New Member

So... I just joined and I really am not quite sure how to use anything or what this site all does... all I know is that I love books and I love writing. If possible can someone give me the download??

Welcome!

I notice that you have Harry Potter books so you might like to take a look or join the Hogwarts Express group, take a look at their group at http://www.librarything.com/groups/hogwartsexpress#forums and read a few of the talk threads and then when you get a feel for the group dynamics jump on into the discussion.

Another good resource is the 'Tools' tab in the upper right hand corner, there is a lot of helpful information to be found there.

Thanx sounds great :)

Post here or elsewhere if you want to know more.

Hi Veta!

If you click on the 'Groups' tab, you'll find a myriad of the most active and/or largest and/or newest Groups in all of LibraryThingLand (virtually speaking). Near the upper right hand corner there a spot says something like 'show all groups'. Take a deep breath first, then click on it. I don't know of there's any way to get an actual count, but I'm willing to bet there's well over a thousand of them - over 40 just about all-things-Twilight!! They're listed alphabetically in 3 or 4 columns, along with a brief description of what they're supposed to be about. Some are about nothing worth mentioning.

There are Groups about writing; I just can't think of the name at the moment.

Oh, there is a Tour of LibraryThing that you can take. I think you may have to log out to get to it, or maybe it's accessible from the 'Tools' tab.

Don't be a stranger!

I've never used any kind of social network so I'm a little sketchy on how the whole friends or groups thing... any advice??

Well, LibraryThing is a funny social network. There are "friends," but they are less central to the experience. You'll notice on your profile page that it gives you a list of people you share books with, even without "friends."

LibraryThing is a funny mix of book listing and social networking. People often start from one end of the other—cataloging, or talking. The goal is to have them come together. Your books provide you with a window onto people and conversations, and back on more books to run out and buy.

look around, like WholeHouseLibrary suggested in #5 in the groups for ones that might interest you and then read several of the threads. From reading you will know if it is a group that you would enjoy participating in and you will learn what the 'rules' are for that group.

I don't find 'friends' to really be useful here on LT...by participating on the talk threads you will get to know other users. This is not a chat room...the talk threads are less interactive and sometimes there are minutes, hours, days between posts.

Don't be shy...just keep poking around and you will find the right groups for you.

Choose your friends wisely.

When you become familiar with someone here, and you feel like you get along, you can send them a friends request, and they can either accept or reject the invitation. Sometimes you'll get them from names you don't recognize. Don't be afraid to question them about their motivations. Some are authors looking to build up a 'fan' base; some are ... I'm not really sure, so I tend to reject those.

Groups are supposed to help you find a sense of community, and (in theory) the subject matter ought to be limited to the relevance of the Group, but really, it doesn't matter a whole lot. On the other hand, if one goes about putting random messages in a group, people will get upset.

Groups are not chat rooms; there's no one sitting around waiting to converse with you. So, if you begin a new topic, or reply to an existing thread (topic), don't get impatient waiting for a reply. There's no captive audience.

LibraryThing is a GREAT place. Seriously, I'm very impressed with the whole layout of it, and I don't make use of very much of it. But that's my choice.

See that Veta? Even the guy who created the site is around help you along (Message #7).

He's apparently an insomniac, not unlike myself.

>Choose your friends wisely.

I disagree!

See, we're also a disputatious community.

No, we're not! ... {:>)

Who says we argue here? ... Oh, him. He just started and runs the site. Does that means he knows what's going on? Tim, haven't you gotten to bed yet? Don't you think it's about time?

A lot of the groups have descriptions to help you know what is expected there.

If the group sounds interesting just join.

Most of them are very quiet, but some are much more active. There will often be an introductions thread, so stick a post on the end of that, and then join in any of the conversations.

