The Next Best Book Club discussion

Let's stipulate that there's going to be a creation of database site specifically for books in the distant future that looks exactly like IMDB... and the one that replaces many other alternatives such as goodreads.com, librarything.com etc.

With enough number of votes and activity in general that influences a lot of people to get into the habit of reading a lot of books even though they had never used to be a bookworm prior to the creation of this said site, how would the Top 10 in IBDB seemingly appear?

My guess is

1. Storm of Swords
2. To Kill a Mockingbird
3. Ender's Game
4. The Outlander
5. Harry Potter
6. Pride and Prejudice
7. Watchmen
8. Crime and Punishment
9. Catch - 22
10. The Book Thief

Why do you think IBDB would replace Goodreads?

Elizabeth, I think we're just speculating here . . . I don't think this website has a chance to replace goodreads http://www.ibookdb.net/.

I'm not really getting your second paragraph.

So this requested list would end up looking very much like our very own TNBBC Top Books list. Is this spam?

I had the same feeling...

Either way, I just don't think the post makes a ton of sense :P

Allison, I agree -- I read it a few times and still don't really get it. But, above is just my thought and I still stand by the fact that I don't see anything taking the place of GR.

Mel wrote: "Elizabeth, I think we're just speculating here . . . I don't think this website has a chance to replace goodreads http://www.ibookdb.net/.

I'm not really getting your second paragraph. "


That site you posted looks like a GR rip off.

Jackie wrote: "Mel wrote: "Elizabeth, I think we're just speculating here . . . I don't think this website has a chance to replace goodreads http://www.ibookdb.net/.

I'm not really getting your second paragrap..."

LOL, exactly!!

A) I don't get the point, and B) I think you underestimate the fanaticism of the Twilight fans in your list.

Might I add that after taking a good look at that site it's not even a really good rip off.

I like my fiction in books...

uhm, guys, I dont think she is spamming. If you check her profile, she has only posted this with us, and has posted a few times with us on other threads....

I agree that this post doesnt make a lot of sense. I reread it a few times and dont quite get the jist of it. To me, asking someone to come up with a top 10 list for a site is being kinda biased. You're going to chose the ones you like, or are drawn to....

huh.
whatever.

Whoops... I didn't know that there already exists something called Ibookdb.

To be honest, I haven't come across such a site, I used to be a frequent poster at Imdb.com, so therefore the thought occured to me to create a fantasy top 10 in a book site that is a parody of the Imdb and stands in parallel with it in everything else.

Sorry if you took my post as a kind of spam. I didn't intend to. I posted the same thing into the Imbd message board, and the thread is beginning to generate a lot of responses as if its the most sanest thing in the world. ;-)

Perhaps I'm kinda obsessed with the well known Top 250 Movies list, and the discussion centering around it. http://www.imdb.com/chart/top

Initial post wouldn't make much of a sense unless you're profoundly familiar with the Imdb Top 250 as linked above, and its famous voting/ranking system and think along the same line as to how a book database would look like.

Btw, I'm not a "she". I'm a he, funny how book people automatically assume that anyone using the nick around here could probably be a she, just because "she" reads a lot of books than a "he" in general. Feminist paradise. Just kidding! :)

Well, I have www.ibdof.com bookmarked because they have a genre list. Since this is already a part of www.iblist.com, I thought that's where this was coming from. And suggesting it might replace goodreads sounded kind of spammish.

@Fiona, I found the listopia to be rather vague and unclear. People just vote for their favourite or the one that is well known, and it almost always is a classic of some kind.

To be perfectly unbiased, One would have to make some sort of condition, like taking higher ratings/minimum 1400 votes/no-duplicate registration account etc in order to construct the top list.

Imdb has very effective policy when it comes down to a registration, they'd ask for confirmation via a credit card although they charge no money when granting you a registered account. So each and every vote is not duplicitous. I couldn't say the same thing about goodreads, amazon or librarything but still the ratings given for individual book around here is trustable.

If we had to take the goodreads ratings rather than a listopia, I'd think #1 would be The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins, that stands out at 4.67/5 mark.

