Lists Revisited

With recent author/work improvements, Lists are getting closer to the top of the user priority list, but despite several past discussions I still don't think it's clear how exactly people want them to work.

So, here's one proposal. I'd like to see three basic types of lists:

1. Personal Lists. This is exactly what it sounds like; one person creates a list and that person alone can edit it. The list can be either public or private. The creator can add comments to items, and can enable public commenting as well.

2. Collaborative Lists. This is a list that anyone can add to. Items can be given thumbs-up (and maybe thumbs-down?), and can be sorted by number of thumbs, in addition to other basic sorts like alphabetic or recently-added. People can include a comment when they add an item, and others can comment on items as well. Thumbs and comments are enabled by default, but the list creator can choose to disable them at the time of creation.

3. Composite Lists. This is a list made up of many individual lists. Anyone wanting to contribute to, say, the Best Books of 2010 list would create their own list of best books of 2010. The composite list would be made by putting together all of these individual lists, with items ranked based on how many people listed them/in what position. The composite list would show the usernames of people who had listed each item, so that we could get from the composite list to individual lists of interest. We could also view partial composite lists based on different factors: all the people who listed Book X, all the members of Group Y, etc. ETA: There would be an option to limit the length of the individual lists; say, the Top 10 Books of 2010.

This would be my suggestion. Note - I haven't split them up like you have (and I don't believe composite lists are needed at all or should be in the first cut if they are).

Lists - add items (authors as well as works{1}). Each item should have an optional piece of text. Each item should have an image - the user should be able to select which image from the list of cover images for the work*. The owner chooses the order of the list{2}.
- Private / Public.
- Public commenting Yes / No
- Public additions Yes / No (list will autosort)
- List tagging {3}

There should be links to created lists from the linked items (authors and works {1}). I would also favour a new page for listing recent and active (based on items or comments) lists.

I don't much care for thumbs but they are in other parts of the site so I won't fight against them.

{1} Well manifestations (or whatever Tim calls 'em) if that bit is done first.
{2} I believe the owner should have the say in the order of the list not the viewer.
{3} This should help findability.

One of the big things that neither _Zoe_ or I mentioned was does the item you are adding to the list have to be from your catalogue.

I don't think it needs to be at least for paid members.

> 3

does the item you are adding to the list have to be from your catalogue.

Seems to me it shouldn't.

I can see where a group might want to have lists to facilitate trading or sales among its members. (An example that springs to mind would be the Folio Society group, or other small/fine press group, where members are often looking for certain editions that other members might have available.) In those cases, it wouldn't make sense to require that the member already own it.

And what about Wish Lists? I think some people would prefer to use a "list" feature for those rather than a Collection, which is currently the only option.

>2 andyl: Oh, good point about tagging! I also agree about having a page for listing recent and active lists; in fact, I'd like to see a complete list of lists somewhere. Some other possible ways of finding interesting lists would be most viewed, most viewed recently, most thumbed (assuming a general list-thumbing option which the creator would also be able to disable), most thumbed recently, and some combined "hotness" that took into account comments, additions, views, and thumbs together.

I agree about the user choosing a cover image too.

It seems sort of strange to restrict the order to the owner's preference, especially in collaborative lists. We can sort other users' catalogues however we want, so why not lists? I would support having the owner choose a default sort style, though, that determined how the list was sorted when someone first looked at it.

I would start with work/book lists, and add author lists as a second phase.

I definitely don't think lists should be restricted to items in a user's catalogue.

I definitely don't think lists should be restricted to items in a user's catalogue. (#5)

I agree. We shouldn't limit items to what's in the lister's catalog. That said, perhaps there could be an "add items from your catalog" option available.

And what about Wish Lists? I think some people would prefer to use a "list" feature for those rather than a Collection, which is currently the only option. (#4)

Seems to me wish lists might be a good candidate for a composite list (see the third list type in _Zoe_'s post at the start of this thread). Perhaps there could be a dozen or so kinds of prefab list types that feed into composite lists -- with the option, of course, of making a list that is not one of the prefab types.

