What else would you pay for?

A news item on NPR had someone speculating that a fee-based model for Internet social sites might be a better model than advertising-based. LT is already a (very modestly) fee-based site, but it made me think about what else I'd pay to have that might not have enough votes to make it to the to-do list in my lifetime. Mostly it's things that would save me re-entry of data.

I would definitely pay to have my old additional authors converted to the new format. I'd even pay to have a feature where I could cut and paste the data into the new format and not have to re-enter the book to get the data in.

I'd also pay to have my three accounts combined. I think the programming for this has to be redone after the changes that were made for collections, and I'm sure there's not much call for it. Though I'm sure it would be cheaper for me to re-enter the books into a single account than to pay what that programming would actually cost.

Do other folks have things they'd pay to see?

Just so you know there is going to be a tool to let you move books from one account you own to another.

aulsmith: Tim can do it (edit: merge accounts) now if you ask him or Abby. I know they're working on a user interface so people can do it on their own too.

> 1

I would definitely pay to have my old additional authors converted to the new format. I'd even pay to have a feature where I could cut and paste the data into the new format and not have to re-enter the book to get the data in.

Oh, so would I! The inability to have books attributed to multiple authors is one of the very few things that frustrate me about the site. If X & Y co-authored a book, each of them should have an author page, and the book should appear on both.

For interest's sake, here the NPR story:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=105493600&ft=1&f=10...

I think LT has always had it right—if someone is really important to you, particularly something you'll only get value from if you spend time building it up, you're willing to pay for it. That paying can also mean you ads makes it all the more attractive. Our competitor even shows detergent movie ads. Some people don't mind, and they clearly appeal more to the younger crowd, who will never pay for anything online, ever. But man, we're never going to do that; I don't need that shit in my life.

The Facebook plan mentioned—pay to guarantee the Clorox page is your company, and not some imposter—shows how backwards these things can get. That's a nice company trademark you got there, buddy. It would be a shame if someone wrecked it...

each of them should have an author page, and the book should appear on both

Indeed, if only because I would then finally get my own author page ;-) The plight of an eternal "other author".

Yeah, I'm about to become one too. I may just take over the book, though. I can do that. I paid myself.

Well, I've already paid for what I wanted to pay for, more then once too. And did that sound complicated or what? lol I paid to feed my addiction. I became addicted to LibraryThing fairly quickly, and the 200-books-for-free threshold is not enough to feed my addiction, so I paid up. (I also recently paid for a friend, as part of my diabolical plan to get all my friends addicted to LibraryThing. It worked. *evil laugh!*)

But let's see... I'd definitely pay again/more to get seperate author pages for identically-named authors. It's a mess right now, even with the partial-seperation. I... can't really think of anything else.

I would have paid extra for Collections, but I didn't have to!

I'd pay for a sub-work system to fix the omnibus problem and to get each separate author their own page, even if they have the same name as another author.

>10 jjwilson61: - Totally in agreement on the sub-works. I already offered to pay more for it:
http://www.librarything.com/topic/32996#638901

I would pay extra for (Already) Read to be considered a valid state for a book, with all the implications that would come with that. I'm not talking about Collections, but about the whole attitude that to say a book is completed somehow demeans it.

Also, shouldn't there be an easy way for people who are happy with LT to donate money to the site?

I'd be willing to pay a *modest* annual or bi-annual fee just to keep using LT. After all, the cable company makes me pay every month for TV and I don't get nearly so much pleasure from that.

This reminds me - I am going to pay for collections! Is there a way I can just donate? (I'm not particularly interested in buying merchandise, in part because I'm not particularly interested in donating to the manufacturing process or international postal services.) Could I purchase a gift membership and not give it to anyone?

>10 jjwilson61: - Totally agree. And I would pay if the multi-authors works can get fixed as well to show up on both authors pages...

(Edited to add: And for edition level inside of the works... you pull all copies from something out from something else, then someone comes over and combine it back and you need to do all the work again pulling it work by work).

Oh I'd pay for lots of things, probably different amounts for each one:

The developers to go on a BugFix / finish developing month

Update authors

A Generic Green Button that works

An intuative working search with Boorlean operators, that includes CK

Recently read connections

Omnibus / contents / anthologies especially if these automatically 'knew' the contents

Someone to come by and add all my wishlist books, and arrange all my collections/tags properly.

Probably more besides.

I've already paid for four lifetime memberships, but would definitely contribute to a ~Fix Groups~ fund.

Obviously we can't charge for small or medium-sized featues, or bug fixes. So, would you pay for music or movie cataloging?

I hope they can be served concurrently. Otherwise, you're really going to screw up the Social Security actuarial tables.

So, would you pay for music or movie cataloging

On a similar system as LT? Certainly!

p.s.: especially if it would be possible to make cross connections between those catalogues - this movie is an adaptation of that book, that sort of thing.

#20

No. I would pay for the contents cataloguing as linked to by PortiaLong however especially if rolled up with some of the little changes (other authors - both old->new conversions, and data pages for other authors*). That would be a massive job to do it right.

* I think on its own that is a good one to do. For example it would be way cool to be able to find out all the works that Jim Burns did the cover art for?

Music - with similar connections and reccomendations features (and overlap into LT finding people with same books and same music). Absolutely.

Hardly watch/own any films so not there, but I can see the appeal.

If the movie cataloging was really good, I would definitely pay. The site that's similar to LT is too slow - and not full enough. But with a better CK, a more robust character/actor CK, a crew CK and ways to break out and review various features on DVDs (honestly, I think this could be a stand-out feature - who else really allows for full individual reviews of all of the extras - imagine being able to sort by best director commentary, best deleted scenes, best alternate endings, best making of featurettes, etc.)...

But, yeah, built right for sure!

ETA - and then there always is the possibility of you guys getting in on some of that Netflix money...

>Obviously we can't charge for small or medium-sized features, or bug fixes
Creating the "Part of" and "Contains" relationships are not so small

>So, would you pay for music or movie cataloging?
Yep.

>So, would you pay for music or movie cataloging?
Yep.

as long as it is the same quality as the current LT.

Obviously we can't charge for small or medium-sized featues, or bug fixes.

This isn't obvious. You can charge for anything people are willing to pay for.

So, would you pay for music or movie cataloging?

