Lists, of a sort

http://www.librarything.com/lists.php

Lists have gone live. Go ahead and check them out, add works and lists.

I've brought what I have live, but they have a serious flaw. I think I know what's wrong with them.

What's up:

1. Lists are exclusively work-based and social. While members have expressed an interest in other features, such as a way of listing books in your collections, or even textual strings, work-based, social lists are what's on offer today.
2. They show works that have been added, who has given them thumbs up.

What I think needs changing:

1. I think "thumbs up" should be changed to "vote for," or something similar. That would add it to the books you've voted for.
2. You should be able to order the books you've voted for, presumably by dragging them up and down. In other words you need to be able to say that your favorite "Best Science Fiction" is X and second-favorite is Y.
3. You need to be able to see a given member's list for a given list—that is, the things I've said are "Best Science Fiction," in the order I putt hem.

Basically, the current system allows a group to compose a list, but it can't order it well when all there is is thumbs up/down. One method of dealing with this would be to allow members to give works stars, but that would rapidly get into seeming like cataloging books, and I want to avoid that.

So, that's what I got. What do you say?

Cool! Thanks for this. A way to change the edition/cover for the listed book would also be useful (perhaps it's there and I don't see how?).

Nice. How about an optional comments field? Presumably someone is going to want to give reasons for adding a book.

What do people think about my "needs changing"?

> 5

Yeah. Kind of weird to see a book sans cover on a list of "best covers"!

Do you want bugs here or somewhere else?

Bug #1: If I add a title already on the list, it pretends it added it and lists it under "Added by you". I suppose this could be considered correct, but I don't think it should be. Especially if it takes it off the original person's "Added by you" list.

Bug #1.5: I note that if you add an already existing one using the "Also give work a thumbs up", there's weirdness. I did that with one that had one thumb. After I pseudo-added it, it still had one thumb. But now the thumb was colored like I had thumbed it. It should have said two thumbs at that point, with the thumb colored.

Bug #2: Not sure how much this is intentional, but when you click on Date (under Sort) twice, it seems to sort it in reverse date. But then Date is no longer bolded. Double-clicking the other sorts don't seem to do this. It's just a bit inconsistent.

Just for orientation purposes, could you (Tim) please explain the concept you're implementing here and how this feature is meant to be used? Are the lists sitewide or groupwide or individual or what? I guess I'm just not getting how one would use or participate in the listmaking. It seems to me that there are already lists everywhere I turn on this site.

I infer that some sort of discussion may have preceded this, but newcomers may not have the benefit of that context.

Added a few books and a new list - fun!

I created a list (number 5) called test. Then I thought I would rename it once I had detemined what I wanted the name to be. However renaming it actually created a brand new list (number 6). I can't find a way to delete list 5 so now I have two lists (actaully I have three as I thought maybe removing the lists name would delete it ,but that just created a new list (7) which is blank). :-/

First thought is have I missed the obvious delete list button. Second thought is renaming the list shouldnt create a new list should it ?

1> 3. You need to be able to see a given member's list for a given list—that is, the things I've said are "Best Science Fiction," in the order I putt hem.

That sounds an awful lot like a personal list.

>11 Meredy:

Previous discussion.

I think "thumbs up" should be changed to "vote for," or something similar. That would add it to the books you've voted for.

This seems like a very minor matter of terminology. I don't really care what things are called.

You should be able to order the books you've voted for, presumably by dragging them up and down. In other words you need to be able to say that your favorite "Best Science Fiction" is X and second-favorite is Y.

I think the utility of this is actually fairly limited. Sure, it might be meaningful for the first few books, but once we get into decisions about whether a book is eighth-best or ninth-best, I'm not sure there's really any meaningful information being conveyed there. I'd stick with the current system for now.

You need to be able to see a given member's list for a given list

Yes. Maybe even more importantly, we need to be able to see the list of who gave thumbs up and down for a given work.

How about an optional comments field? Presumably someone is going to want to give reasons for adding a book.

Yes.

I'd also like an option for a positive-only list (no thumbs down). If we're looking at, say, Books I Read in 2011, or Books I Read for TIOLI, or whatever, it doesn't make sense for people to vote down items that others have added. It's only the positive total that matters. In these cases, I'd also like to blur the distinction between "added" and "voted". I don't know whether this should be presented as a whole other sort of list (I had originally called them Composite Lists, based on the idea that they combine people's individual lists) or just as options at the time of creating a list.

I'd also like to be able to give thumbs up to a list as a whole. This will provide another way to find lists of interest, besides Recent and Active.

Related Tags don't seem to reflect the content of the individual lists.

ETA: At least in the case of "Classics you know you should have read....", which is apparently all about Harry Potter.

Desperately needed: option to show all lists.

And there should be a way for the adder to remove a book if no one else has voted on it, for when we choose the wrong option from the search results.

(1) Allowing people to move books up & down in a list is going to be difficult to implement in a way that captures group feelings. Just dragging up & down would basically let the last person have the say and will inevitably lead to edit wars (assuming popularity of feature). I would suggest instead either an option to allow people to rank-order the list, and then an algorithm that would calculate the ranking.

(2) You should probably let people "watch" / "follow" / "star" the lists so they can continue to edit and vote-up/-down various titles.

(3) How are you going to avoid having lists of infinite growth?

(4) I'm glad that Tim has done this. I'm curious if he / staff also have plans to build out other suggested implementations of lists, i.e., private personal lists, and public personal lists -- i.e., amazon-style lists. The common-editing feature is fun but I think to really pique people's interest, you have to give a mechanism for self-expression. In other words, for the commonly-editable lists feature to reach its full potential, you'll want to have privately-editable lists to intrigue, entice, and allow shy people to practice/train.

Allowing people to move books up & down in a list is going to be difficult to implement in a way that captures group feelings. Just dragging up & down would basically let the last person have the say and will inevitably lead to edit wars (assuming popularity of feature).

I thought he meant people would be able to rank their personal sub-lists. So I might say that I consider Book A to be #1 and Book B to be #10, and the social list would take this into account to create an overall ranking.

You should probably let people "watch" / "follow" / "star" the lists so they can continue to edit and vote-up/-down various titles.

Agreed.

How are you going to avoid having lists of infinite growth?

What do you mean?

The Proust work currently at the top of the Classics list has sort of disappeared. I suspect someone combined it.

21 me > How are you going to avoid having lists of infinite growth?

22 _Zoe_ > What do you mean?

Well, you can add titles to a list -- I just added two or three to time travel. Is there a limit to the size of lists that I missed?

Hmm. The leading contender in 'Classics you know you should have read but probably haven't' has now vanished. It was one of the parts of 'A la recherche du temps perdu'. It's probably been combined, and the number has changed.

ETA: Beaten by Zoe.

>24 lquilter: Ah, I suspected that that might be what you meant, but I didn't see it as an obvious problem that had to be addressed. Does it matter if the lists are arbitrarily long? It doesn't seem to be a problem with Talk threads, for example.

>23 _Zoe_:
That was me. It was an uncombined single copy edition. I combined it with the correct work. I was about to report the disappearance a a bug, but Zoe beat me to it.

#1 > For the whole feature, I'm ... meh.

As for the actual function, I don't think the thumbs is the way it will allow for what you want, Tim. If anything, it will need for each user to place a number of 1-whatever to allow their own sort, then aggregate that number across the amount of people voting. It would then become a personal sort vs a group sort type thing. Thus you'd take care of needs 2 and 3 at the same time.

The thumbs just seem wrong to me.

If they're work-based, is a cover-art list really even sensible?

Lists are sliding off the "Active lists" (apparantly 10 lists only) and disappearing as new lists are added. An "All lists" option is needed.

Also, the "More" tab is activated once you follow the link to "Lists home". But opening the "More" tab shows no listing for "Lists".

#28

I'm not totally taken by the implementation. I think it is too raw at the moment to be on general release.

I agree that the the thumbs don't capture the ordering correctly in all cases. I can just vote Yes it should be on this list, or No I think it shouldn't be, or leave it unthumbed. Aggregating those votes will give an interesting result, but I don't think it produces the kind of result some people want.

