Should we drop the "freethinker" focus?

Chris OConnor

I'm shocked nobody responded.

Maybe a different approach would be better. Maybe make a post and use BookTalk.org in your signature, so that our site is mentioned each and every time you post.

I'll start posting over there once in awhile too.

Chris OConnor

Or maybe we just say:

Quote:
"We're actually discussing this book as our quarterly selection right now at BookTalk.org. Anyone interested is welcome to drop by and join the discussion. Susan Jacoby has agreed to a live chat session with us near the end of the month too."

And make sure BookTalk is an actual link.

marti1900

First of all, even among semi-intelligent people like me, the term 'freethinker' does not mean non-religious or not believing in a god. For most people, it means being able to make up your own mind on all kinds of matters. OK, maybe that is wrong, but that is how it is.

Quote:
"Theists are welcome and encouraged to participate in all aspects of BookTalk, but our community is about reason, critical thinking and education, not faith and religious dogma."

You are exactly right. All you dweebs can come here and read and post BUT....see how unfriendly that 'but' is?

Change this to: Everyone is welcome and encouraged to participate in all aspects of BookTalk. Our community is about reason, critical thinking and education. We are interested in your views. Share with us what you are reading. Speak your mind.

You know, yada yada like that. Sound more friendly and welcoming. People post once and never come back. Ever think why?

Again, my opinion, based on years of business training courses: You have a mixed mission here. You need to ask yourself: Is this a book discussion site, or a freethinker discussion site that is incidently concerned with some various reading from time to time. You can't have it both ways, not to the general public. If it is a freethinker site first and foremost and all else is incidental, there are other and better and more active 'skeptic' sites. If it is a book discussion forum, there is too much emphasis on the freethinker philosphy to appeal to a broader range of thinking, intelligent readers. The freethinking attitude here is unfriendly and sometimes downright insulting.

I've been a skeptic so long I don't even care about it anymore. I just want to read and discuss as intelligently as possible, books, get input, perspective and feedback from other intelligent people on those books. And I don't think I am the only one.

Marti in Mexico

Chris OConnor

Marti

I think you've just summed up our problem beautifully. I'm in the middle of something right now so I can't say much in response, but you're totally right on all counts.

This needs to be a book discussion community first and foremost. I'll reword our About page and every other place on the site that is so damn offensive.

We can restrict our quarterly books to ones that are educational and advocate using reason, but the atheism component ins't necessary or helpful.

I think we ought to do is lose the phrase, "The freethinker's book discussion community" and change it to "Quality books, good people, great conversations." What do you think?

We also need to be more tolerant. This doesn't mean we should read books by Jerry Falwell, but blantantly insulting religious people needs to stop.

marti1900

Quote:
Quality books, good people, great conversations

Excellent! I like it a lot.

Edited to add: I think it would be nice to have a fiction section as well. I think it is elitist to proclaim we only read non-fiction. Offering a thinking fiction section could be a way of luring in non-fiction readers and encouraging them to try a non-fiction book or two.

I understand fiction book forums can easily degenerate into the 'I really liked Book X.' 'Why? What appealed to you?' 'Because it was good.' kind of discussion, but I think that could be minimized because there sure are enough people here with opinions, backup reference sources, etc. to keep a fiction section up to an interesting level of discussion.

Marti in Mexico

Edited by: marti1900 at: 10/24/05 3:51 pm

Jeremy1952

Marti: I liked your post. Because it was good.

Chris OConnor

Quote:
I'm so confused.

I've spent hours explaining myself so I'm not what I an do to remove the confusion.

Quote:
This seems like a significant change to me.

How so? We already are discussing books that anyone should be able to discuss, independent of their religious affiliation. Why should we automatically reject 90% of our target audience?

Quote:
And so sudden.

We have been around over 3 years so this isn't sudden at all. You're new here so I can see how you would see this as a sudden change, but I have been struggling for years with this. We're very inactive and I am exhausted trying to reach such a small market (atheist nonfiction book readers with computers and an interest in online discussions) I'm simply trying to drop one of the qualifiers so that more people feel welcome.

Quote:
Considering the posts you've made.

What posts? Posts where I argue for atheism? I'm an atheist! If I could find a few hundred intelligent atheists that are interested in joining we wouldn't be in this situation. I spent $600 in the past few months and nobody is joining. I've spent a hell of a lot more money over the past 3 years and we currently have less than 10 active posters. So my posts have nothing to do with this. I'm an atheist and don't want to see preaching. With this change I still won't want to see preaching.

Quote:
The articles you've posted on the home page.

Those articles were selected with the desire of appealing to the freethinker world. It isn't working. I can't drive it home enough, but this business model of targeting such a narrowly defined audience is killing us.

