Q3 Nonfiction! - Should we read 2 books this time?

Chris OConnor

Q3 Nonfiction! - Should we read 2 books this time?

We've been tossing around the idea of reading and discussing multiple nonfiction books concurrently. Based on the very close poll results from our recently closed "Official Poll - 3rd Quarter 2006 NONFICTION book POLL!" thread I am wondering how everyone feels about tackling BOTH of the top two books during July, August and September 2006.

Here are the poll results. This might help you decide:

A Peace to End All Peace: The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East by David Fromkin
(20 votes) - the winner!

Classical Celt X3
misterpessimistic X2
ginof X3
MadArchitect X3
Dissident Heart X3
Loricat X1
tomiichi X2
LanDroid X3

Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon by Daniel C. Dennett
(18 votes)

Jeremy1952 X3
JulianTheApostate X3
misterpessimistic X1
tarav X2
Meme Wars X3
Loricat X2
tomiichi X1
Chris OConnor X3

Consider the people that voted for each book. Some are more active than others. Some rarely post at all. This matters, naturally. But both groups contains very active members that are sure to purchase the book and jump right into the discussion.

Please take this poll AND make a follow-up post explaining how you feel. Now might be as good of a time as ever to start doing multiple books concurrently. But maybe not. I want your opinion! ::44

Should we read both books this time?

Results (total votes = 12):


Yes, let's do both. I will probably read/discuss both books.	6 / 50.0%

Yes, let's do both. I will read/discuss "A Peace to End All Peace"	0 / 0.0%

Yes, let's do both. I will read/discuss "Breaking the Spell"	2 / 16.7%

No, only the winning book. I will participate in that discussion.	3 / 25.0%

No, only the winning book. I won't be able to participate.	1 / 8.3%

Chris OConnor

My vote was "Yes, let's do both. I will probably read/discuss both books."

mmpruitt

What about, "sure why not do both books, but nonfiction isn't really my thing so I probably won't participate?"

-Meghan

"Are you alright? Yeah you're alright, you're alive!" -Garden State

GOD defiles Reason

Yes, i might participate in both.

Maybe votes like this, where there's an even split between active members, could be used as a deciding factor for future one or multiple book discussions.

Mr. Pessimistic

I like the idea...but I worry about participation.

I voted yes...probably both...but only because of the 'probably'. I am not sure I will get to both. I already have Breaking the Spell...so...

I will keep in mind that the winner was "Peace" and make every attempt to read that...

I am confused now. Thanks Chris!!!!!

Mr. P.

The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.

Once you perceive the irrevocable truth, you can no longer justify the irrational denial. - Mr. P.

The pain in hell has two sides. The kind you can touch with your hand; the kind you can feel in your heart...Scorsese's "Mean Streets"

I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper

Chris OConnor

This could be a test. We really have no way of knowing if overall participation will be increased or decreased by such a move. But it seems worth the experiment.

From experience the majority of members don't read and discuss every winning book. If their top choice doesn't win they might purchase, read and discuss the winner, but most members do not. Try as I might, I cannot force anyone to read any of our winning selections. By doing both of these books there is a chance that we'll have our best quarter ever. Everyone that voted for either of those two books has every reason to be happy and every reason to participate.

And I agree with God defiles Reason. We can examine the poll results each polling period. If we have a close tie, with quite a few people voting, we can consider the option of doing the top two books.

I really LOVE the freedom of being able to change your vote. Having our polls an active discussion is so superior to a simple poll where you click a button. I'm really pleased with seeing people shifting their votes to the two remaining books.

Mr. Pessimistic

Quote:
And I agree with God defiles Reason.

Aw...I like when you two play nice together! :P

Quote:
I'm really pleased with seeing people shifting their votes to the two remaining books.

That is a good thing. More interactive. I like listing the names and vote counts too.

Mr. P.

The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.

Once you perceive the irrevocable truth, you can no longer justify the irrational denial. - Mr. P.

The pain in hell has two sides. The kind you can touch with your hand; the kind you can feel in your heart...Scorsese's "Mean Streets"

I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper

Chris OConnor

Listing the names makes it more personal and hopefully increases the odds that those people will participate.

Loricat

My suggestion would be to do the winning book this quarter, the other the next quarter...'cause I don't know if I can juggle both books and do them justice.

"All beings are the owners of their deeds, the heirs to their deeds."

Loricat's Book Nook
Celebrating the Absurd

ginof

i dont' think i have time to do both, but it's cool that we have such high turnout! Perhaps if we did one, we could do the other next Q (or at least have the book on the nomination list again)

MadArchitect

I didn't vote for any of the options, because, honestly, I don't know. That there are people showing interest in both books is a good sign, but I don't know if we could garner participation for both books. I think the worst case scenario would be that half the group would read and discuss one book, half the group would read and dicuss the other, and there'd be no real overlap between the two. To my mind, it's better for the site if the majority of us are reading the same book -- I'd rather see that than an even split not really interacting with one another. But then, it might not pan out that way.

I probably won't read the Dennett book any time soon -- I've read some negative reviews by reputable critics, and I'm pretty burned out on arguments for religion as a genetic anomoly. Beyond which, "Peace" is over 600 pages, which is more than enough to keep me occupied for most of the quarter. I guess the real test is to try running two discussions concurrently, but if you're seeing a lot of people saying that they'll read one or the other, and very few people saying they'll read both, then I'd consider whether or not that's really good for the community.

riverc0il

for the record, i threw in x3 votes for peace in the poll...

GOD defiles Reason

Hmmm...

Your chad musta been hangin'

We may have to take this to court.

Chris OConnor

Riverc0il

Woops. You're right. I think I missed yours somehow. $:\$ So Peace won by even more votes.

Any other opinions on this matter?

JulianTheApostate

I voted for two discussing two books. That should lead to more overall discussion, since less dedicated readers can discuss the book that interests them more, while fanatics like me can read & discuss both. Also, with a single book, someone who doesn't care for the selection might disappear for the quarter and never return.

FYI, I read Peace a couple of years ago and don't plan to re-read it. However, since I've read several Middle East history books since then, I should have plenty to say.


	FORUMS	ABOUT	BOOKS	VIDEOS	TRANSCRIPTS	LINKS	BLOGS	DONATE	CONTACT