Things you hate to see in an sffworld thread

[Rob B]

Look in any book store, or video store; Horror has it's own section, while Fantasy and Sci Fi are always combined.

Not so much. Only one Used book shop in my area has its own Horror section. In others Horror can be found in both Literature and Fiction and in Science Fiction & Fantasy.

 

[hawkwind]

Here in Toronto at least all the bookstores seem to have a separate section for all three. And all three sections seem to be getting larger and larger every year. Very good news.

 

[Evil Agent]

I still don't buy the Fantasy/Horror merge... but I've decided that I'm okay with it.

The elimination of author sub-forums, however, still bothers me.

 

[Eventine]

Evil, at the bottom of the page you might like to click the "Tags" link, then the tag with an author name - e.g. jordan or robert jordan. This will bring up all the threads that have had that tag applied, which is hopefully equivalent to (or soon to be) the old sub-forum.

 

[owl]

I'm a bit confused why some authors have their own sub-forums in the authors section, but the most popular (Martin, Erikson, etc) do not.

 

[Erfael]

owl,

The official author forums are an area where authors who visit the site are given forums where they can start their own discussions and interact with their fans. Some still visit quite frequently and others not so much.

 

[owl]

owl,

The official author forums are an area where authors who visit the site are given forums where they can start their own discussions and interact with their fans. Some still visit quite frequently and others not so much.

Ah ok. Thanks for the explanation!

 

[ben1xy]

I really like the new changes. Now, I'm looking towards popping by Borders and picking up some Horror titles!

Thanks heaps Admins!

 

[Dayne]

I really like the merge of Fantasy and Horror. I've had some difficulty figuring out where urban fantasy like the Dresden Files fit in. I think of them more as fantasy than actual horror, but then there were several vampire books in the old Horror section, so I always found it a bit difficult. I also hope it'll lead to more posts about horror books.

 

[Hobbit]

Thanks all.

Actually, it's quite interesting: we are getting more of the old Horror threads being looked at. Wasn't expecting that, it's a pleasant surprise.

All changes take a little getting used to, but once we're used to them it's like they've always been there.

We have a fantastic group tagging like crazy, so that some of those old threads don't get lost.

In the end, it might make things easier, once we're used to it!

Mark / Hobbit

 

[Werthead]

It's still early days, but I am somewhat concerned about the sudden and abrupt downturn in discussion of many of the individual authors that was going before we had the forum merge. I remember there being daily discussions going on in the RJ and GRRM subforums, and not far off that for Erikson. Now that seems to have screeched to a complete halt

 

[AuntiePam]

I like the Fantasy-Horror merge, but agree with Werthead about the author forums. I realize that I can search Malazan, Erikson, Bonehunters, etc., but having the threads all in one place was really convenient. Many times I'd go to the Erikson forum looking for one specific thing, but I'd end up hanging around and reading other threads.

I don't know if traffic is down all around, but it used to be that I'd open the board three or four times a day and always find something new. Now, not so much.

 

[nick1689]

It's still early days, but I am somewhat concerned about the sudden and abrupt downturn in discussion of many of the individual authors that was going before we had the forum merge. I remember there being daily discussions going on in the RJ and GRRM subforums, and not far off that for Erikson. Now that seems to have screeched to a complete halt

I totally agree. The author subforums really needa come back

 

[KatG]

It is early days yet, yes, but why do you think all of you have stopped talking about these authors just because they no longer have a sub-forum? The threads are there in the forum -- why don't you feel like reviving them and continuing the conversations?

I'm not asking this to be snide -- I'm sincerely interested in what this portends. When we had the sub-forums, I preferred them because I didn't want to talk about these authors specifically most of the time, and so liked that there was an area that people who did could go. But we were told over and over again by many members that the dedicated sub-forums felt like they were being exiled and they wanted to talk about these authors in the main Fantasy forum, not in a corner.

So when we merged the sub-forums into the main Fantasy forum, our big concern was that these sub-forum threads were actually going to take over, with these authors having lots of threads filling up the Fantasy forum. And many members feared this as well and so cautioned us against merging the sub-forums on the grounds that they'd take up the majority of threads.

Now you're telling us that the opposite is the case -- that if there isn't a sub-forum, you don't want to talk about these authors at all? Or you're trying but everyone seems to have disappeared. Is there a protest going on? I think if we can get a better idea why this is happening -- the opposite from what we expected -- then maybe we can see about improving the situation. Worse comes to worse, we can, as we've said, restore the sub-forums, but if we can't get people interested in talking about these authors in the Fantasy forum, then I wonder if we will still have the traffic for them if we bring the sub-forums back.

 

[Steve Brickman]

I think we need the sub-forums back, i used to go straight to the author forums that i was interested in, Jordan, Feist, Martin and Erikson and was glad that all the relevant threads were there, and i could respond to the ones that interested me, and yes, traffic was much heavier and every few hours at work i'd check and find new threads to read about the authors that interest me...
Bring them back please!!!

