<Snipped quote by Inkarnate>

I'm okay with whatever structure happens so long as there is an option for veto, otherwise people will simply opt out. A vote might keep someone from having a turn, but it also is possible to structure it so that the voting system can be devised to let one individual have a turn but be required to provide a list of options from different authors that get voted on. They can speak to the merits of their selections.

I'll be blunt; I don't want to be roped into reading "Atlas Shrugged" again and I want to make sure there are ways to keep people from being hit with the inevitable for things they dislike immensely as well.

While I might be tentatively interested in a book club, having a "veto" option is severely unappealing. Honestly, in all book clubs I've been apart of, the whole thing was about finding new books and partaking in conversations and debates about that book. A veto option erased the former. and quite frankly, it takes away the "don't judge a book by its cover" simply because one doesn't like the reputation of said book.

Also, how do you know that people won't like the books that you dislike? I can tell you right now that I've disliked a lot of things that people have told me are great and vice-versa(me liking something that they don't). So, honestly, that's another reason why the 'veto' option isn't a good one.

hey guys theres no need to fight im sure we can all start with a great book everyone will like

Mein Kampf.

i dunno about yuo but i really think well all like reading it!!! i heard it makes great for writing edgy protagonists who have deep internal struggles and also helps in writing nation rps because ive enver done one before and

For real. Let's all read Me-
*click*

Err. I mean. I am mildly interested for when exams are over, but ideally they should be books we can all access without much effort. :) I know I can't often head to the bookstore, and can't afford very much (books are expensive here y'know!) but I like ebooks...

Please do not call the CIA. That would be most inopportune.

hey guys theres no need to fight im sure we can all start with a great book everyone will like

Mein Kampf.

i dunno about yuo but i really think well all like reading it!!! i heard it makes great for writing edgy protagonists who have deep internal struggles and also helps in writing nation rps because ive enver done one before and

For real. Let's all read Me-
*click*

Err. I mean. I am mildly interested for when exams are over, but ideally they should be books we can all access without much effort. :) I know I can't often head to the bookstore, and can't afford very much (books are expensive here y'know!) but I like ebooks...

Please do not call the CIA. That would be most inopportune.

Kinda my point about coming up with a vote mechanism to prevent having someone select Mein Kampf, or something that most everyone has already read. In the case of Atlas Shrugged and Mein Kampf, I was given one in HS and one during undergrad. I'm good.

But if someone else wants to take this and run it their way, I don't have a problem. Also, there's a lot of local library access to books in ebook form these days. It's not all areas, but there's some availability.

I'm interested, provided the books aren't too hard to get a hold of. I'd suggested having a list of exceptions that cannot be recommended for this problem of "controversial" books.

The point of an open discussion, in my mind, is to discuss things no matter one’s disposition going into them. The process you describe feels to me as exclusionary and seems counterproductive in my view when it comes to approaching discussion. In similar clubs (album discussion, etc.) there has never been option to veto for just this reason. People want to discuss a piece. One does not really want to participate in a group if they are excluded. If this is the system you want to prescribe to, that’s ultimately your decision but my interest in participating is definitely reduced if that is the case.

Isn't the point of a discussion group/club approaching works you might not be interested in or dislike?

If our opinions here in this discussion thread are on how we want to proceed I am a hard ‘no’ on any vetoing/voting system.

<Snipped quote by HeySeuss>

While I might be tentatively interested in a book club, having a "veto" option is severely unappealing. Honestly, in all book clubs I've been apart of, the whole thing was about finding new books and partaking in conversations and debates about that book. A veto option erased the former. and quite frankly, it takes away the "don't judge a book by its cover" simply because one doesn't like the reputation of said book.

Also, how do you know that people won't like the books that you dislike? I can tell you right now that I've disliked a lot of things that people have told me are great and vice-versa(me liking something that they don't). So, honestly, that's another reason why the 'veto' option isn't a good one.

Whereas I understand where you guys are coming from, a face to face book club involves more personal investment than what we would do here, and as a result too much controversy is more likely to cause this project to fracture.

Perhaps a veto with the caveat that the pro-thatbook side having the opportunity to plead the case of their book would be a workable solution?

<Snipped quote by MyCatGinger>

Kinda my point about coming up with a vote mechanism to prevent having someone select Mein Kampf, or something that most everyone has already read. In the case of Atlas Shrugged and Mein Kampf, I was given one in HS and one during undergrad. I'm good.

Don't worry, you'll love my mash-up fan fiction, Hitler Shrugged.

Also, I recommend Mother Night by Kurt Vonnegut.

<Snipped quote by HeySeuss>

Don't worry, you'll love my mash-up fan fiction, Hitler Shrugged.

Also, I recommend Mother Night by Kurt Vonnegut.

Or Rand McNally's debut into the German Market, Mein Atlas

I need to read Gilgamesh again for a writing project. Perhaps that could be tossed in the suggestions pile?

