowl and asking people not to discuss the game because you DVRed it and haven't seen it. That's just not realistic. People are going to talk about the game, and in talking they will say things that would give away the final result. In the work scenario, you can politely ask people not to say anything until you walk away, and I thought that the "No Spoilers Please" request would be that polite request. And it could leave it so that others are free to discuss the book without worrying that any post in the thread may give anything away.

It may mean that there would be two threads to discuss a book -- one that may contain spoilers, and one that would not. But that would be better than posters not saying anything because they can't figure out how to talk about the book without giving something away.

[lemondrop]

May 15, 2012 21:25:05 GMT -5 dorothyinAus said:

May 15, 2012 21:15:30 GMT -5 amyb2332 said:

I don't dislike the "No spoilers please" idea but I'm so used to thinking about it the other way around (assuming no spoilers and flagging somehow when there are spoilers) that I'm afraid I might get confused for a while. Or at least until I get used to it! So I kind of like the idea of just doing a (s) for spoilers or (ns) for no spoilers in all post titles just so that everyone knows and you don't have to assume anything (if that makes sense). But I'm good with whatever everyone else likes!

I was thinking of it as going to work the day after the Superbowl and asking people not to discuss the game because you DVRed it and haven't seen it. That's just not realistic. People are going to talk about the game, and in talking they will say things that would give away the final result. In the work scenario, you can politely ask people not to say anything until you walk away, and I thought that the "No Spoilers Please" request would be that polite request. And it could leave it so that others are free to discuss the book without worrying that any post in the thread may give anything away.

It may mean that there would be two threads to discuss a book -- one that may contain spoilers, and one that would not. But that would be better than posters not saying anything because they can't figure out how to talk about the book without giving something away.

We could always clarify at the top of our post what our intentions are and put both spoilers and no spoilers so people who are new will understand that as well.

[lemondrop]

I think another rule to encourage discussion is that disliking a book and saying why is pefectly acceptable, but speaking negatively about or to someone based on their likes and dislikes is forbidden.

[dorothyinAus]

May 15, 2012 21:30:43 GMT -5 lemondrop said:

We could always clarify at the top of our post what our intentions are and put both spoilers and no spoilers so people who are new will understand that as well.

Sounds good, that way no one would default to one assumption or the other.

[aurora]

I like the idea of using both (S) and (NS) for now since I think it would be more welcoming for new members and it would be fun to get lots of people involved here.

[DarcyLongfellow]

May 15, 2012 21:31:56 GMT -5 lemondrop said:

I think another rule to encourage discussion is that disliking a book and saying why is pefectly acceptable, but speaking negatively about or to someone based on their likes and dislikes is forbidden.

To be honest, while that sounds great in theory, I think it would end up being censorship. Who would draw the line?

If someone wants to come on here and say -- "Darcy is a real bitch. And I can't believe she's dumb enough to like Outlander." I wouldn't like it, but I'd rather deal with that than stifle the conversation by dictating what people can and can't say.

As far as I'm concerned, the only strict rules (i.e. Mods should delete for violations) should be about spam and sharing others personal info.

I agree with what others have suggested as far as marking spoilers or no spoilers. I think stickies at the top with FAQ's can be helpful, but maybe wait to see what questions get asked a lot?

If we start a regular discussion (monthly or whatever), having those dates in a sticky at the top would be great.

[lemondrop]

May 15, 2012 22:40:56 GMT -5 DarcyLongfellow said:

May 15, 2012 21:31:56 GMT -5 lemondrop said:

I think another rule to encourage discussion is that disliking a book and saying why is pefectly acceptable, but speaking negatively about or to someone based on their likes and dislikes is forbidden.

To be honest, while that sounds great in theory, I think it would end up being censorship. Who would draw the line?

If someone wants to come on here and say -- "Darcy is a real bitch. And I can't believe she's dumb enough to like Outlander." I wouldn't like it, but I'd rather deal with that than stifle the conversation by dictating what people can and can't say.

As far as I'm concerned, the only strict rules (i.e. Mods should delete for violations) should be about spam and sharing others personal info.

I agree with what others have suggested as far as marking spoilers or no spoilers. I think stickies at the top with FAQ's can be helpful, but maybe wait to see what questions get asked a lot?

If we start a regular discussion (monthly or whatever), having those dates in a sticky at the top would be great.

Good point. Do you think using it as more of a suggestion of conduct, rather than a rule?

I also think the majority of the board should agree to the serious offenses that require deletion/censorship.

[EllieArroway]

I think the only rule necessary here is a spoilers/no spoilers tag in the title.

Mods have their own standards that the community decided on. Basically, they will only delete spam or personal info. You can request that they delete a post of yours if it contains personal info that you don't want out there, but they won't delete threads just because you are getting flamed. NSFW images shouldn't be posted, and links that are NSFW should be tagged as such. Blatant, continued harassment/stalking isn't cool, but just being mean/offending someone isn't enough to be deleted/banned.