To expand on what WholeHouse said @5, for finding something in "Groups": What I have found that works best is: click the Groups tab, then go to the "Complete groups list" at the top right, then use your browser's find-on-this-page function (on my computer, its found within the "edit" tab) to search for a specific interest. You mentioned that you love to write, so searching in that fashion for "writer", yielded quite a few results, with these two groups worth mentioning:

Writer-readers - http://www.librarything.com/groups/writerreaders
Writer's Brag and Rag Bag - http://www.librarything.com/groups/writersbragandragbag

"Groups" is one of those facets of LibraryThing that I love, but would love to see improved to raise its functioning to the level of excellence with which the rest of the site performs. (Hopping off my soap-box...) Hope you enjoy your time on LT!

Thanks everyone that responded.

So I've looked at some possible groups and some look interesting. I guess I need to come out of my shell 'cause I"m not sure how to join in but I think I just need to find a group that fits.

>vetatorres

welcome welcome. if you are trying to figure out a) how to get involved and b) how this site really works, i highly suggest checking out the "standing groups." these groups, especially new features, recommended site improvements, and site talk are always FULL of LT whackos (including most of the ones that have responded in this post) who are constantly debating, joking around, talking about cat hair in books/keyboards, and generally being helpful and knowledgeable.

>tim, i've been seeing several of these types of posts a week recently. perhaps we need a standing group specifically for new members (since they rarely now what WikiThing is for). not that site talk isn't the place for it, sort of. just a thought.

>17 leahbird: Ooh Ooh...and it would be really cool if somehow magically new members got an automatic message to go to that thread to introduce themselves so they don't have to find it themselves.

I really like the idea of having a standing group for new members, especially since I far too often see people being unwelcoming to them in the current groups ("How dare you post a suggestion in RSI without reading through all the threads that already exist?" or "Go away, we don't want to talk about Twilight here").

Standing group for new members is a great idea. They'd get a nicer response, since power users who go to that group will want to help and curmudgeons won't bother with it.

VetaTorres,

Another fun way to find groups is through your own books. Go to the book pages for your favorite books and see who else has them, or has rated them highly. Then check that person's profile to see what groups they're in. It doesn't hurt to join several groups and later, narrow down your list.

Alternatively, go to a favorite author's author-page and see who else has 'favorited' that author. You may even find that your favorite author is an LT member! Once you find some people with your interests, drop them a 'hello' comment on their profiles. Pretty soon, you'll be chatting on all sorts of subjects.

19>

I think you're exaggerating slightly.

I don't see anyone saying that in RSI -- I've seen people expressing frustration at newbies not reading any threads -- suggesting Collections when six of the top ten threads are about exactly that, for instance.

And as I've said before I think there's a difference between being "mean" or "unwelcoming" to new people, and not falling all over ourselves to be extra-coddling. I subscribe to the "new people are new, not stupid" philosophy, and expect them to be able to read and maybe try a couple things before demanding help -- that is, I don't look at whether someone is new before responding.

Despite the existence of many long threads about Collections, I don't think they necessarily make it clear what Collections is. Someone wouldn't automatically associate the word Collections with wishlists, for example.

But I also just don't see the need to express frustration at newbies or anyone who's not very familiar with the site. If someone isn't very familiar with the site and asks a silly question, it seems better to ignore it than to say something rude. In other words, I prefer the "if you don't have something nice to say, say nothing at all" philosophy. When it comes to newbies, anyway.

I'm in favor of a "New members" group. I'll create one today. Does anyone want to suggest things about how it should be described or work?

>24 timspalding:

i think the description should DEFINITELY point new members to such things as the tour and tools as well as encouraging them to spend time reading some threads. like lorax said, we shouldn't coddle them. i just feel like the new members group should be a place for newbies to go when they are feeling a little nervous about diving straight in, or if they still have questions but feel a little silly about asking in the "hard core power-user threads" (which rsi, new features, and site talk sometimes feel like).

and, like carolo said, maybe new members should be directed to the group to introduce themselves and give them a base for jumping into LT. like one of those orientation classes when you start college... you know, make some connections with people, figure out the lay of the land, etc.

wow who knew i'd stir things up so much...

yeah, welcome to the whackness, veta! the smallest little thing will get us off on weird tangents that somehow end in 1) tim (the creator of the site) wanting to kill himself 2) users coming up with brilliant features that will, again, lead to tim wanting to kill himself or 3) talk about bobcats! (see what another poor newbie stirred up in this thread)

lol i'm beginning to see the ppl here are let's say unique. :)

Eccentric?

yeah, i guess when you amass a large group of people who spend the majority of their free time reading, cataloging, or talking about reading/cataloging, things are going to get weird. in a good way.