On ordering.

The problem is that for some lists - my top ten feminist SF novels (for example) I want to control the order so my number 1 is at the top of the list. Also other lists might only make complete sense if read in the order they were intended.

Maybe it ought to be another create time option like the others I mentioned. Fixed order - yes / no.

Ordering: I think a default order makes sense but not a fixed order. After the viewer sees the list in its default order then if they want to sort the list in some way that doesn't make sense then that's their problem.

How would lists be displayed? Are we just talking about title, author, and cover (for works)? Or do you want a full catalog view with the ability to edit the columns (but the columns would come from the work instead of the book)?

How would you add items to the list? Something like touchstones where you type in the title and choices appear in the right column? Or something more like search where you could maybe search for all the works by an author the results get presented with checkboxes so you can choose which ones to add to your list?

There needs to be a way for the list owner to manually re-order them.

I'll have to think more about the overall display style. For now, just a quick point about the ordering: what if lists could have a ranking--as one of the options at creation--which would then be shown in its own column (that would always be displayed? I'm not sure how much flexibility we want here), but we didn't always have to sort by that ranking? (Sorry, that sentence became a bit convoluted; I hope it still makes sense.) So you assign your rankings to the books in your list, and I see what those rankings are, but I can still choose to sort by, say, author. But even when sorting by author, each item would still show its rank beside it?

I'm still not sure how Lists should be displayed. I was vaguely imagining something prettier than the catalogue, but that would probably mean less flexibility. Maybe we could first figure out what information we'd want to see and what we'd want to do with it, and then decide how it should be displayed?

Basic Information
Cover
Title
Author

List-Specific Information
Lister's comment
Number of other comments (click to expand)
Rank
Number of thumbs
Number of listers (for composite lists--click to see names)

Other work information
Original publication date?
Average rating?
Dewey/LC number?

I'm not sure we want to get into other work information at all, since it would complicate things further. But I can see it being useful, especially if we could sort on it.

I think there needs to be something about why it is on the list. I'm sure not all lists will be obvious like Horror Novels I Hated. Also for public lists it will give people a chance to say why their entry should be included.

Other than the comment, you mean? Or should comments be (optionally?) required?

sorry, missed that one. comment would work.

*peeks in* I don't want to start a war here or anything, I'm just honestly curious... What would you guys use Lists for? We have Series, and Collections... Personally I can't think of what I would use them for, and I'm honestly curious about it.

"My favorite novels of 2011", e.g. I don't want to have fifty million collections for things that would work better as short lists of 20 or fewer books.

-- lquilter

#16

Pretty much what lquilter said. Also useful for recommended reading lists and other thematic lists. I would imagine they would be very useful for the reading challenge people and make their interactions more useful to them.

Also as we have been discussing lists could include books that are not in your catalogue.

Having collections in one's library isn't very visible - so the findability would be next to zero. Also there would be no social aspect. No commenting on the items. No building of community or group lists.

>16 Heather19:
I want a Wishlist separate from my catalog, but not in a separate account.

I want a less pain-in-the-ass way to keep track of the books I read for challenges.

I want to make thematic lists.

What everyone else has said :)

So, how does one look for lists? Is it a tab? Are your private lists there too? Or are those on your home page? Somewhere else?

For the public lists, are they grouped by topic or do you just have to search them to see if there's anything interesting?

And I'm still confused about how group lists are different from the lists that are currently in the wiki.

nothing to see here folks.

I think a tab would be appropriate, though Tim probably disagrees. Either way, there should be a main Lists page that highlights various lists (recent, hot, etc.); you could also find lists via tags or by searching. There would also be a way to see which lists included a given work.

Each member would also have their own Lists page showing lists they'd created and lists they were following (starred? any they thumbed? Some way of marking interest, anyway).

Oh, and as for how it's different, there are a lot of things that are difficult/impossible with the wiki. The whole idea of ranking items based on how many votes/thumbs they got is much harder, and compiling composite lists requires a huge amount of effort.

You could possibly get to it from Your books. So Your books becomes a switchable view between the current catalog and Lists.

