litga.org won the vote.

There is now something sort of vaguely resembling a website there. :)

I put a logo poll up on the front page, but its too primitive to take multiple answers, so please comment down below saying what your three favorites are.

There is also a forum. (which, in theory, you will be able add comments to but not start topics on unless I've verified you as a "member" rather than just a user. Sorry for the inconvenience. If I recognize your name I'll verify you the next time I log on, or you can drop me an email and say "this is me, please verify me.")

I haven't got the rating stuff up yet, but there is a primitive "add a book" page. Please, I'd like to concentrate on *recent* books right now. Stuff published in the last five years or so. When I've got the rating and the sorting capabilities up and tested, then we can start adding all our older favorites too.

You are also currently limited to a list of publishers I pulled off the sfwa site. This is not because I think we should never allow self-published, e-published or small print books to be added to the site, but because I'm not willing to allow them to be added indiscriminately. I'd love to discuss setting up some kind of review board for them or something, because I actually think it would be really cool to have the good stuff get recognition from litga.

The list is also incomplete -- if you need a publisher added let me know.
(Cross posted to rec.arts.sf.compostion and sff.workshop.critters)

litga.org, or litga.com?

(If nobody cares, we'll flip a coin or something.)

As a reader, which would you find most helpful:

1) 7 out of 9 litga members reccomend this book

2) the average rating of this book is 4 out of 5 suns (9 ratings)

3) most of the litga members who read this book classified it as "grim in spots but with a cheerful ending"

Possible other classifications...
"generally sunny"
"dark yet humourous"
"grim"
"this book got widely varying responses from litga members"
"most members passed rather than vote on this work"
"an insufficient number of members have read this yet."

Also I have 4 suggestions for a logo/mascot, and I'd like at least another couple suggestions before I put it to a vote. (This is brainstorming, people -- suggest dumb things! It helps other people come up with ideas when they have something to go "Ug, not that!" about.)
A Pre-Raphaelite maiden
An angel
A sun
A swashbuckler
... a swashbuckling sun? I could *do* that. :)

And a final comment just for the lj community...
I have a moderated membership, but I'm not doing much in the way of moderation. (There isn't a lot I *can* do, other than to look up you all before clicking the "yes, let them join" button, which is a pain, and doesn't always tell me much.)
It might be better just to have more people with "zap inapropriate posting" powers instead.
Anyone here want to be given a position of power?
Does anyone with more experience running lj communities have suggestions to offer? This is the first community I made that anyone might actually want to *join*

(And yes that does mean I have made a community that I thought no one would want to join... or at least, no one would want to join before 2012 or so.)

The LITGA League is looking for members, and for suggestions of fantasy and science fiction books that are "not grim".
("And", she says as she looks ruefully at the empty userpic spot, "ideas for a logo and/or mascot would be helpful.")


The (tentative) LITGA League mission statement is: to promote the creation and
distribution of "not grim" science fiction and fantasy, largely by
making it easier for readers to find this kind of book. (This is to the
benefit of readers *and* writers *and* publishers so we hope to recruit
membership from all of those categories.) "Not grim" does not mean that
nothing bad ever happens. We're not trying to promote boring books.
We merely require a happy ending, and that the overall feel of the book
is not "dark","gritty" or "depressing".

Current activities: Create a website promoting LITGA recommended
reads. This will be done by A) soliciting suggestions of "not grim"
books, B) having the LITGA membership vote on the suggested books, C)
posting the books that pass the voting stage onto the website, along
with helpful warnings and etc.

I think it would be a good idea to try and sort out the books most
likely to be "new" to readers, by having a special category for recently
published, not next in a continuing series books. These would be
randomly featured on the home page, while the older, more established,
next in a series books are merely listed. What do you all think, good
idea, or bad?

Privileges of membership in LITGA: Er... none. But hey, it's not like
you paid anything to join.

Responsibility of LITGA members:
1) Read books. (No requirements on which books, but you will be sent a
list of books that have been suggested that not enough members have read
yet to pass the voting requirements, that it would be nice if you gave
special attention to.)

2) Vote! Vote honestly. Only vote on books you have actually read.
(You don't have to have *finished* them to send in a "too grim" vote
though.)

Does this sound interesting? Fun? Doomed to an early and uninspiring death?
Are you willing to give us a hand?
Let us know.