Yeah, the bobcat is thinking about starting his own blog now.

24, 25> I would suggest that the description recommend reading the description as well as a few topics before jumping into a group. Except those who don't probably won't read that description either. Oh, well.

Edited to add that it isn't all newbies who post topics that don't meet group expectations.

Would that make him a blogcat?

Tim (@24):
(1) Include something about how Groups works. With a note to the effect that, if they will take the time to search Groups for their topic first, there is probably already a group talking about "what they're looking for". That joining that group will be a much richer LT Talk experience, than creating a new, duplicate group, where history shows that very little activity happens in the new duplicate (besides being against TOS). Maybe using Twilight as an example of duplicate groups having far less talk than the older ones. (Back when I was tracking the twilights, there were about 20. Time out for a horrid cross-country move, and I'm now out of date with the number of twilights. An example of that history/membership activity is on my profile in comments.)

(2) Another thought: Maybe create another standing group: "13-15? Let's Talk!" (except titled in teen-speak; sorry-not my language). Then, perhaps, all the new groups that would otherwise be created by the young ones, they could instead create as topics in that group. Then those new groups, like:
"teh reading circle", "what kind of pie do you like", and the infamous "llama, llama, llama...", wouldn't be sitting there under "Newest Groups", (oftentimes that list is a lot more full of this kind of stuff), scaring off potential new members who came browsing through, thinking this was supposed to be a serious book lovers' site.

I think a "new members" group is a good idea in principle, but it's unlikely to work well in practice.

For it to be at all useful, it would need to have some non-newbies participating, and answering the same question several times a day (because as we all know, not everybody reads any existing threads, or even group descriptions, before leaping in) is going to make people burn out really, really fast. Either we hope that newbies get up to speed fast enough that they can stick around and help the next crop, or it just turns into the blind leading the blind once established users get tired of answering "How do I add books to my library" three times a day.

>34 countrylife: Teh Reading Circle seems like a legitimate group. I certainly don't think it's for 13-15 year olds. Or if 13-15 year olds are reading the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, I don't see why they should be segregated.

>35 lorax: There are plenty of members who I've seen patiently answering the same question multiple times.

Thanks, _Zoe_, that's what I get for scanning the list so hastily. My first thought on seeing misspellings in someone's newly created group (understood - that one was not a misspelling), is that it, therefore, must be another kid. But my point remains: seeing a lot of kiddie groups listed in Newest Groups is off-putting.

36>

Sure, and I'm one of them.

Multiple times is one thing -- multiple times per day? I haven't seen that, have you?

>38 lorax: I'm not sure why you think it has to be the same one person answering all the questions. And I do think the newbies will be smart enough to repeat answers that they themselves received mere hours before. You said you subscribe to the "new people are new, not stupid" philosophy, but I'm not seeing any evidence of that here. Providing a focus for newbie help should make it easier, not harder, for them to help themselves.

--> 24

Finally!!! Thank you, Tim.

Just off the top of my head, I think the newbie group should:

1. Ask the newbies to introduce themselves
2. Enourage questions
3. Point newbies to the FAQs
4. Be kept simple

I think you've got enough people here at LT who would from time to time stop into the newbie thread to help people along. Newbies also help each other along.

24> #3. Do you mean the FAQ group? Because that doesn't really serve its purpose of answering the really Frequently Asked Questions as far as I can tell. I was hoping that that group could be demoted from the standing groups in favor of this new group.

