Forum / Imbroglio

  • Dsc_7543.thumb
    Gloria Garfunkel
    Dec 21, 04:56pm

    im·bro·glio
    /imˈbrōlyō/
    Noun
    An extremely confused, complicated, or embarrassing situation: "the Watergate imbroglio".
    Synonyms
    entanglement - complication

    I started a groups called Bureaucracy that morphed into Imbroglios and still no one but me posts, which is embarassing. If no one else is interested I would like to be able to delete the group. There are tons of groups like this on fictionaut, that have just one or two contributors. This doesn't seem to serve the purpose of promoting dialogue. Some people just use the groups to post the same story on all of them for PR for more faves. Can't we rethink the purpose and process of groups. There is no interaction at all in them.

  • Mugshotme_(3).thumb
    Mathew Paust
    Dec 21, 08:39pm

    Too many, Gloria. Too much fragmentation. I've joined several, but the only one I've ever visited is the one Adam Sifre started recently, and I can never remember what it's called -- something about leaving your sugarcoats behind. Adam since became hospitalized, so the group had been idle. Actually, this forum seems to be a more logical place for discussions. It's more active anyway.

  • Frankie Saxx
    Dec 21, 10:43pm

    I guess I just don't see why this is a problem that needs rethinking. I don't see that groups hurt anything by being what they are.

    Should Fictionaut's population reach the point where trying to converse in the forums is like shouting at each other across Grand Central Station, maybe we'll need to retire to private rooms and they'll become more active.

  • Dsc_7543.thumb
    Gloria Garfunkel
    Dec 22, 12:47am

    I don't think groups hurt anything, but I also don't think they do anything at all and there's a potential there for something very creative that we aren't using, like mini-focus groups about writing. The current logic of the groups are chaotic, some based on litmags, some on themes. I totally don't get the litmag groups.

  • Frankie Saxx
    Dec 22, 11:28am

    I've always assumed that the lit mag groups were started by an editor of the lit mag or by contributers to the lit mag to showcase work that has appeared there.

  • Dsc_7543.thumb
    Gloria Garfunkel
    Dec 22, 03:47pm

    But most of the litmag instructions say anyone can post. I keep vacillating between joining a zillion groups to showcase my work and then quitting almost all of them because they are pointless. Will someone suggest what exactly is the point and purpose of the current groups, the logic behind them?

  • Frankie Saxx
    Dec 22, 04:19pm

    Whatever you want it to be. Whatever you can make it.

    That's what I think the point and purpose of most things are.

  • Dsc_7543.thumb
    Gloria Garfunkel
    Dec 22, 05:37pm

    That's very wise. I'm going to stop adding stories when other people stop adding them, otherwise it just looks like I'm a group hog. I'm posting only one story per group, two if there is absolutely no one else. I am not going to feel responsible to keep the group 'going.' if it goes, it goes. If not, it was a miscalculation that can just die away. I have to let go of feeling responsible to make them work. But I can't stop feeling that they could be something more, better, a contribution and instead they just hang around like dirty laundry.

  • Frankie Saxx
    Dec 22, 05:55pm

    Maybe inactivity in the groups is down to lack of obvious notifications? I usually just forget to check most of them.

  • You must log in to reply to this thread.