No, I probably wouldn't use this. I'd actually be sad to see the development time taken away from book features.

I would pay to list a rare book or an entire collection for auction.
Currently Amazon and other sites do not offer the ability to auction an entire collection/list.

#20 Movies and music? Probably, yeah. Especially with cross-referencing. Movies made from the book. Music or movies featured in a book. Books or music appearing in a movie. That sort of thing. Always assuming the quality is similarly high compared to what we've become accustomed to.

I wouldn't pay for music or movie cataloging.

However, my husband would leap at the chance to have an LT quality music and movie cataloging site.

15>

Could I purchase a gift membership and not give it to anyone?

Sure, or give it to Tim, and he could use it in a future "free membership!" contest.

20>

So, would you pay for music or movie cataloging?

Well, that depends.

I'd pay for the development of a completely separate music/movie/perfume/bobcat/whatever cataloging system that makes these objects completely 100% separate from books -- so they wouldn't show up in sitewide searches or browsing other's libraries or anything. I wouldn't actually use the other site, but I'd be grateful enough for the resulting improvement in data quality here that I'd pay for it anyway.

If that's not what you had in mind, then I'd pay for you to not work on movie/music cataloging. There's enough non-book data cluttering up the place as it is. Anything that encouraged the intermixture of more non-book data would be, in my opinion, an enormous step in the wrong direction.

33> even if it was a part of the current system, I would imagine that being able to specifically designate something as music or movies would make it easy to filter out of searches.

30:

Movies made from the book.

Aaah (*a mixture between an exclamation of joy and evil laughter*)! I can just see the debates over what makes a film an adaptation of a book. All those "inspired by", "suggested by" and "based on the characters of" movies. (Son of Frankenstein: related to Mary Shelley's book by way of Bride of Frankenstein, which certainly claims to be an adaptation, but is it?)

Music or movies featured in a book. Books or music appearing in a movie.

Movies appearing in movies (Top Hat in The Green Mile), books appearing in books (The Mysteries of Udolpho in Northanger Abbey)...

Wouldn't this (the latter, in any case) make a good CK feature? (Not that I know a lot about CK.)

33:

Or a switch you could throw to exclude all such non-book works from your own viewing of the site? (This wouldn't be simple. The site would have to be able to recognise them as non-books before it could separate them out, and this might mean having to make the architecture to support them - which by itself you don't want.)

Personally, if the site went into the "catalogue your whole library, including DVDs (or whatever)" direction, I think such a switch, or something like it, would be a requirement. (And then we'd have to debate where the various book-with-DVD and DVD-with-book editions would have to go...)

To answer the original question, I don't know what I'd pay for (not to be disapproved of by lorax for cataloguing DVDs? nah. ;-) ), but I think an easy way to donate to the site would be a good thing.

ETA: Perhaps I'd pay for a preview option in Talk.

I'd pay for separate MusicThing and MovieThing; having links between them would be nice, but not so much that it would be possible to combine a book with a movie. Things like "this book was made into this movie" and "this music is the score of this movie" would be very helpful functions. I can see that the music one would be much more complicated to design than the movie one, which could probably be boilerplated off LibraryThing with the addition of extra fields for actors/directors/etc.

I do agree with posters above who don't want lots of time taken away from LT to devote to non-book features, though. :-/

If that's not what you had in mind, then I'd pay for you to not work on movie/music cataloging...

Ha. Oh, looooorax I'm thinking of writing some code today. Time to send your payoff cheque.

35>

Or a switch you could throw to exclude all such non-book works from your own viewing of the site? (This wouldn't be simple. The site would have to be able to recognise them as non-books before it could separate them out, and this might mean having to make the architecture to support them - which by itself you don't want.)

That would be fine, too. Needing to exclude them with a "format:book" specification on every search or every browse of someone's library would not be.

I know it was said that LT cannot charge for bug fixing, but if someone fixes the search and the sorting to work with Cyrillic titles (and all the CK issues on the language sites), I won't mind paying a second lifetime membership...

>20 timspalding: Tim - YES and YES, absolutely, positively!

I don't care if it is it's own site or part of LT, I don't care if it links or not, I just want to keep track of my music and movies as well as my books.

Please, please, please?

20
In a manner of speaking, I have already paid to catalog music on LT, via a separate lifetime account which I've specifically dedicated to music. Inasmuch as I feel like I'm an outlaw in this regard, I'd probably pay some fee if LT was able to transfer the data I've already entered to an "official" LT music catalog if that's the way things go. My preference would be to be able to transfer the music to my main account as a separate collection, but I'm still pondering the advantages/disadvantages.

Regarding films, I don't want to step on anyone's toes, but I did begin cataloging DVDs on another site similar to LT, but ceased to do so once I realized that the cost (something like $20 every two years) was not something I wanted to commit to.

I understand THAT, Makifat. One of my other paid accounts is for our family's movies, because I didn't want them mixed in with my BOOKS. So, yes, Tim, I WOULD pay for a MovieThing.

I would be thrilled to have music and video catalogs like LT, and would pay for each of those.

Also, I think it would be terrific to catalog art and jewelry (those would be private) and other collected items ... for estate and insurance purposes. I might become obsessive enough to catalog my clothing (at least the vintage stuff).

I'm not up to date technically, but based on what I remember, these seem like good applications of semantic web.

Anyway, I'd be pleased to have such services and have tried the few that I've found. None holds a candle to LT.

I've thought about it some more, and I think I'd use (and pay for using) an LT-spin-off site for DVDs, music, etc. - meaning I'd move my nonbook items from here to there - if my two accounts would then be inte... integratable? For while I agree with objectors that listing J. R. R. Tolkien as the main author of Peter Jackson's movies is a horror - especially without putting something like "video" in the title - I really see my movies, especially my book-based movies, as part of my library; I often keep them on the same shelf, I group them together in my LT account, etc. So I'd like to be able to see them together even if they were on separate sites. (I have no idea whether this is technically possible.) I might still use a separate website that wasn't integratable (and move stuff away from here), but it would involve a paradigm shift.

I'd pay for movie cataloging. (Heck, I'd like to work on the project.)