#31

I think that is part of the problem with the whole feature. Everyone wants something different for the same name. In the previous discussion, I don't think it ever got narrowed to ONE definition of what exactly a "list" would be.

Now we have implementation that leaves a lot to be desired.

General points some already covered by others.

1) Comments on an item by the adder.

2) Findability - getting to old lists

3) Findability - works should show (on the work page?) which lists they are part of.

4) Findability - tagging of lists

5) Cannot see who added a work to a list

6) Apply uniqueness to list name (there seems to be two lists called Best Time Travel Novels)

7) Look and feel is a bit spare - even for me.

I think it is too raw at the moment to be on general release.

I think you may be right about this. Such a long-awaited feature deserves a more enthusiastic release.

For sorting/ranking, I think there's room to add other options in the future. This is just one type of list, and I do think it's one worth having.

Comments on an item by the adder

I'd actually like all voters to be able to add a comment.

#35

So would I but I was going for something easier to begin with.

33> Apply uniqueness to list name (there seems to be two lists called Best Time Travel Novels)

That was me. A bug, but not to do with uniqueness. Changing the contents of the "Comments" field actually produced a new group...

Pages don't work properly. The numbering starts again from one on each page.

Also, there should be links to the other pages at the bottom as well as at the top.

I went to add a book to the "worst books read in 2011" list, and in the box was given the option to "give this a thumbs up". It seems weird to me to "thumbs up" a book that was so bad that I'm putting it on this list, as that has always seemed to me to be a sign of recommendation.

#39

I think the thumbs up means "Yes - I believe this book should be on this list".

However that means as long as one person adds a great book to a "Worst books" list or vice-versa that book will always be on the list. This could be a problem.

What should be done about non-novels added to a novels list. Or worse a book diametrically opposite in viewpoint to the point of the list. For example books espousing racist views being added to "Best Black Novels of the 20th Century"

> 40

as long as one person adds a great book to a "Worst books" list or vice-versa that book will always be on the list. This could be a problem.

In fact, the book I added is one that is loved by a lot of people. But it was definitely the worst book I read in 2011 (it was so bad I didn't finish it).

I don't see why this is a "problem". Surely every listing of a book on a "best" or "worst" or "most-anticipated" or "most thought-provoking" list will be a matter of opinion.

Where did the Best Science Fiction list go?

Will there eventually be list types besides "popularity"?

>42 jjwilson61: - this one? http://www.librarything.com/list/1 (I suspect it's a function of not being able to see all of the lists)

Currently, the only option for "type of list" is "popularity list". Some of the lists that have been created ("most thought-provoking" and "Classics you know you should have read but probably haven't") don't seem to me to have much to do with how "popular" a book is. Certainly "worst reads" wouldn't!

I'd like to see some other types (or the ability to not have a type).

>45 lilithcat:
Exactly.

Okay, I'm up and working through stuff. Thanks for your patience.

I just noticed something. The "related tags" for this list looks hinky.



See? Isn't this a really unusual bunch of related tags for five books about disasters?

BUG:

When I edited a list and then saved it, I then saw a screen that said:

Started by: (December 1969)

Type of list:

(Type of list was blank.)

And it apparently deleted the dozen or so books I'd added to the list.

ETA: Actually, it looks like it just created new lists, rather than editing the old list.

I didn't pay attention to how quickly my list appeared, but perhaps it isn't quick enough (or should force a refresh or something): there are three lists with the same title and same description started by the same user. (They're here, here, and here.)

Only the first has anything listed.

> 48

The same "related tags" are showing for "Israeli Novels Not to Miss", "Best Dystopias", "Worst books read in 2011"*, "Best books read in 2011"*, "Headless sexy woman covers"

*no Harry Potter on either of these lists

#41

Sure as long as people are adding stuff in good faith.

For example - someone adding "A Parent’s Guide to Preventing Homosexuality" (for example) to a "Best LGBT Books" is being a jerk (at best), and I doubt that the users who had created and were building that list would really want it there.

Another BUG:

In the "Recent lists" box, some lists are showing more than once:

Fantastic Reads - Translated from Hebrew
Israeli Novels Not to Miss
Headless sexy woman covers
Headless sexy woman covers
Israeli Novels Not to Miss
Headless sexy woman covers
Books that changed the world
Best History Books about Disasters
Worst books read in 2011
Best Dystopias

I think some of the lists are indicating that the feature was released too early. Some of them aren't votable IMO. "Headless sexy woman covers" - well it either has one or it doesn't. What am I supposed to be voting on - I don't see how thumbing entries are going to do anything there.

> 29

If they're work-based, is a cover-art list really even sensible?

I don't think so.

For instance, there's a list for "Headless sexy woman covers", and one of the covers shown does not have a woman on it at all. My guess is that the person who put it on the list has an edition that does have that sort of cover, but the cover shown on the work page is different.

> 13

I created a list (number 5) called test. Then I thought I would rename it once I had detemined what I wanted the name to be. However renaming it actually created a brand new list (number 6). I can't find a way to delete list 5 so now I have two lists (actually I have three as I thought maybe removing the lists name would delete it ,but that just created a new list (7) which is blank). :-/

I had the same problem. I started by creating a list of Israeli novels only to discover that I was also listing nonfiction. When I tried to change the name of the list, it gave me a brand new list with no selections! I did give each of these two lists different names so they should not be showing up twice.

List #1:
http://www.librarything.com/list/22/Israeli-Novels-Not-to-Miss

List #2:
http://www.librarything.com/list/23/Fantastic-Reads-Translated-from-Hebrew

Update: Now neither list has any selections. I know these lists were not permanent, so if this is what you wanted that's fine.

Request: We need a way to delete a list that was created in error or at least a way to change the title of the list without creating a new list.

> 54

"Headless sexy woman covers" - well it either has one or it doesn't.

Well, one of the books on that list doesn't have such a cover (see my comment in post #55), so I gave it a "thumbs down".

> 56

Aha! That's probably why some lists are showing multiple times in the "Recent Lists" box.

ETA: Israeli Novels Not to Miss

#56

The first one is still there as http://www.librarything.com/list/19

BTW - again how am I supposed to vote on this? These are supposed to be popularity lists. Wouldn't it be best to call the list "Best Israeli novels translated into English"?

> 59

Wouldn't it be best to call the list "Best Israeli novels translated into English"?

Perhaps, but I was doing this on the fly. I have to run now. I'll be back later to change the name to whatever you want*! :D

When we put the books on the list, are we supposed to add thumbs for our own books? That seems weird! I did that, though.

* as long as it doesn't create a third list! :)

> 59

These are supposed to be popularity lists.

Are they? Right now, "popularity list" is the only option in the drop-down box. But certainly quite a few of these lists have nothing to do with how popular the books on them are. See my comment here: http://www.librarything.com/topic/130669#3157632

58 > Editing lists creates new lists with the same title -- that's why there are three headless sexy women lists.

2) Different covers with different editions -- This is why we need to be able to select particular editions.

I think there should be a limited period when changing the title is possible; after a while it would be better just to start another list.

For example, I might have thumbed down all the nonfiction on a list devoted to novels; it would be problematic if the basic concept of the list changed later on.

This might result in the existence of some "failed" lists, but that shouldn't be an issue as long as there are ways to highlight the successful lists.

Editing now actually edits.

I'm going to get a "delete" in now.

>64 timspalding: What can be deleted? I wouldn't want the creator to be able to delete a whole list after other people have devoted a lot of time to it.

#55 by @lilithcat> I feel like this is a bit of throwing out the baby for the bathwater. I think popularity lists based on whats on the cover are a bit of an edge case, no? Should all lists be stripped of their covers (which some people like and find make the site much more visually appealing, and others dislike because they like stuff more simply text-based) because of these edge cases? In my opinion, no. Ditching the covers would make the feature much blander.

You could make the same case for ditching the voting, because as someone pointed out, what are you even voting for in those cases? Square peg meet round hole.

If whether or not to show the covers is that important, I think there should just be a checkbox for "show covers".

