Any authors you feel deserve a spot here?

[ManTimeForgot]

I was actually a bit surprised to find out that Mercedes Lackey didn't have a spot amongst the authors "sub-forums." Are there any authors that any of you all feel should have a spot but don't?

MTF

[Lioness]

There are many authors I enjoy that don't have a spot, but to have a dedicated subforum an author must have at least 5 active threads about his/her work in the General Book Discussion area.

Anyone else feel free to correct me if I've got my figures wrong, but I think that's the gist of it.

[Overread]

I belive Lioness has it right - 5 active threads (or there abouts) are needed for an author to be considered for having their own section on the site.
still - nothing stops you talking about other authors in the general section

[Teresa Edgerton]

Yes, we don't start a forum for an author unless a certain amount of discussion already exists. As far as Mercedes Lackey is concerned there just hasn't been that kind of interest around here so far, which is surprising since I know that she is a popular author. However, new members come in all the time with different interests. The best thing you can do if you want to see more discussion (and perhaps, eventually, a sub-forum) for a certain author is to start a thread or two on that writer's works and see what happens. If those threads lead to more threads and a sustained interest, a dedicated sub-forum would certainly be taken under consideration.

[Parson]

I always thought it was 5 threads. If active threads means going at the same time, I would guess very few authors could clear the bar. My all time favorite SF author who has sold who knows how many books -- I would guess a million easily -- David Weber has has no sub-forum. He might rise to the 5 threads category, but 5 current, no way. I'm guessing he's much more popular in the States than he is GB or elsewhere.

[Teresa Edgerton]

By saying that an author has to have five active threads, we mean (for instance) that threads that only have a handful of posts over the entire life of the Chronicles and the last post was two or three years ago don't count. And of course there needs to be some current discussion on the author.

There are authors who have five threads only because every year or two someone comes along and starts a new thread that almost immediately dies. There are also threads that attract one or two posts per year.

If you hunt up all of the Weber threads, Parson, and find that there is much more activity than that, send some links to one of the moderators and see what happens.

Edit -- Ian Whates and chrispenycate read his books. If you can come up with the links, one of them might make a good advocate for a sub-forum.

[chrispenycate]

I consider the authors list as mainly a very effective way of stopping George Martin from clogging "general books" to a halt.

No, not really; but if all the authors that somebody or another thought were important were piled in, it would make it impossible to find anything in there.

Indeed, I would be in favour of removing Spider Robinson and Kage Baker, both authors I know, read and enjoy( and with one of whom I have had a correspondence), as not being sufficiently encumbering to require segregation.

So, don't expect me on any crusades for additional subforums, though I won't impede anyone who does.

[Teresa Edgerton]

Originally Posted by chrispenycate

Indeed, I would be in favour of removing Spider Robinson and Kage Baker, both authors I know, read and enjoy( and with one of whom I have had a correspondence), as not being sufficiently encumbering to require segregation.

Yes, I'd be in favor of that, too. Older sub-forums that don't get any traffic anymore simply clutter up the Authors board -- which would be overwhelmingly crowded if we made a new sub-forum every time someone says, "Why isn't there one for (fill in the blank)?"

But sometimes there is enough interest to warrant a new section.

[Parson]

Teresa,

I did the search and was pleasantly surprized at the number of times his name was mentioned 99. There are 9 with David Weber in the title, but one of those has no connection to Weber that I can see at all. But over all his threads gather only sparse interest. If I want to talk about him, I should make the effort. It does not look to me like he deserves his own sub-forum on Chronicles.

[Dave]

I don't think those rules are hard and fast, but rather a guide that Brian can use when people ask why ****** has no forum. He makes the rules, so he can break them too.

Just as the authors without forums should not be seen as out of favour, those authors who have forums should not be seen as favourites, or that Chronicles endorses them, it is simply that at some point in the past there were enough threads that they clogged up the book forum, or it was seen that there were enough threads that we could encourage even more if they had their own forum.

That is not always the case; puzzlingly giving an author/TV show/Film their own forum can sometimes actually reduce activity.

Don't ask me why, it's just my own observation. As an example, why did so many people suddenly come here, seemingly all at once, and start posting about Janny Wurts?

[Lioness]

For the sole reason that they wanted a sub-forum, if I remember correctly. Someone asked and was told that there had to be a certain number of active topics, and then everyone started talking about her.

[Overread]

yah we got a Wurts invasion round that time -

[GOLLUM]

That appears to be what happended. Still, this was obviously not a flash in the pan thing but is clearly demostrating a sustained interest in this author. I personally like Janny's work and in fact have everything she's ever had published and I also happen to correspond with Janny but I promise it wasn't me who started all this....

I have plenty of other authors I like e.g. Magic realists from South America, Surrealist writers etc...who wouldn't get a guernsey mainly because it's a fairly niche area that not a lot of members are probably into. I suppose that's where "spreading the word" can be an effective mechanism for change given enough momentum.

Anyway, I think the suggestion of "clearing" some authors from the boards who haven't really been garnering much interest over a long period of time is a sensible idea.

[kythe]

To me, it makes sense to have some archived sub-forums even if they haven't had apparant interest for a long time. For instance, if I read something new, I tend to want to read threads about it to see what others think. When you post to a very old thread, there may or may not be any response in return since those posters may not even be a part of the forum anymore. It can still be interesting to read other people's interpretations of the books.

I've always been disappointed that two of my favorite authors don't have sub-forums. I feel like I just read a different kind of fantasy or something. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one, and that it doesn't mean I'm just weird.

[Grimward]

Clansman and I, along with Dekket and The Procrastinator are (proudly, I might add) among the culprits of said Wurtsian Invasion. As might be expected, Janny has a site with a number of threads on it dedicated to (what else?) her stuff. I found both that site and The Chrons simply by searching for 'Janny Wurts', although I went to her site first, and also saw a reference to the Chrons there. The Chrons, of course, stands on its own merits, a fact that quickly becomes apparent to anyone who bothers to look past their initial topic of interest herein. So, while it's true that we registered, saw threads like "Most Underrated Author" and "Favorite Author", and put our 2 cents in (a little more, in Clanny's case), clamoring for a sub-forum for Janny, we also almost as quickly backed off of it, and not only after receiving "noob" (we being the "noobs" to the site!) direction from Theresa and other moderators as to the reasons why forums are created (and, occasionally, taken away). As for the initial concern that we registered ONLY to tout Ms. Wurts, I think we can (and have!) put that one to bed.

For myself, I'm a little surprised that Alan Dean Foster doesn't have a sub-forum here. Granted, he's done a fair number of "media novelizations", but he's got plenty of original work out there, too, more than enough to generate talk here (I would think!). Apparently not the case....