One thing I really appreciate about LT is the lifetime membership. Although I'm willing to buy a few charity memberships, I really hate the yearly subscription thing that some sites do. It's one reason I don't do more with Take II, the movie website that's sort of based on LT. A cataloging site like LT exists in great part because of a lot of work done by each individual member. The thought that I could lose all that work if my circumstances changed to the extent that I couldn't afford the fee is distressing. I'd rather pay a lifetime membership while I'm flush (employed) and not have to worry about it.

I'd pay for both music and movies catalogues as long as the structure of the site would work with all of them. Which I'm not sure it's possible - I envision lots of confusion and clutter. Mostly what I see as a problem is that movies and music would have to be connected enough to the books so that links between them are possible (like other users have pointed out: this book was made into a movie, this album is mentioned in this book etc) but they would also have to be separate enough from the books so that a) it's not confusing which one's a book and which a movie b) users who want to keep their books separate or not use music/movies at all can do so.

Another one who would pay for music and movie cataloging provided that the additions were similar enough in structure that it didn't feel like three wholly separate sites.

And yes, the connection between film adaptations, books, soundtracks, etc. would be complicated and not necessarily agreed upon across the board, but how is that any different from what already goes on in LT? :)

> 20

So, would you pay for music or movie cataloging?

If it were as good a system (even with the few desiderata) as LT for books, absolutely.

Humph.

I can see I'm badly outnumbered.

Oh well, a site devoted to books was fun while it lasted. I just hope everyone realizes that adding movies and music as officially supported media means you're going to have 80% of the population of the site formerly known as LibraryThing will consist of people who don't actually read, right?

The day this happens is the day I take my library private. I came here initially for a book cataloging site. The social aspects have been fun, but I'd have no interest in the social aspects of a "Catalog your movies and music, and if you're one of those weirdos who reads, your books too" site.

While I don't share the negativity expressed in 49, I would prefer that LT staff focus on LT and books and would be happy to pay for this. Now if Tim & Chris were to be cloned, then that would be quite a different kettle of fish although cataloguing of music, films etc interest me not in the least so they wouldn't be getting my money :P

v

49: Oh - I admit I hadn't even thought about Talk at all. What would happen to all the lovely -sometimes heated, but almost always high-level and literate discussions on LT? :O Will they become infected with You-Tube talk???

Okay they would have to be different sites not incorporated into LT (MovieThing?) but with some sort of connection between them. For example if you have an account on both sites it should know it's the same person and would offer the ability to do some cool things between them. Maybe CK could have an "Adaptations" or "Other Media" field but if you clicked on the movie version of the book it would take you to your account on the movie site?

Oooh I take back what I said in 46 - it sounds like it would be too complicated to have them together in one site.

I'm on your side, too, lorax. While the site is LibraryThing, not BookThing, I think the audience for movie and/or music sites would be sufficiently different that the character of the site as a whole would change.

I'd love a similar but separate site for movies, but I think that the social connections between movie watchers would be very different from the social connections between book readers, and even more different than the connections between movie watchers and book readers. That is, I suspect there would be a stronger connection between people who watched The Lord of the Rings and people who watched Van Helsing than between people who watched LotR and people who read the books. The insignificant connections that could be made by integrating the sites would not be worth the cost.

(It would make it easier to charge for a second lifetime membership, too!)

...you're going to have 80% of the population of the site formerly known as LibraryThing will consist of people who don't actually read...

As opposed to now, when 80% of the population don't read anything except Twilight.

Disclaimer: This post represents a crude or weak attempt at humor, satire, or irony. The opinion(s) expressed therein are not to be construed as a personal attack to any poster on this or any other thread (with the exception of __________). This post does not necessarily reflect the true opinion of the poster, his family, or the staff of LibraryThing, including "Mr. Moneybags", aka Tim Spalding. The poster is a good person from a decent family, a doting father who cooks most of the meals and tolerates cats.

Honestly, I guess I just don't understand how my cataloging my Bonzo Dog Band albums is screwing things up for anyone else.

As someone who loves reading but also listens to music and watches films I would like to be able to list all of my library whatever the media but I'd be happy to pay for additional memberships for music and film as long as the format and principle was the same.

I'm not too precious about having all my books, films, music in exactly the same place but having manually added over 400 films I would want to migrate the data across to any new area if separate.

I like the idea of sister sites that link though to Moviething or Musicthing etc but I would only want to log in once and be able to flip between the sites.

Perhaps we could have for one account but pay additional memberships for use of the alternative media sites and this would determine what area of the sites were enabled to view and the ability to flip into them.

That way if you were a Librarythinger you'd just see as is and if you were a Musicthinger you'd Musicthing etc.

It might get round Lorax's basic concern (which I kind of agree with) and definitely girlunderglasse's YouTube talk comment (shudder!) - It would mean that people accessing the Librarything part remained book people (and help prevent cross contamination!)

Things I'd pay for, or pay more for: I might pay the same $25 for music and movies if the functionality was already in existence. I paid my lifetime fee for LT based on what it already could do, not what it might do in the future.

I would pay extra for some hand holding to import and export data. I can monkey with csv files as well as anyone, but it would be nice to have the process vetted by someone who knows more than me...especially if I could import titles without ISBNs en masse, with confidence.

and I would pay for nonprofits and libraries to have their own LT accounts. I'd be more than happy to contribute to a fund that would give them some relief on the resources required to establish and maintain an LT presence.

54:

It isn't, now, and I catalog some of my DVDs on here. But...

Say that the site currently reaches 1% of readers. Imagine how the site would change if the ability to catalog movies and music was as full-featured as it is for books, and it attracted 1% of movie goers, and 1% of people who listen to music. The books would be overwhelmed. The "Currently Reading" section would become "Recently Read/Watched/Listened To" and there wouldn't be any books in the top 10. Your Recommendations section on the home page would be full of Hollywood blockbuster movies or Top 10 albums.

Perhaps I am exaggerating, or being overly pessimistic, but I do not doubt that it would change for the worse, from the point of view of book lovers.

57
I suppose it is based on how or why you use the site. I use it first and foremost to catalog my books. Talk is a pleasant diversion, but if it disappeared tomorrow, the cataloging function would still be invaluable (and I would have more time for reading!).

Honestly, I have removed most of the "recommendations", "hot reviews", etc. functions from my homepage. Most of the interesting recommendations for me come from discussions in the "Chapel of the Abyss" group, and even if music became a bigger element of the site as a whole, I wouldn't expect that particular group to be overwhelmed by hordes of Pantera fans. In short, I'm not that interested in what anyone else is reading, and statistics as a whole bore me.