@66: If whether or not to show the covers is that important, I think there should just be a checkbox for "show covers".

If that gets implemented, it should then let you select the particular cover you want shown.

#67 by @saltmanz> That would be a lot harder to implement, unfortunately. First, you have the time to adapt the cover picking interface to lists. Second, covers are entangled in a reference counting scheme (it ditches a cover when there is no user using it for their book). I'd bet jamming lists into that would painful.

ETA: The real solution is to just wait until the editions layer.

I'm just wondering how long until Zoe realizes she could use this to make a ranked poll of features by making creating an account and cataloging them. :D

(Of course, it'd all fall down when someone went in and combined them all!)

>69 brightcopy: Oh, I know that already. I told Tim that he should allow free-text lists as well.

> 66

I'm not suggesting that lists not show covers. I'm suggesting that something be done to ensure that entries on lists that are based on covers show relevant ones. Obviously, it doesn't make any difference with lists such as my "Books that Changed the World", but it does matter for "Sexy headless woman covers".

I wouldn't worry about covers. Cover-based lists just aren't an ideal use of the feature, but that doesn't necessarily mean that accommodating them should be a priority.

I'd like an option to show more than 20 works on a page.

#71 by @lilithcat> Right, which will have to wait for an editions layer.

#72 by @_Zoe_> Agreed. I feel like maybe it's just not the greatest example of a popularity list for now.

#74

Not necessarily. It would be quite possible for a cover selector to appear after you have chosen the work you want to add. This is not as elegant as an editions layer but it substantially less work.

The lists home now has a section for the lists you started.

>64 timspalding: What can be deleted? I wouldn't want the creator to be able to delete a whole list after other people have devoted a lot of time to it.

Agreed. I'll put a time-limit in.

>77 timspalding: Thanks.

#75 by @andyl> See message 68. I didn't say it is impossible, I said it would be a lot of effort. Just don't see it as being worth it for such an edge case.

Ok, I added a book and I thumbed up another book on the same list. Seems clear and intuitive enough to use. Thumbs vs. votes doesn't make much difference to me, although "move up"/"move down" might be useful (if we're able to personalize lists somewhat).

Is the idea here just to get what Goodreads has, where you just get a list of books ranked by votes? Or are we going to be able to do something more (and more interesting) with it, like see other people's sub-lists of an existing list (how a particular user would rank the books on a list), track reading/progress, etc.?

Or are we going to be able to do something more (and more interesting) with it, like see other people's sub-lists of an existing list (how a particular user would rank the books on a list), track reading/progress, etc.?

I'd certainly like to be able to do these things.

I still think sublists would work best with a whole new kind of list, one that's based around individual lists in a more fundamental way. Basically what I call composite lists here. This would eliminate the added/voted distinction, which would make it easier to combine sublists in various ways (e.g., putting together the lists of all the members of a given group), and it would also be easier to impose various restrictions (e.g., the creator could limit each person to 10 items).

Also, I still think that reading tracking could best be done via a default Read collection.

Bug: this list currently has a problem. I've put a big red bracket on the screenshot.



Edit: I've seen it elsewhere on the same list, though the numbers vary.

>82 AnnaClaire: More specifically, the problem seems to have arisen from combining.

I think the utility of this is actually fairly limited. Sure, it might be meaningful for the first few books, but once we get into decisions about whether a book is eighth-best or ninth-best, I'm not sure there's really any meaningful information being conveyed there. I'd stick with the current system for now.

I guess I don't find the up/down granular enough. For the lists' sake, not allowing people to distinguish between "yes" and "hell yes" means that "best of" lists just become about who has read the book, not what they felt about it. Similarly, from the perspective of self-expression, a list of "best history books" from me would be dozens and dozens of books. But I still want to tell people the ones I think are absolutely best.

I would suggest instead either an option to allow people to rank-order the list, and then an algorithm that would calculate the ranking.

Apologies, that's exactly what I mean. Each user ranks their list not the whole list. (THAT would be a disaster!)

Could we have an option on each work to add it to a list?

Definitely. And it should say what lists it's part of.

But not until this settles down, though. I said I don't guarantee this data will stay, and I mean it--to say nothing of the functionality around the data.

Yes. Maybe even more importantly, we need to be able to see the list of who gave thumbs up and down for a given work.

You can now. Do you mean you need to see users' lists. Yes, yes you do.

If we're looking at, say, Books I Read in 2011…

I've very wary of this, because it can be used as a way to catalog without cataloging.

I'd also like to be able to give thumbs up to a list as a whole. This will provide another way to find lists of interest, besides Recent and Active.

Yes. Some way to mark it. Thumbs. Favoriting star. Whatever.

(3) How are you going to avoid having lists of infinite growth?

Worth considering, either on the list overall or for select lists by member--eg., "Five books you'd take to a desert island."

>84 timspalding: You can now. Do you mean you need to see users' lists. Yes, yes you do.

I must be missing something, how do you see who voted books up or down?

#84 by @timspalding> What you're talking about in your first two responses sounds a lot like what Zoe typed up for composite lists (and as she also mentioned earlier).

For the lists' sake, not allowing people to distinguish between "yes" and "hell yes" means that "best of" lists just become about who has read the book, not what they felt about it.

Not entirely. That's what thumbs down is for. It's not the most nuanced view, but I don't think that's what's called for here. List data is always going to be heavily influenced by popularity.

You already have more nuanced data that you ignore. Let me just go to the "history" tag page and sort the results by rating, excluding those with fewer than x ratings.

Similarly, from the perspective of self-expression, a list of "best history books" from me would be dozens and dozens of books. But I still want to tell people the ones I think are absolutely best.

This is why I think there's something to be said for "10 Best History Books", where each person can only contribute 10 items. A composite list, not a popularity list.

Yes. Maybe even more importantly, we need to be able to see the list of who gave thumbs up and down for a given work.

You can now. Do you mean you need to see users' lists. Yes, yes you do.

Okay, then the UI needs some serious revision. Is it one of those hidden options that only show up when you mouse over a particular spot? I can't for the life of me figure out how to show the names of the thumbers for a given work. Or maybe it's not working in Chrome?

If we're looking at, say, Books I Read in 2011…

I've very wary of this, because it can be used as a way to catalog without cataloging.

There's no way to avoid this without seriously crippling the whole feature. I don't think that would be worth it at all. You just have to take a leap of faith that people want their catalogues to include more than the unalterable work information and a comment (assuming comments will come eventually). You could just as well say that we shouldn't have touchstones because they can be used to catalogue without cataloguing.

I must be missing something, how do you see who voted books up or down?

Only on development server, apparently. They're there now. They were supposed to be.

>87 brightcopy: I think I should probably just copy that here, because it seems like a lot of people aren't bothering to follow the links ;)

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.

>89 timspalding: Thanks! Do all the names show up all the time, or is there a "show more" option at a certain point?

Also, an elaboration about composite lists: I'd like the creator to have the option to say how the composite will be ranked. For "best books of the year", it might make sense to have the users' individual rankings affect the outcome. For a more general "books read in 2011", this would be more of a hindrance and the raw count would be better.

#90 by @_Zoe_> The thing I think makes the most sense about the composite lists is they follow The LibraryThing Way. A person's individual copy of the list is like their "book" and the global version of it is like a "work". Ditto for the way tags work. I'm sure there are other examples, too.

I know Tim said something along the lines of "we're doing social lists first, then (maybe eventually) personal lists." But that kind of feels like saying "we're doing works first, then personal books." Separating the two seems to be a bit of a mistake.

As lists get longer and go onto multiple pages, I'd like to have the page # links at the bottom, as well as the top, of the page.

Thank you.

I'd like to add an "It would be nice" feature.

Make the pages exportable/printable. For people who want to take it on, say, a non wifi/nonsmart phone device or paper to a bookstore for shopping purposes.

I've been asking for this for the book lists from touchstones since their inception, as well.