Quote:
Is it still a question, or is your mind already made up?

I'd really like to see more members post their comments on this issue. But thats the point....nobody but 6 of us are reading this. I am leaning towards implementing this change.

Chris OConnor

Maybe this diagram will help.

Mr. Pessimistic

Chris:

This is kinda sudden though. Even with the last book, "Freethinkers", YOU pushed that book defending the fact that we were a freethinkers community! That book was your suggestion and you pushed for it. So please understand that those of us that were drawn here BECAUSE of the freethinker/atheist atmosphere may be a little taken aback by the sudden change of heart.

I understand that this is a business to you, and you have to do what you think is best to promote business...I just thought it was more than just a business...I thought it was a drive of yours to promote and denfend our minority position. That is why I have stuck around for over a year and over 2300 posts trying to help you promote that. But this, to me at any rate, is a very fundamental change. I am against it, but that is simply my opinion.

90% of the population does not feel alienated, nor does targeting a small section of society preclude a strong community...again, look at infidelguy.com. That guy offends right in his URL!....and has over 11,000 members. I agree that we should be more welcoming of all people, but I just feel proud to be a freethinking atheist, and I feel that watering that down to appease is wrong. Again...only MY opinion. Even if 90% of the population feel a little hesitant, at least we know that we welcome them...and that that 90% of the population thinks that WE have something wrong with us because we do not believe in their god.

But hey...again...that is ONLY my opinion. I offer it to you because I respect you as a person. If I did not care about booktalk's success, I would simply ok you to death.

Mr. P.

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

Let me add a comment.

God defiles Reason said:

Quote:
If you drop the Freethinker aspect of your project, are you compromising that passion?

No, I wouldn't be compromising that passion at all. That passion exists with or without an online world devoted to it. There are already a dozen quality freethinker communities, as Marti pointed out. Am I trying to compete with them? Or is this really supposed to be a book group?

I'm also passionate about aviation, online role playing games, and redheads. But should I form a nonfiction book discussion group for freethinker female online roleplaying redheads that have pilot licenses? I just might end up sitting all by myself scratching my ass wondering where I went wrong.

Mr. Pessimistic

Quote:
I'm also passionate about aviation, online role playing games, and redheads. But should I form a nonfiction book discussion group for freethinker female online roleplaying redheads that have pilot licenses? I just might end up sitting all by myself scratching my ass wondering where I went wrong.

Just realize that some of us are serious about this Chris. We are giving you our thoughts.

Mr. P.

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

Nick

Quote:
This is kinda sudden though. Even with the last book, "Freethinkers", YOU pushed that book defending the fact that we were a freethinkers community! That book was your suggestion and you pushed for it. So please understand that those of us that were drawn here BECAUSE of the freethinker/atheist atmosphere may be a little taken aback by the sudden change of heart.

Who was drawn here because of the freethinker atmosphere? You and God defiles Reason? Where are all these freethinkers that will be upset if we become more tolerant? I’m looking around and all I see and hear are empty chairs and silence.

We are a freethinker nonfiction book discussion community, not just a freethinker community. There are two components, and one of them is the focus: reading and discussing nonfiction books.

Without this facet we are dead. I never wanted to create a freethinker community. This was first and foremost a book discussion community. Those people that want a purely freethinker community have many available options that already exist. I will never be able to compete with Reginald and his Infidel guy site. His site is his life and source of income, while BookTalk is a side note to my life and income. I met Reggie at an Atheist convention and we went out to dinner and talked. He doesn’t have a job other than running his site, and he barely gets by on the revenue generated from his site. We cannot compete with a community run by someone that does nightly radio interviews. We don't make money - I lose money. We sell very few books through our links. The revenue doesn't come close to paying for this community. We have to find our own niche, and the one we have selected has proven to be unappealing to most people.

Quote:
I understand that this is a business to you, and you have to do what you think is best to promote business...I just thought it was more than just a business...I thought it was a drive of yours to promote and defend our minority position.

Wow, I could write a 500 page essay responding to this one. First of all I am losing money every month on BookTalk. Call it a "business" or a "passion" I am putting way more money into this community than it is earning. How would you feel about that if you were in my shoes? BookTalk should be able to support itself after almost 4 years of existence, but it cannot.

Quote:
I thought it was a drive of yours to promote and defend our minority position.

How are we promoting and defending a minority position by only inviting adherents to that minority position and excluding those that don't adhere? Wouldn't we be doing the freethinker world more of a service by encouraging anyone and everyone to join, and by limiting our book selection to ones that promote a secular worldview? Why should we preach to the choir? BookTalk has the opportunity to expose theists to science and reason, but we're shunning that opportunity and social responsibility by considering them unwelcome.