One thing I do enjoy is seeing how many of my "friends" share individual books. But again, I don't see how adding music would change that too much, except inasmuch as it would introduce me to more Bonzo Dog fans.

> 58

I don't see how that can be done. If images are copyrighted, you have to get permission from (and, perhaps, pay) the rights holder. Since there's no way of knowing beforehand what they would ask, I don't know how LT could figure out what to assess a member for that privilege.

Of course, if Tim changes his mind about whether he'll allow images under the "fair use" justification, then it wouldn't be necessary.

54>

Honestly, I guess I just don't understand how my cataloging my Bonzo Dog Band albums is screwing things up for anyone else.

It's not you, or anyone, "adding a few albums" (which you can do now; it's just not supported.) It's opening the floodgates.

In no particular order:

1. Movies and music come to completely dominate all the sitewide metrics -- most popular, currently "reading", recently added.

2. The average quality of Talk goes into the cellar, and keeps going downward from there. Remember what Tim said about how much better discussion is here than on YouTube? Forget about it. Sure, there will be some "book" related groups that remain mostly okay, but forget about trying to use Recommend Site Improvements, Site Talk, or Bug Collectors. They'll be sewers.

3. Site search for anything other than a specific title that hasn't ever been the title of a movie or album becomes basically useless. Author names? A few words from a misremembered title? Forget it.

4. One more place for books becomes just another anything-goes media site. Bleah.

A separate MovieThing? Even one where you could use your same login, and easily click from one to the other? Sure. But adding official support to adding them here? Please, no.

I really don't think the three sites would have to intermingle to that extent.

When you are on LT, looking at a book record, you can click on a link to take you to Amazon or ABEBooks to buy a copy. That does not mean that all Amazon reviews or chat automatically appear on LT. If there was a link in LT on the LotR record that took you to the MovieThing record for Peter Jackson's film, that does not mean that LT Talk would be overwhelmed with non-readers. It just means that you could look at the record in MovieThing, if you were a member of MovieThing. It seems likely to me that only those people in the target audience for MovieThing who are also readers would be tempted to come over and join LT.

61: But adding official support to adding them here? Please, no.

I'm sorry - I don't understand what you are saying with this final comment?

Ok, I understand how it might affect sitewide metrics. I guess my viewpoint is that I don't really care about the metrics anyway. Having "Terminator Whatever" replace Twilight as "most popular" doesn't affect me in any way.

62>

Which is why I've said all along that a 100% separate MovieThing or MusicThing would be fine. But not anything that mixes books and other media. I should be able to do a search on LibraryThing for "Lord of the Rings" and not have Peter Jackson's film come up as a result.

63>

What's not to understand?

Movies in an entirely 100% separate MovieThing? Fine.

Movies in LibraryThing? Bad.

I would want them to be separate myself; three sister sites which work in a very similar way, but are not the same site.

Give me a separate music site which my current data can drift to painlessly, I would be happy with that.

Emphasis on "painlessly"!

66: What's not to understand was the sentence itself I was referring to (your wording) - but I gather by 'adding official support' you just mean you don't support adding additional media to this site, period.

Surely having separate search databases for different media could be a default setting between sister sites - so Librarything only ever searched against books and you would have to select to search an alternative database.

Even within Amazon you can go into a 'book' area and excluded other things or just log on generally and see anything and everything when you search, only obviously its not preset so you have to select first.

69>

I gather by 'adding official support' you just mean you don't support adding additional media to this site, period.

Well, people are already adding music, movies, perfumes, etc. to LT. I don't like it, but that ship has sailed, and there's nothing I can do about it (even the perfumes). The volume is kept somewhat manageable by the fact that it isn't supported -- the data structures aren't set up for it, and it's not treated as an official use. It's "off-label", so to speak. But Tim making big splashy announcements about "Hey everyone, come to LibraryThing and add all your movies and music!" would dramatically change the relative numbers.

Even within Amazon you can go into a 'book' area and excluded other things or just log on generally and see anything and everything when you search, only obviously its not preset so you have to select first.

Yeah, but you have to specifically set it, every single time. Suboptimal.

If the media were separated and supported in the same site with a much better search interface, it would be easy. Especially since things could distinctly be marked Film/Audio/Print and folks could search accordingly. Further into that, all stats could even be separated by these distinctions - whole preferences could even be built (never catalog a single DVD or CD - no stats on either!).

As to the talk thing, I don't even get this argument - we can customize talk now and it's all a huge leap. From what I'm reading, it's coming across as, "film and music people are very different from book people and they will definitely overrun and ruin the site." I personally think that there are a lot more film and music people already on this site than anyone cares to admit (as evidenced by the numerous CDs and DVDs already cataloged).

Having been on two other DVD sites - as far as chat goes...it's nowhere near as active as one might think. The talk is just different. It's a lot more geared towards "what's coming out this week?" and "what are you watching this week?" with a sprinkling of the typical "best _____ scene?" questions.

And from an outside perspective - can you imagine what the interconnectivity with search separation would do to boost LT's profile and value?

As sister sites - it would just look like LT was trying on new skins to see which media fans were most willing to "play ball" with a pay model.

71>

If the media were separated and supported in the same site with a much better search interface, it would be easy. Especially since things could distinctly be marked Film/Audio/Print and folks could search accordingly. Further into that, all stats could even be separated by these distinctions - whole preferences could even be built (never catalog a single DVD or CD - no stats on either!).

I realize this is the best I can hope for, but I really don't relish the idea of having to specify "book" every single time I do a search on the site or browse someone else's library. Oh well, I'm sure I'll get used to it.

The Talk intermingling would mostly be a problem on the "site groups" which is where I spend most of my time anyway. I guess spending less time on Talk is probably a good thing in the long run though. :)

70: Well I have to admit I have added my film library but I only did it after reading a thread somewhere that suggested it was okay - along the lines of it's not set up for it but people do, so included DVD after the titles and use manually add (If I hadn't thought it was okay I wouldn't have done it).

On the data issue I agree about your pet peeve that you should be able to search for 'Lord of The Rings' and not get films chucked at you. But realistically speaking there are heap of data programmes already in existence that allow you to do just that so it must be possible.