>15 Noisy:: Thanks, Noisy. I still don't really see the point. Is it group consensus? How will there ever be consensus among people who think Lolita is one of the greatest books ever and people who think it's a waste of time? In the end how will this be different from Zeitgeist? And how will the list of categories really be any more meaningful than a list of superlative adjectives?

I'd like to see the different books separated by horizontal lines, or in some sort of grid like on the popularity page, but without the big gray sections. Especially when there's a long list of thumbers, it can start to blur into the section below.

>92 brightcopy: I don't have a problem with the current concept of lists; I just think that the other kind is important too.

#97 by @_Zoe_> I don't have a "problem" with them, per se. They just seem like an evolutionary dead end. Kind of like GoodReads' concept of a book versus LT's work/book philosophy.

>98 brightcopy: Yeah, they're definitely more limited than composite lists. But I can see that as a justification for releasing them first.

> 64

I'm going to get a "delete" in now.

Can we have a "delete" for an item in a list? For example, let's say I want to delete the 'Nonfiction" from my "novels" list because I entered it in error.

I think that feature should only be available to the person who posted a particular book so that others will not take off books they don't like.

Books with long titles look weird. The reviews/ratings information should stay in line with the rest rather than moving to the left under the cover. Examples here. Hopefully clear enough without a screenshot.

I was able to add a book of my own to one of Zoe's lists. Is that okay? Is that how this is supposed to work?

>102 SqueakyChu: Yup, that's right. Add away! :D

102> Of course. Tim said this is a social feature and not personal lists.

> 102

Will do!! :)

Lovely!

P.S. Thank you, Tim. This is a great (and long-awaited) feature!

#101 by @_Zoe_> That also points out the problem that he doesn't force the cover width but only the height. That cover has some white space to the left and right on the image. Click on the work and you can see it on the image there.

BTW, to see the reviews/ratings move, I had to crank up my font size. A tip for anyone trying to see what Zoe is talking about.

I'm using the up arrows to move some books on my list to the top as I begin. I like doing that.

>106 brightcopy: Blah, okay. Here's a picture:



I don't mind the white space to either side, just the ugly alignment of the non-cover info.

Interesting that the order of the thumbers list isn't fixed.

I'd really like a better way to deal with multi-page list.

Bug: The numbers start again at 1 on each page.

Feature requests: Show page links at the bottom. Let us display more than 20 items on a page.

On deleting and publicity:

At present, votes/thumbs are public, and one can delete one's own votes/thumbs by clicking on the green thumb.

However, right now, who added a book to a list is not public. It's also not possible to remove a book you added from a list, even though you can remove any (ETA: of your) votes for it.

As others have mentioned, I think we need the ability to delete a book we've added (clear it from our "books you've added" list, and also maybe delete it from the other list). However, should that always delete the book from the other list, or only delete it if it doesn't have any votes?

Also, should we be able to see who added a book to a list?

More general comments:
Apart from these few questions and the small kinks already mentioned by others, I find the feature generally easy to use. I probably won't use it, though. I might if votes/contributions could be anonymous (although the possibility of spamming/sockpuppetry might outweigh demands for anonymity). I probably would us it if this allowed me to have my own version of some of these lists, but I doubt I'd want those "my own versions" to be public. I'm also not that interested in popularity lists, but I'm curious to see what other kinds of lists might be developed next. So all in all, the current feature seems to work fine for what it does, but I'm probably not the target user for what it does.

Question: what should the numbering on "added by you" reflect? Should it keep the same number it has on the main list?

As others have mentioned, I think we need the ability to delete a book we've added (clear it from our "books you've added" list, and also maybe delete it from the other list). However, should that always delete the book from the other list, or only delete it if it doesn't have any votes?

Also, should we be able to see who added a book to a list?

I'd say we should only be able to delete a work if it doesn't have any votes.

I might go even farther to say that a work that has no thumbs left should automatically be removed from the list. If someone else thinks it belongs there, then they can add it.

This would mean that thumbing a work would be a necessity for adding it, rather than an option like it is now, but I don't really see that as a problem.

Also, if the list of thumbers remained in a fixed order, then we could get a pretty good idea of who added it anyway.

I should add that I'm enjoying these lists already, even in their very preliminary forms. I hope you'll decide to keep them.

> 113

I'd say we should only be able to delete a work if it doesn't have any votes.

A book might have some negative votes because it doesn't really belong on the list.

I might go even farther to say that a work that has no thumbs left should automatically be removed from the list.

I disagree. The person who posted the list might only want to move two or three books to the top with thumbs up. That should not mean automatic elimination of any books with no thumbs in either direction.

I should add that I'm enjoying these lists already, even in their very preliminary forms. I hope you'll decide to keep them.

I agree with you here, Zoe. :)

A book might have some negative votes because it doesn't really belong on the list.

Oh, good point. So, ability to delete (or automatic deletion) of any books with no positive thumbs.

I disagree. The person who posted the list might only want to move two or three books to the top with thumbs up. That should not mean automatic elimination of any books with no thumbs in either direction.

I think they'll just end up being noise, though. This comes back to Tim's point about wanting more nuanced lists, but I think there are better ways to achieve that.

I guess I was under the impression that this 'lists' feature was going to enable us to compare our catalog with a list such as "1001 Books" or "Hugo Winners (Book)", etc so that we'd be better able to complete our collection of those books (if that was our particular aim). I like the idea of "FAVORITE such and such" but was more interested in that aspect when it was first being discussed. Apologies if (that) I've missed a vital part of the discussion, but I'd like to know how (if) this function fits with the current iteration/implementation.

I had initially thought that 1001 Books-type lists could be incorporated in this type, but it is looking a bit implausible. They could be done as personal lists in the future (i.e., lists with a single creator), or else maybe CK-style where anyone can add and delete books to the list, rearrange them, etc., but there's no voting?

I think they'll just end up being noise, though. This comes back to Tim's point about wanting more nuanced lists, but I think there are better ways to achieve that.

But then, if we make up a list of, say ten books, we have no say which books go on top and which remain on the bottom. Are you saying it's better to give the books I list a negative thumb than no thumb?!

Will a negative thumb then delete a book?

Oh, good point. So, ability to delete (or automatic deletion) of any books with no positive thumbs.

Then...is it mandatory for the maker of the list to give all the books a thumb? If so, I'll go back and do that.

Well, you don't have to change anything now! This is just speculative.

That's okay. I figured out how to game the system. I just thumb the ones I like best and then press F5 to get them to the top. Following that, I add thumbs to the rest of my selections. :)

Well, I think this feature is doing what it intended. I just wishlisted a book someone added to one of my lists. :)

122> In msg 107 you said you were using arrows to move books around on the list. Is that an option when you are first creating a list? Are you now saying you want to move the lists around after the list is created?

It seems to me that you're trying to use popularity lists as personal lists and they're not.

> 124

I wasn't using arrows. I thumbed the few I wanted at the top. Then I thumbed the rest of them. Those were those books I liked "super-best". I wanted those books at the "tippy top" when I created my lists. That's all.

As others add their thumbs, my thumbs will be of less and less use anyway. I have no problem with that.

After my list is posted, I no longer want to move my books up or down.

I tried adding Sarah's Key & The King's Speech: How One Man Saved the British Monarchy and it wouldn't even search for them the little search circle came on then blinked out

I started a couple "Gateway Book" lists. I suppose it's not technically a list until other chime in, though. I thought it would be an interesting topic. If it catches on, there are a lot of genres to cover!

>126 susiesharp:
I tried to add In the Lion's Court to the Tudor England list, and it couldn't find it until I searched for Derek Wilson instead. It found the others I searched for without trouble, though.

It sounds like the search has trouble with apostrophes.

I tried to search for The case of Doctor Sachs by Martin Winckler but it only pulled up the work in French.

Well Tatiana de Rosnay's name must be different on her books because when I put it in without a space after De it came up A Secret Kept and with the space I finally got Sarah's Key.
When I put in Mark Logue no book came up but when I put in Peter Conradi then the King's Speech came up with only Mark Logue's name as the author.

So not sure what's going on in the search but now the books are in my list.

I only care for a private list feature, I hope it will be implemented as well.