Quote:
That is why I have stuck around for over a year and over 2300 posts trying to help you promote that.

Nick, we would be in good shape if we could find a few dozen people like you. But look around. We have a small handful of active posters, with even less actively participating in any given book discussion.

The fact is freethinkers aren't joining our community in sufficient quantity. Why not? I theorize that it is because of what Marti said. We're confusing to visitors. Freethinkers come here after running searches for "atheism" and "freethinker" and end up leaving. They can get their fill of "faith vs. reason" debate over at Infidelguy.com or Internet Infidels in a larger and more focused community.

Nonfiction book lovers aren’t joining our community in sufficient quantity. Why not? I theorize that it is because of what Marti said. We’re confusing to nonfiction book lovers too. Nonfiction book lovers come here after running searches for “book discussion” or “nonfiction books” and end up leaving. Why? Because 90% of them immediately get the impression that they aren’t welcome.

I actually think plenty of freethinkers have come and gone due to lack of activity too. Even if they love to read and discuss nonfiction books, they don’t want to do it with themselves.

Quote:
But this, to me at any rate, is a very fundamental change. I am against it, but that is simply my opinion.

Then tell me how to make our current model work. Please. Anyone reading this – tell me what would solve this problem. I have struggled for years now and I'm exhausted. We have BookTalk links on about 60 atheist sites. Atheists aren’t joining.

Yes, I'm an atheist, but this community is not supposed to be an atheist community. We're a book community that doesn't waste precious brain cells and time reading crap. We focus on science and books advocating reason above faith. I am not proposing we change this aspect at all. I just don't see how our tone is helping us at all.

Quote:
90% of the population does not feel alienated, nor does targeting a small section of society preclude a strong community...again, look at Infidelguy.com. That guy offends right in his URL!....and has over 11,000 members.

But we're NOT a strong community. Nick, that is my point. What you envision is NOT happening. How long should I wait? Three and a half years and we have 7 active posters. Jesus, I'm trying man.

Maybe we’re not offending enough in our logo? Should we be “the atheists book discussion community?” Would this help?

Infidel guy is focused. His community is about atheism. We're NOT. Are you all arguing that we should be about atheism? Aren't there enough atheist sites out there? I've got no interest in running a site devoted to bashing religious belief. Infidel guy has a niche and is doing a fine job. To me that topic gets old. It is one worthy of discussion, but it doesn’t appeal to me as much as I am getting older.

Quote:
I agree that we should be more welcoming of all people, but I just feel proud to be a freethinking atheist, and I feel that watering that down to appease is wrong.

Nick, of all the freethinkers on this site you are not one of the more welcoming. And how can you assume I am not proud of my atheism? Everyone I know is aware of how strongly I feel about atheism. But atheism doesn’t have to be a component of a nonfiction book group, and making it a component dramatically increases the odds of failure. Not because atheism is a bad word, but because atheists are not joining in sufficient quantity. Again, we’re not attracting enough atheists. See the chart I created in my last post. It is a sort of Venn diagram. The point is that nonfiction books can be read, enjoyed, and discussed by just about anyone with a brain. By limiting our community to just atheists we're screwing ourselves.

Quote:
Again...only MY opinion. Even if 90% of the population feel a little hesitant, at least we know that we welcome them...and that that 90% of the population thinks that WE have something wrong with us because we do not believe in their god.

We do NOT welcome them Nick. If we welcomed them we wouldn't call ourselves "the freethinkers..." We're freethinkers and we advertise this. But there is NOBODY HERE. Obviously, advertising to freethinkers isn't working. Freethinkers do not seem to have much of an interest in reading and discussing nonfiction books.

Chris OConnor

Doesn't anyone else have an opinion on this subject?

Mr. Pessimistic

Quote:
Who was drawn here because of the freethinker atmosphere? You and God defiles Reason? Where are all these freethinkers that will be upset if we become more tolerant?

I am only speaking for me...and God spoke for himself. Sorry to upset you Chris. I am just giving my opinion and stating my reasons.

Quote:
We are a freethinker nonfiction book discussion community, not just a freethinker community.

I do not see where I argued against this.

Quote:
I never wanted to create a freethinker community. This was first and foremost a book discussion community.

Ok...but when I came on the scene, that was not evident. I thought it was both...I thought it was unique. I gave everything I could to help it succeed...and we have grown and are more active than we were back then.

Quote:
How would you feel about


	FORUMS	ABOUT	BOOKS	VIDEOS	ADVERTISE	LINKS	BLOGS	DONATE	CHAT	CONTACT