For a drearier, scarier, better ‘downs.

[Durelin]

Since we're going over embarrassing threads and moments (oh, and to think there's an entire thread dedicated to that! Goes to show how smart we people actually are... ), perhaps a brief 'guide' to a good "The Books" topic, or any type of good topic, would be quite nifty.

Here's one question to start off that I've wondered about: is it better for the topic to be more general, or more specific?

(I would say a good "The Books" post, but I think that's far too difficult, since that could be so many things.)

[Mithadan]

What I sometimes do is sort of plot out an issue, thinking about what I want to ultimately say, but in my initial post starting the thread I will merely give a general overview, state a position and solicit comments before pouring out my whole theory or interpretation. Sometimes less is more. If you write a thesis for your first post members may be less likely to respond thinking the issue is fully addressed. Alternatively, members might be intimidated by a lengthy initial post, particularly if you are planning on using quotes or referring to less common texts.

[Lhunardawen]

I agree that it's the verbosity that I find intimidating more than the BDers posting. It's funny, but back when I still visited Books frequently, the words "Letters" or "Canonicity" or "HoME" (among others) were my signs to click on the Back button right away. Nah, Lhuna, don't even try.

When I do find an interesting topic, I tend to stumble on it too late, in which either all my ideas have been said, or I've taken too much time reading the posts that by the time I see the Reply button, I've forgotten what I was to say, and then become too lazy to gather my thoughts again.

So much to read, so little time. Sigh. Short, sweet, yet altogether very though-provoking threads are such a relief when they appear.

[Boromir88]

What I sometimes do is sort of plot out an issue, thinking about what I want to ultimately say, but in my initial post starting the thread I will merely give a general overview, state a position and solicit comments before pouring out my whole theory or interpretation.~Mithadan

I'll agree with that...I haven't started a thread in a long time, but I won't forget one of my earliest threads I started...about oaths, and I pretty much explained everything in detail, and I think it was Gurthang who said 'What's the point here, seems like you've explained everything.' (paraphrasing that). And I realized that there truly was nothing to argue or debate about. So, I approach starting threads differently now...kind of like laying down the foundation of what the argument will be about, and then later on arguing my side.

[Farael]

Well, I think we have reached somewhat of a consensus here, or otherwise everything that we wanted to say has been said. Since it was my proposition I might as well wrap it up a little.

From all the talk I gather that:
*Perhaps linking without discussing can be seen as discouraging, and posters should be aware that in spite of their best intentions this may just happen
*Even if it feels a little scary, the "old time posters" (meaning those that make long, very very elaborate posts) don't mind different views, even if not expressed as fluently.
*Thus, we should all take a big breath, choose one topic and give it a try!!

I think there was a small increase on movement on The Books... might just be a coincidence, but let's all go over there and share our thoughts! =)

This post, obviously, does not mean that the lack of activity on The Books sub-forum can no-longer be discussed, but I believe Jenny had something else to comment on... the floor is yours =)

[JennyHallu]

Um. This is embarrassing.

But I forgot.

[Lush]

My first thread in "Books" was, for lack of better words, totally retarded.

No pressure.

Oh wait, wasn't I the one talking about how I've been staying away from "Books" lately? Do as I say, not as I do, folks.