For "Hitler Shrugged" I was going to link to Hipster Hitler...except they finally took it down.

Whereas I understand where you guys are coming from, a face to face book club involves more personal investment than what we would do here, and as a result too much controversy is more likely to cause this project to fracture.

Perhaps a veto with the caveat that the pro-thatbook side having the opportunity to plead the case of their book would be a workable solution?

I’ve been in a lot of online discussion groups that have functioned as clubs, so I don’t think they operate too different as offline. But I don’t mean to argue your point. My perspective is that a veto systems at all (this includes caveats) would be counterproductive and a system that works against an open forum of discussion is one that I am not at all interested in volunteering my time to.

To be honest, I really haven't read anything (well real books) in several months. :I I've read a shit ton of books, usually whatever my mom gives me. But there almost never anything I write about which I find weird. But I just find the mystery genre, great to read. But I'd likely never write one outright. The last fantasy book I read was kind of boring as piss. So, yeah I probably should read more. But with anime, music, and outdoors and writing, gaming and interacting with friends. Books have sort of fallen out of my current hobbies. :/

<Snipped quote by Vilageidiotx>
I’ve been in a lot of online discussion groups that have functioned as clubs, so I don’t think they operate too different as offline. But I don’t mean to argue your point. My perspective is that a veto systems at all (this includes caveats) would be counterproductive and a system that works against an open forum of discussion is one that I am not at all interested in volunteering my time to.

Is your concern that vetoes can't be discussed at all? I think selections should be debated either way.

<Snipped quote by Inkarnate>

Is your concern that vetoes can't be discussed at all? I think selections should be debated either way.

I think that the reader should have the chance to object and I'd rather create a process for recourse than have them just drift off.

I wasn't going for a system where someone goes, "No, just because" as that is the opposite of "This is my choice, we're reading this book, end of story." I'd prefer to avoid that, because people will peace out at that point if it's a sufficiently distasteful book to them. Also, I think we should avoid putting down titles that are duplicative to the group, so that there aren't several people re-reading a title. That dilutes the value of having a discussion among people reading it for the first time.

(Which was honestly my objection; I already read certain titles once, it's going to be suggested sooner or later, and I'd prefer something new. It has nothing to do with close mindedness and everything to do with having done my time already.)

The alternate mechanism I was envisioning was that the person present at least three titles by different authors for vote by the participants with a chance for discussion.

That allows a mutually inclusive process of selection. I mean, end of the day, I do not think we should be just letting someone just pick the books without at least some explanation of what they want to do and there should be a compelling reason for turning it down. But there are good and valid reasons for not wanting to read a book.

Since this isn't a purely academic forum, we should be considering that some reads are not simply asking tough questions, but are genuinely unpleasant. We should be striking the balance between challenging/stimulating and entertaining here, and that means that we shouldn't be just assigning books like this is an undergrad course.

I understand the need for vibrant discussion, but I also feel it should be tempered by the knowledge that it doesn't have to be our jobs to make people read things they wouldn't otherwise, or engage them in unpleasant discussions for their own good. This isn't academia, so we shouldn't be prioritizing intellectual challenge above all other considerations. It honestly should be the other way around -- views should be challenged, but gently. Discussion and debate are two different things with two different goals, sharing vs. winning and I definitely err on the side of sharing.

The person that humorously suggested Mein Kampf definitely hit the note. As an alternative to Mein Kampf, there is always "Eichmann in Jerusalem" (312 pages) or "Night" (175 pages) if Holocaust studies had to happen, rather than the, quite frankly, banal ranting of Adolf Hitler (730 pages) or something more dry and lengthy history like Raul Hilberg's "The Destruction of European Jews." (1300 pages) Kampf and Destruction have a place in academic study (and were assigned reading for me), but seem a little much for book club stuff.

Basically, I don't believe that we should just take a book sight unseen because someone has their turn. Both sides should be getting their say here.

Sure, I'm in.

Thoughts:

Suggest only books you have not read yet.

For each (month, or quarter or whatever) everyone votes for the book they want the group to read together.

If it's not your cup of tea, skip that month.

Limit the number of books you can suggest each cycle (2 or 3 should be fine)

Elect a discussion leader (normally this is the person who suggested the book, but not always the case if they don't feel comfortable doing it) They are responsible for thinking up/research discussion points throughout the cycle.

That's it. Hit me with a mention if this thing gets going.

I'm not too great at contributing to discussions but I could always go for some new recommendations. Color me intrigued.

Is anyone else still considering this? I think Polybius had good suggestions. At this juncture, if we still have interest, I think we move forward with the vote system. People propose books, people vote, most votes is the book of the month.

It's not like this would be the one and only book club anyway, but I feel like it's the fastest way to get this moving, and keep it democratic.

I'm still interested.

Still here.

I am still interested.

The idea of a 'discussion leader' (maybe someone familiar with the context / topic of the book) is a great idea.

I'm here whenever you folk wanna start something.