I don't understand why the list should show who voted what: we have just a few voters so far, but as they will become more and more, how can you show a list of (example) 300+ users who voted up and 120+ users who voted down?

Every time I try to add a book to a list I get this error message:

'Some sort of error just happened. The error was logged and Tim has been alerted. If problems persist, email timspaldinglibrarything.com
In most cases, the problem can be fixed by using this link.'

Bug?

I get the same error as #134.

Me too, although I thought I successfully added one to a list yesterday.

I can't add books either, nor can I search for books with an apostrophe

Sorry, I don't know what's up; Tim must have made changes overnight that borked something.

Sorry about the error. I'm mid-way through a rather extensive change to lists, which involves changing the back-end considerably. Sorry that slipped through.

With luck, I'll get the changes out today.

>139 timspalding: Will the front-end also be changed considerably? Or the underlying concept?

I'm surprised that you added down thumbs here. I think a lot of lists would work as well, if not better, without them. When people downthumb "Classics you know you should have read but probably haven't", what does that mean? Isn't it just as good to let people upthumb the books they think fit that category?

#141 by @prosfilaes> There's a certain logic to that, yep. Of course, I think the best logic is to be able to rank the entire list like YOU want it and have that come into play. Makes the math a bit more hideous, but it's doable. And now we're back to composite lists again. ;)

#142: My problem is there's rarely that many books I'm qualified to have an opinion. Unlike Collectorator, I'm not going to upthumb or downthumb or rank random books I haven't read and have no reason to have an opinion on.

#138 - Don't forget the checkmarks.

>143 Collectorator:

Thumbs-down works. I just tested it. It doesn't happen until you refresh, though.

#146 by @timspalding> I think she was referring to it not working in that she hasn't been able to sandbag other works enough to cause her favorites to bubble up. But I could be wrong.

>141 prosfilaes: I was downthumbing ones that I actually have read. I think that works as intended; it seems appropriate for Jane Eyre and Pride and Prejudice to move to the bottom of that list because they're more commonly read than something like War and Peace.

I did the same thing for most lists: downthumbing ones that I actively don't think are "best", or whatever the description is. If I'm not familiar with the book, I generally leave it, though again, it depends on the list.

141>

When people downthumb "Classics you know you should have read but probably haven't", what does that mean?

It means I've read them.

In cases like "Best books in some category", it means I have read them and disagree with the characterization. (Xenocide as a best SF novel? That's a distinctly minority opinion, and it's very useful to be able to distinguish "I agree", "I disagree" and "I have no opinion" on many of these lists.)

I'm replacing the current system where each member gets to prioritize their own list. A score will be calculated from those—with #1 scores being worth more than #2, etc.

But I think I'm going to keep a thumbs-down possibility—a blackball, if you will, which will reduce the score.

Xenocide as a best SF novel

Ha. No. I agree. I think the first three are great, but diminishingly so, for sure.

#150 by @timspalding> I like the news about each user getting to prioritize their own lists. Getting me a bit more excited about the feature.

Sorry it's taking a while. I'm not at peak performance right now :)

I wish you were adding an option rather than a replacement. There are some cases where ranking makes sense, and others where yes/no is enough.

I also wish this had been thought out a bit beforehand. It's not like these issues have never been discussed before. I'm far more discouraged now that things are being taken away instead of added, and apparently pretty haphazardly.

>154 _Zoe_:

Right. I'm going to make two types, basic to the list--ranked and unranked. The former would be for "Best Science Fiction Novels." The latter would be for "Three books you'd take to a desert island."

I also wish this had been thought out a bit beforehand. It's not like these issues have never been discussed before. I'm far more discouraged now that things are being taken away instead of added, and apparently pretty haphazardly.

Sometimes you don't really understand something until you do it. I apologize for being imperfect :)

#156 by @timspalding> The latter would be for "Three books you'd take to a desert island."

So you could only thumb three things, right? ;)

Sometimes you don't really understand something until you do it.

Ain't that the truth.

So you could only thumb three things, right? ;)

Right. The list-creator will be allowed to set limits.

>156 timspalding: Before eliminating anything, why not just add the additional types so that we can see whether the results are significantly different?

I would leave the current system for now, and also add composite lists. Which would include both of the new types: lists composed of individual ranked lists, and lists composed of individual unranked lists. (I'm not quite convinced that downvoting fits into either of these, whereas it makes perfect sense in the current implementation.)

I know that things often appear clearer in practice. But it's sometimes also worth reading the existing discussions to see whether other people might have thought of certain issues beforehand ;)

I'm assuming the list creator will be able to set limits for both ranked and unranked lists?

Everyone can make their own ranked list of x books = intuitive
Everyone can make their own unranked list of x books = intuitive
Everyone can add books and vote them up or down = intuitive

Everyone can make their own ranked list of x books plus vote down others' = weird combination. Not immediately obvious how it works. How does a downvote compare to a first-place ranking? To a 12th-place ranking? Etc.

Start with the intuitive options.

If there are going to be lots of lists, then you should be able to tag them so you can search for ones of interest.

> 162

Agreed. This has been in Beta one day and there are already 33 lists (if I've counted correctly). When it goes live, it will explode. Sure, it'll calm down after a while, but not before there are an insane number of lists.

Tagging (or starring or any way easily to find the ones we want) would be a great help.

A random Q:

I think I want lists to have a graphical image.

Should lists have their own user-chosen images? Should their image be the cover of the current winner?

>164 timspalding: Maybe that could be a choice? You can enter a URL for your own picture, but if no URL is entered it uses the cover of the current winner. or something.

Tagging would definitely be helpful in preventing duplicate lists.

Do we need tagging if the related tags were to work?

#166

Yes, I think we do. There is a difference between a list being tagged as "science fiction" and a list which contains some books tagged "science fiction".

>164 timspalding: Either way is fine. Not nearly as critical as many of the other issues raised here.

Reflecting on the seemingly ad-hoc way in which major decisions are being made, it's particularly frustrating because some people actually have spent time thinking things through over a prolonged period. You don't address the proposals to say why they're lacking, but just go with whatever you happen to think of on development day. And then you periodically have to comment in other discussions that users are incapable of designing features, just to add insult to injury.

>162 Noisy: Agreed. Tim said at one point that tag clouds could be generated from the books on the lists, but I think there may be something to be said for direct tagging as well.

Starring is important too.

>tagging lists
I agree that we should have this ability. We can use tags to find books. We can use them to find groups in talk. Shouldn't we be able to use them to find lists?

#164 - Tagging would definitely be helpful in preventing duplicate lists.

a proper search would eliminate the need to tag everything to death.

>172 gilroy: That too.

But tags are more conducive to browsing. The goal isn't always to find one particular thing.

Argh. Have to break off. Someone tell my wife that the taxes don't need to be done tonight? ;)

@176: You can tell her I say so.

>176 timspalding:
But doesn't getting your taxes done and sent in this early make you more likely to get audited?

>178 AnnaClaire:

Heh. Probably. No, we need them done, mostly, so we can apply for something.

>179 timspalding:
Something good, I hope.

Just out of curiosity...

Do you mean the existing list feature, or do you mean the lists people have created within it?

I also hesitated in answering this, trying to figure out whether I think this list feature or this set of lists is "interesting." Is that "interesting information to see, whether or not I use the feature" or "interesting enough to me that I'll use the feature"?

>182 rsterling: "Interesting enough to keep around", I guess. Should the new composite-style lists replace the existing ones, or just be an additional type?

I'd still like a complete list of lists.

>184 _Zoe_:

I know. Of course, a necessity.

> 181

Some are, some aren't.

>185 timspalding: Sorry for the repetition; sometimes earlier requests get lost in the thread. I was actually tempted to make a wiki list of requested list improvements....

Recommendations:

* Collections checkmarks (owned, read, etc.)
* Ability to star / favorite / watch a list
* list of "Lists you've voted on / added titles to"

Sorry guys. This is going to have to wait a little longer. I can't finish it tonight, and I've got to take a personal day tomorrow. I'm as frustrated as you on this.