I'm suggesting an 'opt in' model not an 'opt out'. By that I mean your searches default to only search the book media unless you select an option 'to include other media' - I used to manage a Bookshop and our stock inventory allowed you to do just that.

Likewise with stats and reporting (automated or manual) - If there wasn't the ability to run a Top 10 against books only the entire Bookshop Top 10 bay would have cards and wrapping paper in it. I had the ability set up automated reports by media type, department, publisher, category etc, etc. I have no idea of the intricacies of writing the programmes but the functionality already exists.

>72 lorax: I don't know if you realize this, but your posts are coming across very much in a "I shall take my ball and go home if this happens" vibe. I'm sure that you don't mean for this to happen.

For all you know, the search could have a default search setting for everyone in their profile - no changing it every single time. Perhaps you might want to get that request in early if this were to really happen.

You assume that the Site Talk will be overrun with these other posts - but you're putting something way ahead of the curve since there's also discussion to re-do a lot of the Site Talk areas now with the Bug Talk/Site Talk/FAQ/RSI overlap as it is.

Frankly, there would be so much overlap in those requests, it wouldn't be funny. Who's to say that someone cataloging CDs wouldn't experience a site-wide Bug? Or that someone cataloging DVDs wouldn't have an RSI that would benefit everyone? Or that a new book cataloger wouldn't have a FAQ question that wouldn't benefit everyone?

I'm not seeing where this is going to They'll be sewers. comes from. The YouTube level of discourse doesn't come from the fact that it's a media site - the YouTube level of discourse comes from several issues - lack of moderation, too many discussions to moderate, total anonymity, sheer volume of posts, speed of posting, banning has no teeth (acct user = free e-mail account)...it's a lot of things, but it's not video + music = bad posters.

I would pay money to have non-book things be kept off this site. If a separate site gets set up, fine, but I won't use it. I like movies and music as much as the next person, but not on LibraryThing. I'd quit using the site.

I would pay extra to be able to ignore (hidden) everything written by users I select.

But really, I'm just very glad I paid for LibraryThing as it is. I love it!

74>

I don't know if you realize this, but your posts are coming across very much in a "I shall take my ball and go home if this happens" vibe. I'm sure that you don't mean for this to happen.

No, it's more a "I will be sad at the loss of something I enjoyed."

For all you know, the search could have a default search setting for everyone in their profile - no changing it every single time. Perhaps you might want to get that request in early if this were to really happen.

I did mention that, way back upthread, as it happens -- and it was ignored by everyone talking about how they'd looooooooove to be able to see their stuff all together. I was responding to the very specific example of "But you can decide to search just books on Amazon!"

Frankly, there would be so much overlap in those requests, it wouldn't be funny. Who's to say that someone cataloging CDs wouldn't experience a site-wide Bug? Or that someone cataloging DVDs wouldn't have an RSI that would benefit everyone? Or that a new book cataloger wouldn't have a FAQ question that wouldn't benefit everyone?

Oh, there would be some. But there would also be a lot that weren't universal, and so people frequenting the groups would either need to be willing/able to deal with all media types, or make very heavy use of the red X.

I'm not sure I understand the concern over site talk - there are many sites that already have separate forums - even film sites might have separate forums for different kinds of films etc. There's no need for total mayhem although the range of topics already discussed on Librarything already suggests that many people like to exchange ideas and talk not directly related to books (although presumable at the very least we at least have being book lovers in common)

The point about what would happen if the site was aimed at / marketed at people beyond book lovers is unavoidable though - I think less than 5% of the UK populace are regular book buyers - although more will be readers than just buyers it sadly remains a minority pursuit.The dynamic WOULD change.

I joined foremost because I love books and I'd regret it if any extension worked as a detriment to the site and it's current membership.

First off, I'm pretty sure Movie/Music Thing would be a huge project and won't be any time soon.

That said, it could be an integrated site and be sort of like super-collections. Each user could set defaults to exclude the other types of media. Recommendations and recently added, etc. would have separate versions for each thing. So on my homepage, I might have the 'What LTers are Reading' module and 'What LTers are Watching' module, but not the What LTers are 'Listening To' module since I'm not to educated about music. Lorax could have only 'What LTers are Reading'.
Zeitgeist would have separate pages for the separate types of media, and I would never need to click on the music zeitgeist page.

Talk would have more groups. The sort of person who posts to Bug Collectors and RSI is the same sort of highly involved person who cares about the site, regardless of whether they catalog their books or movies or music, so I don't know that the common groups would necessary devolve appreciably.

It's not the type of media cataloged that makes an LTer, it's the passion and thoughtfulness that lead a person to spend a serious amount of time on a quality catalog and the desire for a quality cataloging process/tool.

IMHO, I believe that Librarythng should remain a BOOK site. If there were a MOVIEThing or MusicThing that would be okay but they should remain separate from Librarything. However, if it were determined that expansion was going in that direction I would hope that collections would be modified so that groups would be segregated in such a way that those interested in books only would be possible. I would hate to see the discussions intermixed as well as the development of a readers vs. viewers mentality.

I personally would be willing to pay to see the expansion of the sort possibilities. I would love to be able to sort on any field.

But, overall, I love LT no matter what. Great Job Tim et al!

I wouldn't use the Movie or CD part, but, most of all, I'd hate to see our developers time go to movies and CDs instead of books. That said, I have no objection to paying for added features on Librarything as long as they have to do with books. This site has brought me so much pleasure and turned into a great new hobby.

I agree. I think we should get Librarything completed with all the changes/improvements that we can think of/want before we expand to another media.

cyderry: Are you talking about the CK fields and Private Comments? Otherwise, I thought everything was sortable...?

I'd probably pay for a MusicThing site, with the caveat that I'd have to be able to have a collections-type feature that would allow me to catalog music on vinyl, music on tape, music on CD, music as MP-3 files, etc. I'd much prefer for it to be a sort of mirror of LT and for the talk/groups/etc. associated with it to be quite separate also.

But I'd also be fine with never having this and just keeping LT the wonderful book-centric site it is now.

Although I'm never as agressively-worded with my post, I fullheartedly agree with lorax on this issue (I usually do, actually).