22: As Zoe and brightcopy surmised, I meant "how would they look" once they were implemented.

well excuse me.

#25

No, I think it needs greater visibility than that, but that would be a fine place to find the lists that you have created. Public lists should be as visible as Talk.

What could probably be done is merge it in with Talk and Groups into a single tab with a switchable view.

28> Oh, I think that they should have more functionality and you could do stuff with them in Talk. Didn't mean to imply otherwise. I was just thinking of an access point for managing your lists and directly looking at other peoples. I'm not sure I really agree on the "should be as visible as Talk". To me, it's kind of apples and oranges. But I understand your point of view even if it's not my cup of tea.

27: No, you should excuse me. Your interpretation of what I actually wrote was entirely legitimate.

Amateur linguist note for brightcopy: Notice the need for the subjunctive in English. Context does not always make speculative nature of a statement clear.

I'd like to use lists to keep track of my reading or buying progress on certain themes or lists. I'd really like lists to have a checkmark feature. (I want something like ListofBests, but that functions at the "work" level rather than the edition level - LoB can't really do that.) It'd be nice to be able to "check off" books on my own lists, as well as other peoples' - perhaps by "adopting" their list.

I'd also like the option to make lists private.

I might use lists as a wishlist (instead of the collection), but I'd have to see how lists develop.

I'd like a "checking off" feature as well.

For reading progress, I'd like it to be integrated with a default "Read" collection. So I could tell LT what books I'd read, and they would be automatically checked off in lists where they occurred. Likewise, books could be added to that collection from the lists.

I'd rather see Lists separate from Talk since I find it's already a bit slow to switch back and forth between Talk views, but I think that's a pretty minor point. I'd also prefer to get to my own lists from my profile rather than from my catalogue, but again, a relatively minor concern.

Maybe start a new game once it reaches to 50.

I think the primary use of lists I'd use would be to pull the "recommended reading" from threads where people list books about specific subjects. Could we make that as a function as well?

>34 gilroy: You mean automatically create a list of all the works touchstoned in a given thread?

35>
As an option or button, yes!

> 35, 36 I think this might be a blunter instrument than the suggestion @34 would require.

Example: Somebody starts a thread asking about "Mysteries Related to Books" and it generates suggestions of books about librarians who solve mysteries, books in which the murder takes place in a library, and books in which rare books are the motive for murder or otherwise central to the plot. A meta-list of all the books mentioned might be useful, but I'd also like the ability to break out the three sub-categories into lists of their own.

As it is, that information -- often fantastically interesting -- is quickly buried in Talk threads that often have non-informative titles like "Recommend a New Series." It would be wonderful to have it be more accessible and more easily found, and lists seem like a useful way to do that.

(Edited to reflect post 36)

34, 37: I too saw this as the main function of lists. However, it's clear to me from the functionalities discussed above that other people have other ideas. For the thread-to-list function to be useful, it will have to be easier than what we have now (which is the ability to move the information from the thread to the wiki -- hardly anyone does this because it's such a pain). However, the folks who started this thread have such divergent ideas that I'm having trouble envisioning what Lists would look like and whether they'd be useful for the thread thing.

Maybe it would involve doing something different in Talk? Maybe you'd have a post "Let's construct a list of Historical Novels involving Persians here with a link to a collaborative list?

Zoe et al., how would you see this sort of thing working in your vision of lists?

37, 38> You could always create the lists with all he books using the button and then edit them to delete the books you don't want. That would be easier than copying from the thread by hand and less complicated to program than putting up a list of all the works that can then be chosen from.

#37 and #38

I think in my vision of how lists work - if you want to start a "Historical Novels involving Persians" you would just start a new list off (probably with one or many books to begin with). People who were interested would read the list and maybe add comments to items and/or add new items.

If the list creator wanted they could make a post on the historical fiction group asking for helpers with the link as you suggest.

Obviously there still may be some lists that have to be created from older threads but I think that where a list is the point of a topic I feel that most people would just jump straight to making the list and dispense with the talk topic. Of course that necessitates making lists very visible and giving them their own page/view.