189> Why do you feel that you need to finish this new feature in a couple of days. It was an experiment. It wouldn't bother me if you deleted the whole thing and started again when you have more tim.

More tim or time? ;)

I'm stretched thin this week. I'm free all weekend.

Yeah, I'm not frustrated. I'd just as soon wait a bit and see how the existing lists turn out. (But unlike jjwilson, I will be disappointed if you delete the whole thing--I think it has value already).

The only thing I'd like you to do in the meantime is add a way to see all the lists, or at least many more. Testing the feature is much less effective if people can only see 30 or so of the lists.

(And, okay, putting the links to the other pages at the bottom as well as the top would be trivial and very much appreciated....)

I'd like to see a way, for the person who makes a book entry to one of the lists, to at least have a few minutes to delete it and/or re-enter the correct work.

Why?

In one case, I accidentally chose the wrong book and could not delete it. I had to restart the list from scratch.

In another case, I chose the wrong edition of the book which. That copy happened to be someone's manual entry of a well-known book. However, I could not edit it to choose the copy that had the cover picture.

In general, I'd say that communication is key when it comes to user frustration or lack thereof. It doesn't matter if you have to pause for a while in developing a feature, as long as you tell us; it's when there's a sudden silence for weeks or months at a time that frustration ensues.

What LT needs: MORE TIM!

>193 SqueakyChu:
I did the same thing (entered the wrong edition), and someone else entered the right one, but I can't take mine off so now there are two of it on the list. I suspect that the two editions are separate works. There should be a way for the person who added a book to take it off, if it hasn't received any votes.

>193 SqueakyChu:
I did that too, and also ended up deleting the entire list and starting over. In my case, I had only just started the list so nobody else had voted on anything -- much less added to it -- but imagine adding the wrong work to something that had been more widely contributed to!

@AnnaClaire, my list is one of the most active! More books have been added to it by other people than by me, at this point!

For Books That Changed The World, I can agree that all those on the list (well I only looked at the top 10 or so) changed the world but what's the point in just thumbing them all. If every did that you'd just have an unordered list of important books. Maybe that's what you want, but I think it would be more interesting if everyone were limited to something like 5 thumbs or if people could rank them.

>198 staffordcastle::
Hi staffordcastle :)

Enjoying your list very much, and keeping an eye on it to see how it goes. Being the most active, it's provides a good way of seeing how lists might work, or not.

One of the issues I have is with the thumbs system. Not only should lists be able to opt out of having thumbs (you can add but not vote), but I'd like to see the ability to opt out of thumbs up or down. I'll tell you why:

Staffordcastle's list is for Favourite Childhood Books. I love books from both my childhood and my son's so I'm really interested in the results. I understand that lesser-known books and later additions to the list will have fewer votes, but the results are further skewed by thumbs down, particularly from one member of LT (aulsmith, I'm talking about you here!), who has thumbed down everything that ISN'T a favourite. That cancels one positive vote for each book they do that to. Other members have done it, but aulsmith has done it for every single book, to keep their own personal favourites up.

First problem - thumbs down cancel out thumbs up, so some people's votes are going to be invalid. Not everyone is going to thumb down; some will only thumb down a few they disagree with strongly, and others will thumb down every book they haven't thumbed up. So if I wanted to see how many people voted a favourite and work out results, I'd have to work it out myself. Couldn't produce a list that'd do it for me.

The other problem is, it's not aulsmith's personal list of favourites. Once lists have been tweaked, aulsmith will be able to make a closed, ordered list of personal favourites of their very own.

Stress that you only want thumbs up in your list description? Think that's going to work? Some people won't read it, some people won't care. Just imagine, for example, what the Twilight brigade could do to a list. Or how annoying it would be to have some ignoramus thumb down everything they didn't like according to some political/religious agenda.

I'm not against thumbs down - sometimes a person will want that option. But I'd like to be able to opt out.

Stress that you only want thumbs up in your list description? Think that's going to work? Some people won't read it, some people won't care.

Bah. That sort of crap really gets my hackles up.

Want a personal list? Make a Collection, or wait for the next version of the feature. Don't try to take away a perfectly legitimate tool of the thumbs-down because you're concerned that some people might have their feelings hurt when somebody disagrees. Tim is perfectly capable of handling a majority of voters disagreeing with his characterization of Xenocide as a "Best SF novel"; do you really think staffordcastle can't handle people disagreeing about their favorite childhood novels?

{Thumbs-down} cancels one positive vote for each book they do that to.

That's the general idea, yes. It's how voting generally works. Thumbs-up and thumbs-down are recorded, though, so you can see the difference between a controversy -- lots of both, more or less canceling out -- and apathy (few votes either way). Which is as it should be.

>200 Moomin_Mama: Do you think all lists should have voting options, or should it just depend on the type of list?

I'd like to see the following types:

1. The current type, where anyone can add books and vote them up and down.

2. Lists composed of different people's individual lists, with options for ranked or unranked. The composite list would just add together the results of the individual lists. I don't think down-voting would make much sense in this case.

3. Common lists where anyone can add, delete, and rearrange (up to a certain point when the list is locked?). This would be used for things like the 1001 Books list. Voting wouldn't make much sense here either.

#201 by @lorax> Want a personal list? Make a Collection, or wait for the next version of the feature. Don't try to take away a perfectly legitimate tool of the thumbs-down because you're concerned that some people might have their feelings hurt when somebody disagrees.

I'm not sure which part of "opt out" makes you think she's suggesting taking away the thumbs down feature. Especially given the last sentence of the post. I'm also not sure why you would think this is anything other than a suggestion for the next version of the feature. ;)

205> Would it solve the problem if Tm let us sort the list by either total thumbs (both up and down) or just the thumbs up?

200:

Just for the record, I'm not thumbing down to keep my favorites up. I'm thumbing down to illustrate the problem (that Zoe already addressed above -- and maybe others, I'm only skimming the forum) of thumbs on lists that don't have yes or no questions attached.

staffordcastle's list say The ones you will always remember, and maybe even still own your childhood copy!

I have thumbed down all the books that I can't "still own a childhood copy of" because I was not a child when it was published as well as books I read as a child and didn't like. The ones I still have my childhood copy of and liked are thumbed up. The ones I either could have read as a child but didn't or I don't still have my copy are not thumbed.

I did the same thing with the Classics you know you should have read but probably haven't list, where I thumbed up only classics that I actually feel guilty that I haven't read. I thumbed down things that: I don't consider classics, classics that I've read, and classics that I don't feel guilty about not reading (Lolita?? -- give me a break)

I agree that we need to wait for the next incarnation of this feature to see how to sort lists out properly. Right now, I think this kind of list is better for things that have a clear yes-no feature, like Best Science Fiction.

Another thing this feature needs is a way to see just the works that have been added since you last looked at the list.

Oh, and a way to easily see which works you've already voted on. Perhaps you could color the appropriate thumb if you've already voted.

>207 jjwilson61: the thumbs are colored, filled in with green for thumbs up and red for thumbs down. You can also see your votes from the "voted by you" link up at the top.

Speaking of the voted by you link (and the added by you link), it would be nice if when you go to those links, the numbers would show where the books are on the main list instead of just renumbering.

Perhaps you could color the appropriate thumb if you've already voted.

I'm seeing this already.

208> Ah, I see it now but it's pretty faint. Voted by you is nice but if you're trying to be good about keeping on top of a list a "Not Voted By You" would be nice.

I'd also like to second Zoe's request for a way to get to the next page from the bottom of the list.

208: Hmm, I'm seeing colors but my down thumbs are grey. FF 9.0.1

List> Gateway Books: Fantasy
Description> What is the single book that sparked your interest in Fantasy?

What justification do people have to thumbing down books in this list?

BTW, if you do decide to cancel a vote you've made, there's no way to do that. Right?

>212 jjwilson61: BTW, if you do decide to cancel a vote you've made, there's no way to do that. Right?

Just click on whichever thumb you voted for again and it will remove it.

There are all kinds of these things to be irritated over if you choose, like Collectorator thumbing down non-Christian books on the Books that changed the world list etc. These lists are a nice pastime, but I don't see them as much more that that.