LT is already muddied with non-book entries, and it already affects the data in a bad way. If music and movies are officially supported, LibraryThing will cease to be the BOOK site that it is right now. Yeah, we have the muddied data right now, but it's still primarily a book site. That wouldn't be true if movies and music were officially mixed in.

LT would become a LOT less attractive to me if everything about it (recommendations, talk, popular works, etc etc etc) was overtaken by other media. I'm not saying I'd stop coming here altogether, but I sure wouldn't enjoy it as much. It's one of the reasons I don't like some of those OTHER cataloguing sites. I LIKE that LT is for books. I'd really like it to stay that way.

Now, a SEPERATE -Thing site for other media, that'd be fine. Cool, even.

>80 SqueakyChu:, 81

Agreed! I was really looking forward to the completion of Collections so that the developers could finally spend some time on all the smaller features and bug fixes that people want. I really don't think it's time to start another massive new project, especially one that doesn't even have anything to do with books.

> 49: When I said I would gladly pay for music and movies cataloging I was assuming these would be on different sites than LT. After all, I already have a lifetime membership on LT. But I would also opt in for a MovieThing and a MusicThing.

And while I would love it if these databases could somehow interact - not a clue if that is technically possible I'm afraid - that wouldn't even be a deal breaker for me.

If music and movies are officially supported, LibraryThing will cease to be the BOOK site that it is right now. Yeah, we have the muddied data right now, but it's still primarily a book site. That wouldn't be true if movies and music were officially mixed in.

Well, actually, the construction of a separate MovieTHing and MusicTHing would in fact help de-muddle the book data because people would finally remove their movie/music collection and take it there. Assuming, of course, the sites were separate - which seems to be what everyone wants anyway.

I don't long for additional media here. Book/reading culture is very different from that of the movie/music crowd and I appreciate it.

I find RateYourMusic to be an adequate site for movies and music, although Movies are new and a few of mine didn't come up and I'll have to enter them manually. On the site you can get recommendations, see how popular your titles are, tag, rate and review them. You can make lists, make friends, add photos and join in discussions which are more real world than here, but moderated for the actual harsh stuff. Check it out all ye who need cataloging for the rest of your stuff. This is me there - http://rateyourmusic.com/~Bimmer_Nut

> 13 Also, shouldn't there be an easy way for people who are happy with LT to donate money to the site?

I was just thinking that as I started to read this thread... yes indeed! In fact, Tim, if you do it quick, I think you would find a lot of Collections-happy people throwing money at you!

> 45 One thing I really appreciate about LT is the lifetime membership. ...A cataloging site like LT exists in great part because of a lot of work done by each individual member. The thought that I could lose all that work if my circumstances changed...

I think a one-off membership fee with an option to make donations would make most people very happy. And I think many would make donations - I know I would, because I understand and greatly appreciate the huge effort that has gone and continues to go into improving and expanding this site. I have to think hard to remember all the new things which have appeared since I joined a couple of years ago.

> 33 I'd pay for the development of a completely separate music/movie/perfume/bobcat/whatever cataloging system that makes these objects completely 100% separate from books

I would also be very happy to pay for a music-enabled LT, whether integrated (so long as we can have an identifier for book/magazine/audio recording/video recording/sheet music/seashell/furniture/what have you) or as a separate site.

Having read the many sensible further comments on this, I think I agree that it would probably be best to have separate AudioThing and VideoThings.

#87 because people would finally remove their movie/music collection

I would guess that only a minority of those who have these items in their catalogue will remove them. People are pretty crap at cleaning up after themselves, plus a number of users may have catalogued music/movies and stopped using LT.

However I would grudgingly prefer a non-integrated MusicThing / MovieThing to an integrated system. As well as the points already mentioned it would mean no downtime to LT when music/movie functionality gets added. But I would much prefer everyone to work on bug fixing and new features for LT proper.

I would pay for a gift membership for my husband to catalog his music, on either a sister MusicThing or here. Then I could PROVE how much duplication he has so some of it gets cleaned out. I would pay to catalog scientific and professional journal articles, conference proceedings, white papers, reports, and similar literature. Since I keep my professional library of books here, it would be nice to have the rest of the literature here, too. Most of it is actually not in book form, or if it is a book (such as conference proceedings); it's the papers that I need to be able to find, not the entire proceedings.

Separate sites for MusicThing and MovieThing. Not integrated except for ease of transferring music and movies from LT to the others.

I'd happily pay for both for my husband. He'd have a blast.

I would pay for a "contained works" CK field, where you could list links (via title/work number or URL since touchstones are wonky a lot) of with works-within-a-work, including both omnibus and anthology publications. For works that are not currently published in stand-alone format (some but not all poems, short stories, essays, etc.) I am sure that a Thingamibrarian would arise to create a work to link to. This would be so much more efficient than every person retyping contents in a private comments field. I'd pay something for it, and I bet if several of us gathered together it would cost less to feed each day than a pony. :)

>93 SchanleyMedia:
The problem with linking the works in CK by their IDs is that every time when there is a combination, the work ID can change and the old work Number either to be included in the new OR it to turn out to be a totally different work (after fixing a bad combination) so someone will need to make sure those stay current. Just a thought.

93: As long as there was some type of split on the author page to separate out the smaller "works" too.

I noticed that several people have mentioned they have listed their DVDs. I see no harm in doing this. . . In fact only sheer inertia has kept me from doing the same.
The integrity of our community feeling really isn't threatened, and I can't see that it means more work for staff.

> 96: The integrity of our community feeling really isn't threatened

That is a hotly debated issue. First of all it might, if there would be a huge influx of people primarily interested in movies for instance. Second, for some people it's not just about the "community feeling" but also about functionality (currently reading, recommendations).

I can't see that it means more work for staff

That some users occasionally add movies? No. But developing dedicated sites (or functionalities) for movies - or music for that matter- certainly would. And as it stands I think LT isn't really a very good instrument for cataloging movies / music. It's not what it was designed to do.

96>

The integrity of our community feeling really isn't threatened, and I can't see that it means more work for staff.

That's a matter of opinion. I agree that the current low level of DVD/music/perfume catalogs is more an irritant than a threat, but disagree that this would hold true of a massive influx of people with no interest in books.

I don't have a preference for movie or music thing. I might use movie thing, but wouldn't pay for it.

Would want to be able to hop one to the other, but probably not have data, touchstones, searches mix. Wouldn't want the small staff to take time away from books to work on or maintain 2 new sites.