What such a group could do:
* primarily, encourage new members to introduce themselves and say why they joined LT.
* point people to the list of frequently asked questions and frequently requested features on the wiki.
* maybe a brief note for authors too wouldn't go awry (with links to the TOS and to some of the LT resources for writers and authors), since sometimes posts by perhaps otherwise well-meaning authors get flagged as self promotion. This is bad all around, as it can leave a bad taste for a new member, and also seems to create a bad first impression in the minds of existing members.

What such a group could do:
* primarily, encourage new members to introduce themselves and say why they joined LT.

I don't think that needs to be a purpose, and certainly not the primary purpose. If I'd been interrogated like that when Talk started (I joined LT long before Talk was here) I'd have never come here. If I want to talk about why I joined, I'll do so on my own terms, not as part of some artificial "introduction".

> lorax, zoe

i see it working both ways. i have really no problem answering questions, sometimes multiple times a day*, or at the very least point someone in the right direction. i think the biggest problem now is that the answers newbies are looking for might be buried in threads that have gotten off topic (as we are very prone to do) or aren't simple to find through a group search (which i don't even have much luck with).

and if most the the things that newbies need to know are conveniently stuck in the new members group, that will free up space in the other groups so people disinclined to help won't have to see it as often. newbies who are embraced and empowered by seasoned users will most likely become helpful users in the future (of course not all, but at least some).

*maybe this is from my years as a nanny, where you literally answer the exact same question about 900 times a day. "can we watch a movie now? how about... now? after lunch? now?"

I just joined Librarything.com and absolutly love it!!
My teacher would always talk about it in class and personally I didnt see the big deal and thought it looked boring, but now I can search books and read reviews of books Im interested in to see what other people say. I just have to say thanks to my teacher!!
;)

Welcome, Desiree9! I'm glad you're finding that LibraryThing is fun after all.

43 - ? - no one's forcing anyone to post, or submit to an interrogation. If it makes it more palatable, put a "maybe" before the "say why they joined" in my post. Introduction threads are quite normal on many forums - the grad students group here has something like this ("what do you study"). Not everyone participates: I don't, and personally I don't really like doing these kinds of introductions. But I was suggesting something that some new members might enjoy or find useful. We certainly see a number of people here saying "Hi, I'm new. Here's who I am. How do I...?"

I'm really liking the site too! and I'm starting to get the hang of things on my own I guess I was quick to ask questions when I could have figured it out in the first place and not bothered anyone.

Yes, but in a way it's better to ask questions. You get to know us, and we get to know you. Glad you're having fun here.

see, people shouldn't feel like they are bothering others when they ask a genuine question. they just need a better place to put those questions so that anyone who is "bothered" can just steer clear.

aww i feel better thanks squeakychu & atlargeinthewrld

Did the "new members" group ever get created? I can't find it . . .

In message 24 from two days ago Tim said "I'm in favor of a "New members" group. I'll create one today". Maybe he got busy with Collections.

47>

Well, people are going to introduce themselves if they want to whether it's required or not, but having it stated as the "primary purpose" of the group made it seem like entering sans introduction would be frowned upon.

I'm old-fashioned enough that when I started participating in online conversations, "lurking" was considered basic etiquette (rather than rude or creepy as it is in many places now), and the ideal was considered to be to be able to smoothly jump into conversations for your first post, and not have everyone realize you were new. So the "introduction post" still seems a little attention-seeking to me.

I'm still thinking about this. I'd like to reduce all the standing groups. Maybe get my dream of combining bugs and recommended improvements.

No, no. That would be called a nightmare.

I just don't like having a thing for bugs, another for improvements and another for new features. The bleed-between is too great.

I could see combining improvements and new features. That becomes "enhancements" the only difference is who's initiating them--LT staff or LT membership.

I don't like the idea of combining those two with bugs.

Argh.

What's wrong? It's a pretty standard scheme in software development circles. I know I like a clear separation of my list of bugs and my list of enhancements to address. In fact, I insist on it.

I'm with Tim here. There are a huge number of posts to Bug Collectors that just get answered with "This is not a bug, but a lack of feature. Please post to RSI instead", followed by the same post to RSI. Cutting out that middle step seems sensible. (Of course, I follow both groups anyway.)