There are many, many listopia lists. But does it matter? I mean, does the book/author win anything? Is there some personal satisfaction knowing you voted for the most popular book? That by having done so, you can actually follow the crowd rather than reading to suit your own tastes?

Sorry, I like the listopia lists because there are so many categories. There are best books of 2008, for instance, or the best classics, as you suggested, or the best YA, the best sci-fi, etc.

>There are many, many listopia lists. But does it matter? >I mean, does the book/author win anything? Is there some >personal satisfaction knowing you voted for the most >popular book? That by having done so, you can actually >follow the crowd rather than reading to suit your own >tastes?

Well, having the main list is really useful. Think about the future generation. They'd instantly know which ones to read and which ones to neglect without having to do a lot of research.

In 2006's, I didn't know a lot of english films, because I was too young at the time, and I'm a non native speaker. I just referred to the list, rented a Dvd and watched them one by one.As simple as that.

With books and listopias, It makes me want to do a great deal of research to narrow down the list to choose something specifically.

@Fiona, Thank you. :-)

Shredder, any list generated today will be outdated by the time there is a future generation. Don't allow yourself to be spoonfed - go ahead and explore.

The idea of a book database like IMDB is an admirable goal but I think logistically impossible. In 2007 there were 453 movies produced in the U.S. including M for TV. I have no idea how many non-U.S. films make it into the data base but let's say another 450. That's 900 films. Since IMDB also lists TV programs, let's say there are 200 new TV programs a year. That's 1100 new titles a year.

In 2006, according to Wikipedia there were 378,000 books published in the U.S and U.K. alone. How anyone could keep up with all 378,000 is beyond my poor imagination. Besides Google is going to catalogue every book in every library in the U.S. someday.

That's why Goodreads and other sites like it will continue to flourish. One, because they are social rather than just a data-base and two, because it's one of the few ways to get any kind of a handle on what books are worth reading.

IMDB is great and I access it regularly but when I need to decide what movie to go to or watch on Cable, I go to Roger Ebert. I've seen movies he didn't like that I did like but I've never disliked a movie he liked. I'm finding my "Roger Eberts" on Goodreads, something no database can supply.

Ed wrote: "In 2006, according to Wikipedia there were 378,000 books published in the U.S and U.K. alone. ..."

Really? I didn't know that.These could probably not qualify as paperback fiction. We're specifically talking about the work of fiction.

Fiona wrote: "I like IMDB but there isn't really anywhere to discuss the movies (as you said it's more a database) - I mean I know they have message boards but they're flooded with trolls and moroninc imbeciles ..."

Sure, there are some trolls out there, but there certainly are many cool dudes you'd want to enjoy reading their reviews about movies.

Shredder wrote: "Ed wrote: "In 2006, according to Wikipedia there were 378,000 books published in the U.S and U.K. alone. ..."

Really? I didn't know that.These could probably not qualify as paperback fiction. We'r..."

I assume these were both fiction and non-fiction, hard-covers and paperbacks. I don't know where to find a breakdown.

Question: when you say Paperbacks, do you mean just MM or Trade PBs also?

Question: when you say Paperbacks, do you mean just MM or Trade PBs also?

Ofcourse both. Probably shouldn't have mentioned paperback anyway. When we're specifically talking the work of fiction, I doubt if the number would go beyond 1000 per year.

Shredder wrote: "
Question: when you say Paperbacks, do you mean just MM or Trade PBs also?

Ofcourse both. Probably shouldn't have mentioned paperback anyway. When we're specifically talking the work of fiction, ..."

Shredder,

Without any data to back it up, I suspect at least 100,000 English language fiction books are published every year. I think "Publishers' Weekly" magazine would have the correct number for the U.S. but I believe you'd have to subscribe to get the information.

Richard wrote: "Fiona-i never thought about proportion on men to women on goodreads-(is there a "gender blindness"? but now that you bring it up i see that most of the people i have been exchanging comments with h..."

You're not a hermit anymore, Richard. Welcome to the Internet! Soon you'll want to load up your blunderbuss with sharp bits of metal and blast away at those trolls just like the rest of us...