I would make a donation and have told Tim so several times, even sent a link from another site I am on that is set up to take them.

In terms of extra features, I would pay to have my wishlist not included in my all collections and the count not added to my total books. I also would like a robust Currently Reading module, that would add activity to home page and profile, and allow us to see what others are reading with different stats.

Other than that I am not really madly in love with any of the other items. Though I am behind the idea of bug fixes and completion of existing functions.

In terms of always having to set Amazon, I never do. I have a link to the book section and thats the only place I go, and I never have to leave even when searching.

Oh Ti-im! Will you put your big LT badge on and intervene with an official statement (about whether this is at all a possibility or we're just debating over nothing)?

What ejj1955 said in Message 83. Exactly.

The official statement is: I just asked the question. Or rather, someone else asked the question and I proposed on thing that, I think, some members would pay for. It's not going to happen next week or indeed anytime soon. It's not even going to be thought about soon.

Adding other media interests me. I won't rule it out. Functionally, it's a natural extension. At the same time, I'm not an idiot. However natural it is functionally, it's complex socially. I know that it would have to be handled very carefully. Maybe that means a totally separate site. Maybe it means segmenting the site or subordinating it in such a way that book-only users still feel it's their place.

>94 AnnieMod:
In speaking with Tim regarding a project I was going to do, I found that there is some forwarding of work IDs to account for combined sets. Separations could cause issues. I'm not particularly worried what the universal identifier for a work might be--a persistent URI would be nice but it could be a title/author text string (like the MARC uniform title)--but there should be some consistent way to make a reference. For works I have viewed, work IDs have functioned more consistently than touchstones. I argued for simple text listings before, but hordes of people proclaimed that they'd rather have NO information on contents than a system that doesn't allow them to have new records for sub-works; it was like collections for wishlists...a fancy system, or nothing at all, by golly!

(I tried to post this earlier and the site hung up; apologies for any duplication.)

Just to gently float the suggestion that perhaps LT could spend some time and (charge some) money setting up the data file to distinguish between books and non-books (at some point in the future).

This would work towards benefiting both camps and prevent further erosion of data integrity. It would allow any of the 700k plus members and future joiners who might want to list other media to do so with impunity (and the use of non-book cataloguing could be subject to an additional fee) It would halt pollution of the data file and enable automated reports and recommendations to run against ‘book data only’ by excluding all non-books by default. Potentially non-books could run on a similar basis on a parallel data file? Thus only members with non-books listed would generate non-book recommendations etc.

Once delineated LT might need to enforce a similar standard on non-book cataloguing as books (although the manual entry field as it is pretty wide open to quality abuse, isn’t the minimum just a title entry?)

It may even fend off the feared invasion of the virtual Visigoths who are doubtless amassing unseen, only a Google search away, even as I type.

Or is that just a ‘moon-on-a-stick’ suggestion? (And is that the sound of distant hoof beats…)

And is that the sound of distant hoof beats…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3ZOKDmorj0

Maybe Tim could organize the revival of Squirl. As far as I know, it was exactly what the perfume/clothing/bobcat people need - a place to record your collections of anything - Barbie dolls, Beanie Babies, matchbooks, toasters, action figures, whatever (even books!).

I would definitely pay for music cataloging!! I'm probably going to do it anyways. But all that i'd REALLY want would be able to have works/songs on a cd listed as a single spaced table. NOT as wrapped text nor as double spaced.

http://www.librarything.com/catalog/bobpjb_music

Songs (or book chapters) listed as comments are double spaced.
When i tried putting time into the summary field, they were line wrapped.

Heck, i'd happily get another lifetime sub if i could simply have single spacing! It would be nice, but much more work, for a music version to go out an look @ gracenote or cddb or whatever. But in the interim - a music version wouldn't need much more than renaming the variables to reflect music rather than books, a field which could (optionally) use single space lists. (I talked to my wife with whom we share our accounts and she actually prefers the lists double spaced, whereas i want to save vertical page space)

I think the double spacing is a recent bug : http://www.librarything.com/topic/67423#1346730

#106

On the subject of perfume I feel I must confess to feeling more nonplussed, many modern definitions of the word library include reference to books, periodicals, and other material for ‘reading, viewing, listening, study, or reference’ (which covers multiple media), but even a heretic like myself finds listing perfume somewhat leftfield.

109: Perhaps it has something to do with the memory-eliciting capacity of smells. One sniff from bottle X, and you suddenly recall all of R. L. Stevenson you ever read sitting on your grandmother's porch - not verbally, but effectively. A catalogue of teas would serve the same purpose.

Considering the unlikelyhood of anyone's cataloguing memories for their own benefit, I fear we may be dealing with a (well-intentioned but misguided) Mad Scientist. I hope this person will not pay Tim to give the site Smell-O-Vision capacity. We might find ourselves in the position of guinea-pigs, being driven to actions without our consent or awareness.

Personally, I have no desire to catalog movies or music I own. The DVDs I happen to own say very little about me since most of them are gifts and all the movies I really love I saw in the theater or got from a real library. I'm not even sure the last time I bought a CD from a store that I would have to drive to.

That being said, I can't think of anything for which I would pay more. Maybe a sweet iPhone app or Android app if I had one of those fancy phones. But I don't right now. And maybe a Facebook app, but that Facebook app would have to be awesome in some way I can't even manage.

To be honest, I think that the current pricing is about right. I don't know anything about LT's revenue streams, but I have to imagine that at some point the value of the data (tags, reviews, author pictures, common knowledge, translations, combinations, etc.) that we put in will be far more important than the 25 dollars I paid a long time ago or the 10 more dollars I might pay for some feature in the future.

However, if it ever came down to LT either (a) getting tons of adds or (b) going away. I would probably pony up another 25 dollars. :-)

I'd pay for a personal (not private) column, so I could enter and sort my series in my own fashion. (Maybe two columns, one for all those folks who want to tally up their book prices; I could find a use for that column, too.)

I certainly wouldn't pay for music / movie cataloging. I think LibraryThing should continue to do what it does best, and stay primarily a book cataloging site. I'm with Lorax on this subject.

I would pay for "contains / contained in" functionality and for better handling of identically named authors and co-authors.