I wouldn't want New Features combined with either -- the signal to noise is still about 50/50 there of real posts and posts from people who can't be bothered to read the description, so I don't think it warrants merging with the other groups.

I'd much rather see a combination of RSI and New Features than a combination of RSI and bugs. I can't be the only one who thinks that suggested improvements are interesting while bugs are generally not.

In the meantime, I think it would be better if members were allowed to start threads in New Features when such threads are just branching off from or continuing other New Features threads. It seems stupid to say, "Hey, this New Features thread is 400 posts long. Can someone official please start a new one?" rather than just doing it.

58: But it's also RSI requests vs NF announcements of fact. Even though NF accumulates requests and bugs in its announcement threads, it's helpful to have features clearly labeled in a separate group. RSI has too many threads, with too many duplications and digressions, to keep track of without continuous monitoring.

> 61,63

Your points are quite valid regarding "who's posting" in RSI vs NF.

I still wouldn't want either of those combined with the bugs. In my experience, bugs require a different level and different type of attention from both posters and responders (i.e. LT staff) than do the "improvements".

So Tim, you now have the full spectrum and what it comes down to, is what ever you want, because no matter what you do someone will be unhappy.

Personally I like the idea of them being separate but, they way they seem to really work, I don't think it will make much difference in the long run. Combine them or don't, we'll adjust.

Of course we'll adjust. Since others were offering up opinions, I gave mine. That's how I run a software development project. Last I checked, I'm not running this one.

Yeah, I think opinion is running too strongly against it. Maybe I'll group them together more clearly.

T

One thing that might help is to re-name New Features - make it something like Staff Feature Announcements, which sounds much less like a place to request a new feature.

65: I wouldn't be unhappy with any of the various options. I might prefer clear separation if I had a task database, but everything does kinda bleed together when conversation occurs, and I like that LT encourages conversation. For example, we are discussing the organization of standing groups in a thread titled New Member in the catch-all group Site Talk. I would be happy with a single about-LT-features group, especially if threads were labeled (either before or after the fact) as Bug, Request, Announcement, Discussion, etc. Or tagged...

If the groups were combined, maybe there could be a tag system or something to identify new threads as "New Feature", "Bug", "Feature Request", "Question", etc., which could be displayed and filter-able on the Talk page. Identifier tags would be available to the original poster in a drop-down, and certain tags (like "New Feature") could be made available to LT staff only.

Taking that (#70) a step further, all LT site-related discussion groups could be combined into a single group, with the subdivisions accessible through the tags.

>71 saltmanz:
My head hurts just thinking about that ...

>tim

to get back to the topic (well, the topic after we highjacked this tread), i don't think it's a good idea to withhold a new members group, especially since you do think it's a good idea, just because the status of other groups is in limbo. there seems to be a genuine need for something of this sort. you can always add it and then rework the standing groups at a later date.

A good idea for a New Members group would be a FAQ "Sticky" (except LT doesn't have stickies...).

74>

If LT had "stickies" a lot of the reasons for a new member group would go away.

(whistling)

What's a sticky?

withhold a new members group

That's a rather colored description! I just want to talk this through.

68: I would love it if New Features was renamed... Staff Features, Staff Feature Announcements

Barring that, it could be combined with RSI, I guess.

77: Sticky is a way to keep certain threads at the top of forums "Read this first, Common Feature Requests, etc."

Sorry, I don't understand "sticky."

> tim (77)

ok, that came out much harsher than intended. i'm not on a "new members standing group" crusade, a la tags tab (now i've surely gone and done it).

but my basic point still stands. i think it's very much worth talking about what to do to keep standing groups streamlined, but i don't think that should hold up the new members idea. especially since (i believe) it would be something that would be really quick and easy for you to set up and then you can basically ignore it until after the collections hoopla dies down.

A Sticky is a thread that stays stuck at the top of the list of threads, regardless (I think) of any other sort order, so that it is always prominent. Sometimes they have a different icon or denominator to demonstrate the fact that they are sticky.