212 > Yeah, I wondered about that. It would make sense in this case to have the list creator specify the rules (only one addition or thumb, no thumbs down).

That said, it doesn't bug me. There's still value in seeing what sparked other people's interest in the genre. I guess some people really want to emphasize which books didn't launch their Fantasy journey!

The creator will eventually be able to set hard limits on the number of books each person can add, at least for composite lists. Until then, I wouldn't worry about it.

These lists are a nice pastime, but I don't see them as much more that that.

I think they're a good source of ideas about books to read.

I started a new children's book list with yes-no questions.

> 218

I think you've got a typo in the description. It says, "If you have read it, leave it alone". I think you mean "if you haven't read it", no?

218>

If you hadn't put "I read" in the list definition, your thumbing orders are exactly what I would have done -- but with it there, my interpretation would be "thumbs up, read and enjoyed; thumbs down, haven't read or didn't enjoy; neutral, read and didn't feel strongly." Basically you're creating an AND condition (read AND enjoyed), but expecting people not to evaluate it as false (give it a thumbs-down) when it fails to meet one of the two criteria. Why create needless work for yourself and room for misinterpretation from others this way, rather than just leaving it as a "Best children's books" list?

219-220 got it.

Edited to add: I think. Did I fix the Or condition properly, lorax?

So it's not simple to make a clear vote up/down list.

Wasn't personally attacking anyone, just discussing some potential problems with the voting system (depending on what you want to collect votes for), using staffordcastle's list and members use of it as an example. Didn't realise everyone was so thin-skinned around here. I don't think I'll bother contributing to a discussion of this sort again if it means having to choose my words very, very carefully.

Cor dear, and there was me, thinking I was talking to grown-ups ;)

Hmm, (aulsmith, I'm talking about you here!) seemed to be rather personal; if not an attack, then at least a demand for a response. If you truly want to discuss problems, it is better not to call people out by name.

Aulsmith, you had thumbed down a lot, for which reason I may have then confused you with the person who did state, on this very thread, that they were thumbing down to keep favourites up. And then NOT naming you may have seemed rather snide. Could have clarified whether you'd said it or not... by reading 200 posts AGAIN...

I honestly didn't think I was making an important enough point to warrant being so careful and so specific in my wording or references. And I still don't, really, so I'll bow out before I annoy anyone else :)

> 217

It seemed bizarre to assume you meant that those books have not had a great impact on the world, so I couldn't figure any other reason than that you disliked them, but I might be wrong. No biggie. My main point was that we interpret what the thumbs are supposed to mean in different ways, so I don't think it's much to be upset over.

When there are enough voters, individual idiosyncrasies won't matter much anyway.

#225: So dickish behavior that we aren't going to legislate against is just fine?

My plan is to just thumb down all items, on all lists. Forever.

MUHAHAHAHA

229> Ah, good. Now Collectorator will have someone else to go after.

Okay, general "cool it" warning / TOS reminder. Seriously, debate the feature, don't insult each other.

> 228:

That was the pattern I saw, but fine, I was wrong. That wasn't the main point. Sorry if I muddied the waters with that particular detail.

Well, in that context I assumed they were to indicate whether one agreed with the proposition that the book had indeed influenced society greatly or not. But just like more of us (including you) have been saying, my point was that it only shows that the thumbing mechanism is rather blunt. (That we interpret them so differently.)

Books that changed the world

My thumb up = changed it for the better
My thumb down = changed it for the worse

> 239

But that's not what the list is about. I guess I'll change the description to make that clear.

> 240

But judging the effect as negative doesn't remove books from the list. I added a book just so I could thumb it down!

240: I interpreted to mean that there was actually some world-wide effect of the book, not just it changed the U.S. or it changed Western Civilization. (Though I did decide you meant changed for good or ill.)

Wow, maybe we do need comments with the thumbs. Though I'm unsure what it would be like to read them.

So maybe votes would be better/less ambiguous than thumbs.

Based on this conversation, thumbs seem actually to be used for many different purposes:

1) To indicate that one thinks a book belongs or doesn't belong on a list (this is similar to thumbing in member recommendations). For the books that changed the world, we might interpret this as thumbs up = did change the world (belongs on list); thumbs down = didn't (doesn't belong on list).
2) To rank order / move things up or down on the list. (For the change the world list: this one changed the world more/less than that one.)
3) To indicate that one likes or dislikes a book. (This is consistent with how thumbing up works for reviews, more or less.) The thumb is thus not meant to tell us whether someone thinks the book belongs on the list, or that it should be higher or lower, but simply that the person does or doesn't like the book - independent of whether it should be on the list. (For the change the world list, that could mean: yes this influenced the world, and I think it's a pile of dog doo/basket of rainbows, or no this didn't influence the world and I think it's a pile of dog doo/basket of rainbows, or I have no opinion about whether this influenced the world, but I think it's a pile of dog doo/basket of rainbows.)
4) To indicate some other positive or negative judgment specific to a particular list. (For the change the world list: influenced the world positively vs. influenced the world negatively)

So yeah, I think I've changed my mind about votes and thumbs being equivalent; maybe votes would be even just a little less ambiguous -- especially if there was some guidance on what votes were about.

Or just scrap this version of lists, and base the popularity contest on composite lists.

#238: And it's just squawking to complain about people complaining about it. Personally, I see no reason we can't set some guidelines for how to use this feature.

I'd think the thumbs should reflect whether the book belongs on the list. I don't think changing the terminology would make much difference; it would be better just to add a clarifying statement. Of course there would still be people who voted however they wanted, but I don't think that would matter much in the long run.

Also, this thread is one where I think yellow flags could have been useful as warnings. It was clear that things were heading in a bad direction, but there wasn't really anything to be said about it without derailing the thread.

So glad we're not basing any of these lists off star ratings, what with them being unreliable since everyone has a different idea of what they should mean... ;)

239>

Wow, not in a million years would I have interpreted it that way.

247> No, I think rsterling is right. A thumb up or down carries the connotation of liking or disliking the book while a vote sounds to me like it would be more likely interpreted as a vote as to whether the book belongs in that list.

Well, I certainly have no objection to changing it to votes.

I had a quick look at Goodreads' lists, and noted that:
- they have votes, but these seem to be based on ranked preferences (see next point);
- they seem to be based on what's being called here composite lists: aggregations of various people's ranked lists (which may include only some of the books on the master list);
- they allow comments to be attached to votes, though few people seem to add comments;
- ETA: it's possible to see someone's individual version of a list;
- they make voting info public, but collapse all of it into "50 votes," which you can click on to get more details about who.

The Good:
GR lists have several of the things people have suggested above (comments, composite lists), and still overall seem to be pretty clear visually and easy to use and to interpret.

The Bad (from my point of view):
To participate in this feature, for GR as for LT, one has to make one's votes public. (This is good and bad, really: public voting helps ensure the rankings are done in good faith, not by spammers. However, it might mean some people are less likely to participate. Personally, I don't like listing favorites or ranking books publicly, but I wouldn't mind tracking them for my own purposes, and for that info to feed silently into an aggregate ranking.)

The Blah:
What LT is doing with popularity lists simply seems to be a more basic version of what GR has already been doing for some time, and even the suggestions to improve the LT popularity lists seem like they'll just have the effect of making the LT feature even more like the GR feature. It'd be nice if LT could do something more innovative (also, or instead). (I'm guessing the intention behind this feature was not to copy GR or play catch-up, but from an outsider's point of view, that's what it might look like.)

>253 rsterling: First, let me say that I do think LT should, as a minimum, play catch up when GR has a major feature that they lack. Of course going farther is better, but I wouldn't say that copying a GR feature is necessarily a bad start.

Also, I think that just LT's different user base may be enough to make their lists a valuable substitute to GR's. IIRC, GR is used mainly by college-age girls, while LT is used mainly by older people with graduate degrees. I'd be interested in seeing, even if all else remained the same, how the two sets of lists would differ. Will Twilight be at the top of LT's best books ever list?

