I definitely agree with the need for an alphabetic key feature to use for moving through your shelf. I would think this would be a priority.
I think that Shelfari has such a long list of proposed features and modifications that just the act of deciding what is to be done and when must be overwhelming.
One of the bottom-line problems with the alphabetic ordering issue is that the book data is suspect. When the users are tasked with keeping book data current, the data will be subject to error. It is beyond my comprehension why the catalogue doesn't conform to basic rules. The author is THE author. (Yes - there may be more than one author.) However, the editor? the contributor? What the hell?
No library in the world would shelve a book using the editor's name. Why is the Shelfari book page allowing these to even be considered as primary? It is because the members are tasked with flagging a name as "primary". Ridiculous. I've mentioned before that the burden of maintaining the catalogue seems to have been placed on the Shelfari member's shoulders. It is a fine thing to have input to it but I don't think it is very helpful, over the long run, to have the ownership of that task.
I like being able to add things to a book page but, IMO, there should be a protected set of data that is provided by the publisher or some reputable source. For pete's sake - Shelfari belongs to Amazon. You don't find the Amazon catalogue subject to member modification for basic information.
I like the author pages. I wish they were completed more than they are. That, however, is a feature that doesn't affect the catalogue.
My primary purpose for using Shelfari is to replicate my physical library so that I can have an easily updated and searchable listing of it. If it worked better, the Shelfari tool would be perfect for this purpose. I find it superior to Goodreads and it is that personal shelf that made me choose this site over that one. (I also just prefer the dense appearance of the pages.) With few exceptions, I only have entered books on my Shelfari shelf as I obtained them. I won't, until that shelf feature becomes more reliable, even attempt to input the titles of my personal library that I owned before joining this site. I'm worrying a little about what I have entered.That numbers thing is of great concern to me and I am tracking that issue with Amanda. It is a source of anxiety to me that the "number" of books on my shelf is actually the number of book icons on my shelf. That combining feature has rocked my understanding of how my shelf is managed.
My secondary reason for using Shelfari is to help me manage my reading - what books are on my TBR, what books have I read, have I written a review, how did I rate the book, etc. The only problems with Shelfari for me in this use are that ordering complexity and the hiccups using the list view for multiple simultaneous edits. (The bulk view requires that you make the same edit to every book per use.) I want to be able to make different changes to multiple books at the same time.
The last reason on my list for "why to use Shelfari" is the group feature. I wish it were better designed to facilitate actual book club processes. As it is, this is where Shelfari's raison de etre has become confused. The mission statement says, "Our mission is to enhance the experience of reading by connecting readers in meaningful conversations about the published word." The actual implementation is that of just a common social-networking site. Admittedly, it is up to the readers to conduct "meaningful" conversations and have those conversations be about the "published word." It is my opinion, though, that providing information about the actual "published word" in a reliable way would go further to help that than worrying about the look and format of the site. In addition, spending some time on some basic group admin and group management features would encourage movement toward that mission statement. It wouldn't hurt to make the group shelf actual work for a book-club group either.
I do realize, however, that appearances are very important. I do not envy Shelfari's job in trying to reconcile where to put scarce and expensive development resources when faced with that huge list of enhancements that I mentioned in the start of this WAY TOO LONG post!
Closing, I also want to mention that I have never found a site so responsive to its members. The Shelfari team (especially Amanda!) is simply amazing in both providing avenues such as this group for us to moan, rant, and complain and they ALWAYS respond to emails. That builds loyalty and trust.
It certainly has for me.
Loyal to Shelfari no matter how irritated I get,
DL