Ahh, beaten by Collectorator. :(

But a lot of use of LT is through talk, not through the mini-talk that's on every group page...

>84 timspalding::
After a while, yes, but the talk interface probably looks like total chaos for a new member who hasn't yet posted or joined any groups. I'd guess that new members are probably more likely to do their initial exploring through the group pages, if at all.

Tim,
You can see an example of sticky threads in the NaNoWriMo forums.

http://www.nanowrimo.org/eng/forum/162

"This is not a chat room...the talk threads are less interactive and sometimes there are minutes, hours, days between posts"

Yes I've found a wonderful balance between the two. My avatar is interacting in a virtual world's browser while I simultaneously have LT open in Safari. If things go quiet in the former, I switch to the latter, read a few posts, reply to a few, at leisure.

Only ... don't be fooled. Sometimes the Scrabble and Word Association threads are as interactive as they come!

> 85

I agree - although I use talk almost exclusively now, I started in groups.

Perhaps talk and groups and RSI and Bug Collectors and New Features need to be reorganized--but I don't think that's reason to delay the creation of a New Members group. I think its a good idea that new members would find friendly and helpful.

With a link on the sign-up page, and possibly somewhere obvious but moveable on the default home page.

On the contrary as a new member I found Groups a very difficult page to use, still do to some extent, and navigate almost exclusively by Talk.

>85 E59F:

I did this, used the Groups pages exclusively. Only when the new Home page was introduced which will show me posts from only my selected Groups did I stop using the Groups pages. I still go back to the Groups pages on those rare occasions when I've been away from LT for a couple of days and have to catch up.

"which will show me posts from only my selected Groups "

Which you've been able to do from the main Talk page for at least a year if not substantially longer than that, certainly much longer than the Home page.

There is a link on the top left "Your Groups" which only shows your goups' posts.

>92 reading_fox:

Which shows you how much attention I paid to the main Talk page. I probably looked at it once early on, perceived (accurately or not) that it innundated one with all the posts from all the Groups, and never bothered to go back.

>92 reading_fox:,
Definitely at least since January of 08, because that's when I started checking out Talk and I've always used 'Your Groups'.

>92 reading_fox:

Pretty much from the beginning of Talk.

Before the new home page, I always used the list on the right side of each group's home page to navigate through my groups; I found the Talk page overwhelming, even when set to just my groups. Too much at once.

After the new home page, where I could set a manageable amount of Talk listings, I found that the Talk page became useful for catching what I'd missed, so now I use them both.

The Groups page is only useful for finding a group on a new subject I'm interested in - these days there are too many groups to easily find what I want. After doing a search box query, I usually resort to the full listing page and the browser Find command. I rarely have time to look at the new groups listing; and when I do, I usually get sidetracked into reporting spam groups :-p

Just to expound on my point @34.2:

This morning, under New Groups, there are 9 duplicitous new poetry groups, and 11 other stupid groups. It just makes the site look bad.

86> Tim could find an example of "sticky topics" on just about any modern message board on the InterTubes. I love this place, but the discussion forums are just ridiculously out-of-date from a functional standpoint.

And for the record, I do all my posting/browsing from the Talk page via "Your groups".

> 97

How can a poetry group be "duplicitous" ? 0.o Is it a group full of lying poets ??? Or is this the new Fibonacci poetry (abbreviated to "Fib" lol) ?

Tim could find an example of "sticky topics" on just about any modern message board on the InterTubes. I love this place, but the discussion forums are just ridiculously out-of-date from a functional standpoint.

I think the Talk here works more like threads of discussion than a message board. And that is one of the things I like about it; however, discussions are more difficult for a newcomer to jump right into than a message posting-board. That's the nature of a discussion--the format itself leads people into more quickly judging those that come in shouting "look at me!" as rude interrupters. I don't think LT should go too far away from the current format, but newcomers do need to feel welcomed. Hence, I think a newcomers group would be really valuable (regardless of whether talk/groups gets reworked).