Building on that, I think a feature that will make LT lists even more powerful will be the ability to filter by group membership. If there's still too much Twilight in the overall LT best list, what if we put together a list just from the members of Literary Snobs? And note that this wouldn't require restricting lists to particular groups or entering the same list multiple times for our different groups; the filtering could be done after the fact.

A few other points:

I definitely think LT should enable comments with thumbs/votes. It might also be useful if we could comment on a list in general. (And I'd also support an option for everyone to comment on works on popularity lists--not just once with their thumb, but in an ongoing discussion.)

I don't really like the idea of private votes/sub-lists, and certainly not from the outset. I wouldn't mind if people could create private personal lists, but I'd prefer for the composite lists to be composed exclusively of public lists.

Maybe we just haven't come up with the best kinds of lists for thumbs yet. What about all those requests in the forums for book recommendations? Wouldn't they lend themselves to both listing and thumbing?

Here's one to experiment with

Oh, that raises an interesting question: what do you think are the most successful lists so far? Why? Would they be better in another form?

Note that you can see all the lists by changing the numbers in the address and leaving out the names. I think there are only 63. Still incredibly irritating that we couldn't have a complete listing from the outset, though.

I think one advantage to popularity lists is that they encourage more casual participation than composite lists would. When I look at a popularity list, I'll readily thumb just a couple of books as I go by, whereas I expect that I'd think a lot longer if I were trying to create my own sublist, and potentially put it off and just not bother. This isn't to say that casual participation is always good, but I think it has its place.

So, I quite like the Best History Books about Epidemics list. It's short (13 works), but it would still take me a while to read through the top four books (those with at least 3 net positive thumbs).

Only a few people have contributed to this list:
eromsted: 9 contributions
SylviaC: 4
AnnaClaire: 3
ABVR: 3
lilithcat: 3
a few others with 1 or 2.

Given the low numbers that each person is contributing, I think it would be sort of silly to phrase it as "create a list of what you personally consider the best history books about epidemics". I don't know if I would bother creating my own personal list of three. In cases like this, I think it's more important to make participation as easy as possible.

256: Exactly what I was thinking. If someone wants fly-by recommendations, the composite lists are going to be too cumbersome. Of course, we could still do it with forums, but I thought lists were supposed to be a way to make the information tucked away in all those forum topics more readily accessible.

#257 by @_Zoe_> But couldn't the personal copy of the composite list be done pretty behind the scenes? Yes, that phrasing is silly, but I see no reason to have to do that to begin with. Instead, I'd rather any edits I did to the global list just turn into my own copy, where I can feel free to add/delete/reorder. It's not like I'll be able to do all those things on the global copy of the list. Probably just add (and even then, that'd probably be inappropriate to lists like "Best Harry Potter Book").

>259 brightcopy: Sure, but it depends whether you want the individual lists to be the main concept--constructed consciously and deliberately--or just a convenient underlying structure. I think I'd prefer the former.

#260 by @_Zoe_> I think you could do both. It'd be a heck of a lot easier if I could see "my" version of a list rather than try to figure out how my thumbs and/or votes are applied to some list of e.g. 100 works.

>261 brightcopy: Easier for what? I certainly think that composite lists should be composed of easily-viewable sublists. But I'm not convinced that every time someone votes on a single work, that should generate a "list"; I think the interesting information might well get lost in the noise. I think the sublists themselves will be worth viewing, but not if most of them consist of just a couple of works.

Basically, I think there's room for popularity lists and composite lists as two separate things.

#262 by @_Zoe_> Easier in terms of a user being able to see what they've done, especially as a list gets bigger. This is especially true as things like ranked lists get added.

It doesn't have to "generate a list". It's just an application of your actions to the existing choices. For example, I could take all the thumbs and votes you applied to any of the existing lists and dynamically create a "personal" list. The simplest form would be:
works you up-thumbed
works you didn't thumb
works you down-thumbed

So you've already created "personal" lists whether you realized it or not. Right now, the "Voted by you" link just shows a form of that personal list.

>263 brightcopy: Sure. But these are incidental personal lists. Maybe you're right that it's all the same, but I think there's something different about creating a list deliberately versus creating a list as a byproduct of something else. At the very least, I think it would be worth testing both methods and comparing the results.

@_Zoe_ How are you seeing 63 lists? I only see 40 when I click on the link in message 1.

>265 susiesharp: I was looking at the number of the most recently created one: http://www.librarything.com/list/63/Economics-for-the-layperson

Oh ok thanks

212, jjwilson

If I remember correctly I thumbed down on the gateway fantasy list if I have read (or started reading) the book and it bored me in a way that could possibly have made me want to stop read fantasy. That is, it could have become an exitway fantasy experience. I think I would demand a bit of expectations or a big fuss around it too, in order to thumb down. So if a lot of people think that I should read it because it is THE shit (Lord of the Rings as the prime example) but I just think it's a lot of, well you know, shit, I would be likely to say "if this is great fantasy then why should I read the genre at all." Thus, thumb down.

ETA: but I can see why it seems strange though.

The description for the list asks you to thumb the single work that sparked your interest in fantasy. So first of all, your only supposed to thumb one work and second that thumb should be an up-thumb. Your completely distorting the purpose of that list.

Yeah, I agree, but as has been mentioned several times above, thumbs usually means approval or disapproval, and if you can't thumb down, why are there thumbs down?

Conclusion: The system doesn't work for that kind of list.

It's not just strange, it's wrong. The question asked was about a particular book that affected you, there's no room for speculation. If someone actually was turned off of Fantasy because of a single work then *they* I suppose could legitimately thumb it down.

It's kind of sad that you can't trust people and have to enforce mechanisms to only let them do what you want. I'm waiting for someone to add a dozen harlequin romance novels to the list. After all, the system allows it, so it must be ok...

> 249

I was being a little willfully obtuse, and trying to provoke a clear assessment like #244. (I really did thumb that way, though.)

ETA: Reposting this message in the new thread.

(Since my thumbs were hurting peoples feelings I removed them. But it teaches me a lesson about wasting the time answering questions. I did fully explain myself, and point out that I understood why someone would find my interpretation of the list description+thumbing functions strange. But when I look back I see I might have understood this a long time ago. "What justification do people have..." is usually a rhetorical question. My mistake.

Anyway, you can cheer up, Brightcopy, I will not add any books at all to the list ;)

*Back to lurking mode.*)

#274 by @auntSteelbreaker> But it teaches me a lesson about wasting the time answering questions.

Sounds like a lot of guilt shifting. It's like I had a "leave a penny take a penny" jar and you decided to take all the pennies. And I said, "That's not really what that's for. In fact, there's actually a little sign that says 'Please don't take all the money.' Why did you do that?" So you said, "Well, I needed fifty cents. Geez, you people get your feelings hurt so easily!" And then you flounced off, saying you knew it was a waste of time answering the question.

At best, it was just not reading instructions. At worst, it was willfully ignoring them. You made it clear it wasn't the first. Bad behavior is bad behavior.

I suggest that Young Adult books be separated from non-Young Adult works in lists intended to yield meaningful rankings of books in a category (as opposed to a list where ranking is unimportant). For example, the Best Dystopias list now shows Hunger Games as #4 and The Giver as #6. No doubt theses are fine works for Young Adult readers, but including them in a list of adult works is mixing apples and oranges and skews the rankings. Also, a "Thumbs Down" by a teenager should be given weight in scoring books on a non-teen list?

>276 Bluewolf0411: I really don't see that happening. Why not create a list for Best Adult Dystopias if that's what you want?

Another example, Winnie the Pooh is number 13 on the Favourite Books list. What...?

Zoe, why don't you see that happening?

>279 Bluewolf0411: The lists are intended to be community constructions. I can't imagine why LT would start imposing editorial judgement about what does and doesn't qualify.

280> I saw it as a plea to list creators to create separate YA and non-YA lists.

BTW, this should be on the Part II thread.

>281 jjwilson61: I thought it was a request for a technical change. If it were just directed at list creators, it would be easier to create the desired list himself.