I'd like to see a way to donate to LT, preferably through paypal. Maybe in connection with a PBS-like campaign once a year? ;-) (Imagine a buy-LT-a-new-server virtual bake sale...)

(edited to fix typos)

I would pay not to have a PBS style campaign.

114: A give-us-money-or-else-we'll-campaign campaign, then? ;-) Sounds like a win-win situation...

I just think they should put up a donation link, using Pay Pal.

I'm with lorax on movies and music. Please don't clutter up LT data with non-book stuff.

If you're going to do movies and music, start a new website, puh-leaze.

I must say, user-defined columns seems like a reasonable idea. Not that I particularly want any, but its something that all the products Ive worked on have had. Though no doubt those who want prices will want to see them totalled...

Abby has added a donate link on the Store page. Get those credit cards out!

Thanks Rorri. Mission accomplished.

113 / 114 - What is a 'PBS campaign' ?

Public Broadcasting System.

They raise money from viewers and corporations because they are non-commercial. So they have pledge weeks/months.

They have breaks where they ask you to call in. Its not the breaks that annoy me so much as the terrible programs they run in order to do it. Lots of music and snake oil salespeople.

Little Miss, think of a cross between a fund-raising telethon and a kidnapping where a TV network holds your programmes ransom and won't show them until you pay some money.

Aagh!

Kind of like 'Comic Relief' or 'Children in Need' in the UK then - Hours of unfunny comedy sketches and cringeworthy 'celebrity' versions of TV shows that get raunchier the later the hour and probably feature Bob Geldof (sorry SIR Bob Geldof) swearing at you at some point to hand over your ****ing money.

Yeah - but atleast with cable almost nothing short of a full on nuclear attack is likely to interrupt regular programming - and it's not like I don't have plenty to read to avoid it!

I'd have to vote with 114 on that one...*shudder*

re: PBS campaign: Well, I'm the one who mentioned it, but I must admit I haven't watched TV in over 12 years now, so maybe the memory of the awfulness had faded ;-)

(I got rid of the TV because then I could fit another bookcase in the living room...)

126: (I got rid of the TV because then I could fit another bookcase in the living room...)

Now that's what I call dedication to the cause, my father once got rid of his got rid of his because it was so depressing...

> 120 Abby has added a donate link on the Store page. Get those credit cards out!

Great! I've put my money where my mouth was!

I've donated, too.

I just got back from 4 days in Philadelphia. I promise I'll donate next month, but my credit cards have to cool off first!

I hope the link is permanent. I'd like to do an annual payment on my anniversary date.

I can't see why they would take it down. I donated (#121) and I put it on my email calendar for the same day in 2010.

Why couldn't they just post an icon to the blog and if you want to contribute, you click on it and it takes you to the place you send your money--- paypal, credit card, whatever, that way only those that want to would do it.

Because I suspect Tim is ambivalent about it.

I sent him a link to a site I am on that has a donate link (before LT did) and I asked him about donations and he never answered seriously.

Its not a problem being in the store, that way it doesn't look like they are asking for money, but its there if you want to use it.

Yeah, I have to admit I feel a little weird about it. But I'm amazed at how many of you have donated already! We're going to come up with something cool to do with the donated money...

Do we have a donate link I haven't seen?

Yes. Go to the store, or click on the store link in #120.

Yes, it was announced in msg 120.

We're debating what to do with it. I feel a bit weird paying ourselves out of it. Buy buying a bunch of tshirts to give out or whatever might be doable.

>139 timspalding: I haven't yet donated, but if I did, I'd hope that the money would be spent on "real" LT things (paying employees, etc.) rather than being given away in the form of t-shirts or whatever.

Well now I feel a bit weird, but I will put in my 2 cents. I donated freely and you can do what you want with it, but these are my thoughts on the subject.

My reason for donating was two-fold.

1. To thank LT and the people who create/maintain/work there for making it such a wonderful site that is useful and enjoyable.

2. To support a small company doing wonderful work. I don't want to come to the site and find a blank page or an empty hole one day. And I am not saying that as a reflection on your financial health. I am just being proactive.

Some Suggestions (Which you are free to ignore).

Put it toward buying another piece of equipment, or software, or funding someone to work on a promising side project; Put it in a rainy day fund, use it for salaries, or buy T-shirts and LT stuff to give away; Use it for graphic design, advertising, or marketing. Whatever LT needs or you think would be helpful, beneficial or fun.

I've donated and want you to give yourselves a party!
Pat yourselves on the back and just know I really, REALLY appreciate this wonderful place that you have made for me to find new friends and wonderful books!

I can't thank you enough!

Maybe it should include a "use this towards" note, like the alumni giving notices I get from my alma mater. You know, "use my donation towards faculty development / new building / scholarships / etc."

So by that logic:
*Use my donation to help fund an intern
*Use my donation to buy LT moo cards to give away
*Use my donation to buy cheese and wine for Abby
*Use my donation...

I haven't yet donated, but will when my own financial health improves. But I'd be happy to have it banked for a rainy day, spent on equipment, paid to employees, used for bonuses, spent on a party, etc. I agree that giving it away to LT members defeats the purpose.

* fund an intern to work on a side project
* give yourselves a party (including lots of cheese
* look at the suggestions at the beginning of this thread and pick one

but please, NO tee shirts!

*Use my donation to buy cheese and wine for Abby

Abby can have as much wine and cheese as she wants in Portland.

I agree - a celebratory party. Include transportation, and more importantly, babysitters for Tim & Abby's kids. Not someone who slams down Tim's supply of Dom and his Cheetos while slumped on the sofa watching "The Biggest Loser", but who gently reads to them (preferably in a British accent) from Shakespeare, or Chuck Palahniuk.

I just assumed it would all go into the general caffeine fund. Y'all ARE programmers, right?

Use it to bring me over to visit. I will baby sit the children, and gently read Fight Club to them in my Australian accent.

*swoons over Australian accent*

The fuhst rule of fight club ees: You do not tolk about fight club.

The second rule of fight club ees: You do NOT tolk about fight club.

I joined LT because it was a book and library site and I could log my library and talk with like minded persons.
I really would not like to see the different medias co-mingled. I am here to talk books, not music and movies.
belva

I think it was 112.

Yes, to get a user defined column for my own classification sustem. For that I would figure out a way to pay more. (Paypal isn't possible for me.)