 

[AuntiePam]

It is early days yet, yes, but why do you think all of you have stopped talking about these authors just because they no longer have a sub-forum? The threads are there in the forum -- why don't you feel like reviving them and continuing the conversations?

I've been trying to think of an analogy to explain why having the threads all in one place is more conducive to discussion.

Maybe a cookbook analogy would work. Say I want to make a quiche. The main ingredient is eggs. In my cookbook, egg recipes are in one section. I go to the eggs section and find the quiche recipe, but I also see a recipe for frittatas. I'd never heard of frittatas and wouldn't have found the recipe if I hadn't been browsing the egg recipes.

Having the most popular authors in one place is like having all the egg recipes/author threads in one place. They're all right there in front of me. I don't have to know the name of the recipe/thread, and I'll find recipes/threads I didn't know existed.

 

[Hoodwink]

In the UK, at least, SF/Fantasy and Horror are indeed two separate sections and have been for many years. I've never seen a bookstore separate out SF from Fantasy. If the bookstore is small, the three of them sometimes share a space.

I know that Waterstones now are reporting that Horror sales have leapt up rapidly in the last few years and are giving more and more space to it (annoyingly, at the expense of SF&F in my two local stores).

I share your pain Werthed. If it wasn't bad enough, the limited shelf space available for Fantasy + SF is further eroded by film and franchise tie-ins. Do we really need two shelves of Star Wars novels? At least we've got Red Lion Books with their wonderful fantasy section down in the basement.


On the forum reorganisation, as you can tell from my post count I'm a newbie so I didn't see how things used to be. I do think that author subforums are a good idea for easily finding threads that interest individuals. However we must be aware of the mod/admin overhead and how this volume increases considerably with each subforum introduced. One solution is to find volunteers to increase the staff-level so these forums can be introduced but that's not always ideal or practicle.

Personally, I enjoy the less author-dedicated approach and the more general coverage of the genre which is no less dedicated for being less specific. It's easy to go and find a forum on the internet that's dedicated to one's favourite author/series after all. But I always grow uncomfortable with the undercurrent of fanboy obsessiveness that make such places nigh on impossible to hold an opinion that runs against the grain.

 

[KatG]

I've been trying to think of an analogy to explain why having the threads all in one place is more conducive to discussion.

Maybe a cookbook analogy would work. Say I want to make a quiche. The main ingredient is eggs. In my cookbook, egg recipes are in one section. I go to the eggs section and find the quiche recipe, but I also see a recipe for frittatas. I'd never heard of frittatas and wouldn't have found the recipe if I hadn't been browsing the egg recipes.

Having the most popular authors in one place is like having all the egg recipes/author threads in one place. They're all right there in front of me. I don't have to know the name of the recipe/thread, and I'll find recipes/threads I didn't know existed.

Okay, and let me reiterate here that I did like the author sub-forums, but to follow on your analogy:

1) You are happy to find recipe threads on eggs/Erikson that are new to you besides the one you are looking for, but not so happy to find new recipes/threads on other authors that are new to you besides the Erikson ones you are looking for. You want egg recipes while you browse, but not, say, pork ones. At least not when you were after eggs.

2) It is too hard to glance through the active threads in the Fantasy forum and see if any are about Erikson or whichever main author you like. Therefore, no one is participating in these threads, and they sink to the bottom of the menu.

3) It is too hard to find an Erikson thread that you had a discussion on and revive it, or to Search for Erikson threads.

So what we are looking at seems to be a convenience issue. If it is utterly simple and fast for you to talk about Erikson, you'll do it; otherwise not so much. This is something we'll have to take into consideration.

 

[AuntiePam]

So what we are looking at seems to be a convenience issue. If it is utterly simple and fast for you to talk about Erikson, you'll do it; otherwise not so much. This is something we'll have to take into consideration.

Probably 75% convenience. I'll be less likely to start a new thread because I'll have to search first. I need to figure out the correct search terms and hope that I didn't miss a thread. Same goes for adding to a thread.

Some of these books have been out for several years, so there are lots of threads and lots of pages in some threads. Wasn't that part of the reason for giving those authors their own forums in the first place? It made a lot of sense. (Even though it took me awhile to find those forums -- sometimes I'm just a dolt.)

 

[Rob B]

Well, it has been only about a month or so, right? We don't want to jump the proverbial gun to return the author forums.

Let's not forget one of the newer features of the forums: Tags. Threads can be tagged with many labels (much like blogs). For example, when searching for Erikson in Tags, here are all the threads that popped up.

Now, I didn't jump into the author specific forums everyday, but how diverse were the discussions there? Were the handful of threads that had new posts every day distinct enough from each other or was everybody repeating themselves in the various threads?