For what it's worth, I don't see how "stickies" would be any more useful than the group description. The group description sits at the top of all the threads and links to really important threads can be put up there if really necessary.

Tid (@99): You made me laugh out loud at myself! I am a super fast typist on my own machine, and being temporarily stuck on my daughter's laptop, am having a horrible time with its keyboard. My fingers still try to fly, brain's too much taken up by backspacing and fixing typos, and never EVEN caught myself! Having been particularly cranky after a horrid move, I can now go back to painting my bookcases, with a smile on my face!

> 101

You're welcome :-)

100>For what it's worth, I don't see how "stickies" would be any more useful than the group description. The group description sits at the top of all the threads and links to really important threads can be put up there if really necessary.

That's true, both represent "overarching information about the group", and of course either approach would require aggressive management.

I do think that stickies bring other attributes though:
- "Drill Downs" to different types of data e.g.
New Members group
(sticky): FAQs/How do I...?
(sticky): Introduce yourself here
using group description for the first could result in an ever expanding description, the second wouldn't be possible.
- Updates to stickies would be "pushed" and therefore seen in Talk, Home Page, Hot Topics, whereas updates to group descriptions are passive (user must visit the Groups Home Page to see updates)

Not all groups need stickies, maybe only
New Members, Bug Collectors, Request New Features.

But stickies, and group descriptions, only work when you get at the groups from the group page. If you use the Talk page you go directly to that thread and never see any other threads, much less sticky ones or the group description.

I can't think of a way to do this that would make sense on the Talk page. What if the group description was made to appear at the top of every thread (and clicking on the thread name took you to the top instead of to the first post). Then those only reading threads via the Talk page would occasionally see the Group descriptions.

104: ... and still not read it before posting.

104: What if the group description was made to appear at the top of every thread (and clicking on the thread name took you to the top instead of to the first post).
This might make sense for new members, but would drive everyone else crazy. Anyway, the trouble isn't so much posting to existing threads as creating new threads, isn't it? Either in inappropriate groups, or with questions / suggestions that have appeared many times before and that evoke both helpful and irritated responses.

I have no memory of what new users see upon arrival (and it's probably changed anyway) -- could there be a Help module on the Home page (there by default, but optional for anyone who wants to be rid of it)?

>103 kevmalone: using group description for the first could result in an ever expanding description, the second wouldn't be possible

Not really. There could be a part in the group description that says something like:

Come and introduce yourself here!!

Questions? Looking for help? Try here first.

With, of course, links to the appropriate threads (the ones that you would have "stickied") instead of to this thread.

You can even use graphics in the group descriptions (I believe), so you could make those more eye-catching.

>107 christiguc:
OK but all you've done is created "Stickies" with a different mechanism!
That's very creative and I think it's just fine, my point is that some way of corralling/emphasizing that type of thing is needed

I think my second point still applies.

ETA: I'm honestly not being sarcastic here - I genuinely laughed in approval of your creativity, and that's the best type of laughter I think.

>108 kevmalone: Updates to stickies would be "pushed" and therefore seen in Talk, Home Page, Hot Topics

However, the same things would apply to the threads to which the group description linked. Those that introduced themselves (and read the other introductions) would push that thread back up to the top, perhaps onto the "hot" list.

I agree--it's like stickies, but with a different mechanism, something that we don't need a change in the current structure to initiate. Perhaps some groups just need to make the descriptions more thorough; it's not that LT needs to code in stickies.

Having a standing group for new members would be a good change, but, personally, I don't see how there really needs to be a system-wide change of the format of talk.

(Although, having said that, I think when we click on a group name at the top of a thread, it should take us to the group description, not the #forums. I don't think any link to a group should skip over the group description--that's just asking for trouble).

109>'(Although, having said that, I think when we click on a group name at the top of a thread, it should take us to the group description, not the #forums. I don't think any link to a group should skip over the group description--that's just asking for trouble).'

I fully agree with you. People are likely enough to skip reading the description if it is on their screen. If it isn't they certainly won't read it, and no amount of helpful information, or graphics in the description will help.