- Reading periods last 1-2 months, depending on the length of the book.
- Discussions start on the first day of the month, along with the reading period for the next book on the Read List.
- In order to nominate a book (other than to create the very first nomination list), you must have contributed to the discussion of the previous book.
- You may have a maximum of 2 books in the nomination list at any given time.
- A nominated book will move to the Read List based on the chronological order in which it was nominated, and if it has been approved by a simple majority (over 50%) of NOBC members.
- The Read List needs to be at least 2 books deep at all times for the purpose of timely book acquisition.
- You may vote for up to 3 books during a given nomination period; you may not vote for the same book more than once.
- A book may stay on the nomination list for up to 2 (two) nomination cycles. After 2 nomination cycles, any books lacking sufficient votes to be promoted to the Read List will be pruned from the nomination list. (Books may also be removed by their nominator.)
Modified: 11/12/07
August 25, 2007 at 10:43 am
This sounds good. I do suggest we have nominations for books two books out. Depending on how long it takes to get the book the 2 month period may shorten considerably.
August 25, 2007 at 11:06 am
Are you saying that we should identify the order of the next 2 books (minimum)? That’s a good idea, and brings up some missing rules: how do we decide what the order is, or if a nominated book will be read? (I don’t know if there was a rule for either in the original NOBC; I do seem to remember some haggling over both, however.)
August 25, 2007 at 1:24 pm
Yes that is exactly what I am saying otherwise we will cut into read time with purchase time.
I think books should be read in the order nominated and voted on.
I think it would be good to establish some sort of vote (percentage of members) to establish a legit read. In other words to move a book from the nominated list to the actual read list.
August 26, 2007 at 12:16 pm
You forgot the no women allowed bylaw (just kidding!). By the way was Ben invited to be part of the NOBC?
August 26, 2007 at 1:10 pm
I think these will work well.
Also, I think that a current nomination list should not include any members’ nominations from the previous nomination list.
I.e.
Lee, Danny, Chris cannot have an official nomination for the next selection.
August 26, 2007 at 2:04 pm
Tato – Ben and Bonnie were both invited. I haven’t heard from them. (Perhaps because I didn’t invite Holden.)
Danny – Your example seems a little different from the rule you proposed. The rule seems to imply only that there is no carry-over from one nomination list to the next – in other words, we should start with a fresh nomination list every 2 months. Your example seems to be saying that if you nominated a book for the previous nomination list, you cannot nominate a book for the current nomination list… or perhaps I’m just reading things incorrectly.
August 26, 2007 at 2:19 pm
Chris – I modified rule #2 based on our conversation at church today. Wasn’t there something else you suggested? Something related to participating in the discussion and book nomination?
August 26, 2007 at 2:37 pm
Do we need a rule about how many books you can vote for during a given nomination period? Not voting for the same book more than once, but voting (to break a tie, for instance) for 2 different books during the same nomination period?
August 28, 2007 at 2:43 am
I think that 3 is a good number, and everyone should re-vote in the case of a tie.
And I think the losing book in the case of a tie should be automatically re-nominated for the next reading period.
August 28, 2007 at 4:34 pm
Rules/bylaws/whatever… look good to me. I think you covered everything we spoke about at church.
August 28, 2007 at 9:53 pm
Danny – I thought the chronological ordering took care of ties. We have a tie right now, if you don’t take the time of nomination and time to 5 votes into account. Or should there be a distinct end to voting periods? Like bidding on an item on eBay
(Actually, I think the first to get to the majority gets added to the read list…)
Should the nomination list only be open once the next reading period starts? (To select the next addition to the Read List.)
It sounds like you’re saying the list should be wiped, unless there’s a tie (if we can have ties
I think wiping the list is a good idea. So we’d start w/ an empty list for book #3, to be voted on … starting November 1st?
August 29, 2007 at 9:16 am
I think your invitation went astray, Lee … I didn’t hear about the new blog until your vote request email of August 27th … not that I would necessarily have had time anyway
Is there some kind of polling system on wordpress? That might make the process easier. I think that it might be cool to, when a winner is decided, have each person vote on whether or not each of the runners up should be “removed from the pool” shall we say. Nomination bloat was definitely a problem last time around — not that any of the nominations weren’t good ideas, there was just too many of them. Planning six months in advance kind of takes the fun out of haggling over which book we’ll read next.
August 29, 2007 at 9:48 am
I had the same thought, Ben, but suspected that WP didn’t support polls. After reading your comment, I looked it up – and they don’t. But supposedly, one can incorporate polls from luckypolls.com. I made a real quick attempt at creating/incorporating one, but I took the wrong approach and it didn’t work. I’ll take another stab later when I have more time.
BTW, are you a WP member? [Yep - just looked you up and added you as an author to the blog...]
Also, we were apparently heading in the direction of wiping the nomination list clean at the end of every nomination period (which I don’t yet know the duration of). See above.
August 29, 2007 at 11:27 am
everything sounds good. lets hurry up and just read. no women.
August 29, 2007 at 12:46 pm
Wiping the list clean would be effective, but what happens when you have 2 or 3 excellent suggestions in one month? I think this happened more than once. Do we want to preclude ourselves from reading a great book just because it’s already been nominated? I mean, all three of the nominations for this month sound interesting … I guess it’s mostly a trade-off, though. Can you re-nominate a book?
September 26, 2007 at 7:59 pm
Question… when will the official discussion period begin for the Heart of the Matter… and are any of us locals interested in making a meal out of a discussion (in addition to online as well)?
September 26, 2007 at 8:21 pm
Twice?
See Current Selection at the top of the page… it will always have that info.
October 16, 2007 at 4:01 pm
I agree with Ben about wiping the list clean. I think we should just have a continual list of nominations going in order of nomination and if a majority of the group wants to read the book at any point in the future it moves to the read list. Obviously we would not be able to vote for the same book twice.
October 16, 2007 at 4:02 pm
I am interested in having a local meal just to get together if nothing else.
Of course we would have to summarize the discussion from that meal for those not able to attend.
October 17, 2007 at 10:38 pm
Chris – see rule #8.
Yes – it wouldn’t be fair to the non-locals if nobody took minutes…
October 27, 2007 at 8:41 pm
Chris – re: our conversation at the Missions BBQ tonight – Ben seems to have two views on wiping the nomination list – his post from 8/27 at 9:16am talks about pruning the list, at a minimum…
Everyone – I finally checked out Survey Monkey, and here’s the first NOBC SurveyMonkey poll (on the nomination list). The poll closes in 1 week (midnight, 11/3), so vote soon! Note: see the Current Selection page for the password for the poll.
October 29, 2007 at 9:19 am
Non-locals pay the penalty for being non-local. If I went to something like that, I don’t think I would want to have to take notes on my conversation. If all the NOBC members in, let’s say, Kentucky, or Alaska, want to have an “Alaska NOBC meal” to discuss the book, that’s fine with me, though. No need to take notes.
October 29, 2007 at 10:42 am
Looks like Ben and Bonnie have voted, thanks! (Unless someone voted twice… I see the same IP address twice, spaced a few minutes apart, in the Survey Monkey stats.)
Be sure to vote, everybody!