Challenge lists.

At the moment challenge topics are quite high volume and if people made challenge lists (and ticked them books off as they read them) then the challenge lists might easily dominate the most recent / active displays.

Maybe there could be a flag that the creator could tick to indicate that something was a challenge list and there could be a filter to remove challenge lists from the display.

>40 andyl: Right, I think lists would largely replace those Talk threads. Rather than starting a Talk thread asking for suggestions on a given topic, I would start a list instead. (I wonder whether it would be useful to allow Lists to be connected to particular groups?)

One other thought: in addition to adding comments to individual items, it would be nice if there were a way to comment on the list as a whole, and if we could then get lists of interest to show up in Talk.

I'm not convinced that challenge lists should be hidden, though. I don't think being a challenge is intrinsically a bad thing; if lots of people are looking at those lists, they might deserve to be highlighted. I do think the various interestingness metrics should take into account the number of different users participating, though; if I make a list and look at it and add to it every day myself, that doesn't necessarily mean it's very interesting to anyone else; whereas lists that lots of different people are looking at or adding to are more likely to be of interest.

#42

a) On visibility

The hide / show bit would be an option for the user viewing the lists page/view. Those who want to see the challenge lists would see them, those who didn't, wouldn't. I am just wary of the challenge lists swamping other lists. In a way the challenge flag could also help the challenge people* as it could be used to help their search for other challenge people with similar book-lists.

As for personal lists necessarily being of less interest to others than lists with multiple contributors - I don't particularly agree. Yes, they are more likely to be of less interest but what about the single contributor list which is of interest to lots of people but doesn't get many contributions because it is well curated (or no comments are allowed). Would thumbs alone be enough for it to pop in to people's sphere of visibility?

b) comment on the list as a whole

Yep I think this would be a nice feature.

c) On connecting to a group.

Yep - I think in one of the previous discussions something along those lines was floated. That at create (edit by creator) time a list could be linked to a group. I think that there was also talk about having a group can comment / add items option as well as public. So it would be possible for the members of a group to curate a list rather than the choice being an individual or the whole LT world.

On challenges, it would be nice if we could have a more flexible system based on tags--so in addition to "show groups tagged x", I could also "hide groups tagged y". I don't think a system that relies on one individual checking a box would be very effective, plus this way would avoid putting a particular stigma on the challenge lists ;)

For noting lists of interest, number of views might also be a useful metric. A lot of people might look at the single-contributor list with no comments allowed.

>43 andyl: I should add that I agree about group lists, I just don't have anything else to say there at the moment.

Being able to tag lists would be useful, but I think everyone needs to be able to do it, not just the list owner, like group tagging. Otherwise there might be some challenge groups that don't get tagged with challenge and so it wouldn't be possible to exclude them with "hide groups tagged challenge".

Right, I definitely meant everyone should be able to tag.

The leading music cataloguing sites have long since implemented the possibility of making lists - random examples:

RYM: http://rateyourmusic.com/list/soulmakossa/southern_soul_galore____essential_sout...
Discogs: http://www.discogs.com/lists/Amazing-cover-artwork/116440

Just got here and already miss this feature :o)

Bump.

4. Shared Lists. Functioning essentially like Common Knowledge, these would be lists that anyone can edit and rearrange. They would be used for things like the 1001 Books. The individual contributors would be entirely invisible (except maybe for a log). It might be useful to be able to "lock" a list at some point, after which no more books could be added or deleted. This could be done by vote.

I had initially thought of this as a form of Collaborative List, just without voting, but since it also requires a type of rearranging and deleting that isn't allowed in basic Collaborative Lists (henceforth referred to as Popularity Lists), I figure it might as well be its own thing.

noting this as part of my Lists research for RSI's! this entire feature needs some inspection. Thanks guys.

UPDATE on this RSI: basically, the Lists feature definitely needs an overhaul, but is not high on Tim's "List" (pun unintended).. worth looking at, but is more likely to happen later rather than sooner. Afraid that's all I've got right now.