Betsy’s Comments (group member since Mar 06, 2011)

Betsy’s comments from the Science and Inquiry group.

So, we completed the polling for October 2025 using the regular Goodreads poll and a ranked choice option, and the final choice was the same. You can see the ranked choice final results here:

https://www.rcv123.org/results/CvGXCj...

Even though the final choice was the same, I think the ranked choice results are interesting. The total votes for "Tuberculosis" increased substantially as the rounds progressed.

I believe I'll continue using RCV for our book polls at least for the next few months, unless anyone has an objection.

I may not be able to read this book on time. I put a hold on the ebook at one of my libraries, but the wait time is estimated at 16 weeks. I may have to break down and buy it.

For October 2025, we will be reading Everything Is Tuberculosis: The History and Persistence of Our Deadliest Infection by John Green.

Please use this thread to post questions, comments, and reviews, at any time.

Please vote - again - for the book you would like the group to read, at the following poll:

https://www.rcv123.org/ballot/CvGXCjv...

which will be open through September 4, at 11:45 pm PT.

This is a different poll, but for the same selection of books. This poll uses ranked choice voting, in which you may vote for up to four different books, ranking them according to your first choice, second choice, third choice, and fourth choice. You can vote for fewer than four books if you wish.

Please note, I made a typo in the name of one book. It's "Air-borne" by Carl Zimmer, not Sir-Borne. 😏

Once the voting is done and the poll is closed, there will be up to four rounds of result calculations. If there is a clear winner (over 50%) immediately, among the first choice selections, it stops there. If not, then the candidate with the lowest number of votes is dropped, and the votes by the members who voted for that candidate will be switched to their second choice candidate. If there is still not a clear winner, then the candidate with the lowest number of votes in the second round will be dropped and the votes from the members who voted for that candidate will be switched to their next choice. It continues similarly through the fourth round.

I know you've already voted once. But I'd appreciate if you would vote again in the RCV poll. This will help us to determine how well it works, and whether it makes much difference. We're hoping that Ranked Choice Voting will result in more people being happy with the result and more willing to read and discuss the book.

Thanks for you patience during this process.

On the ebook wait list at my library. Shouldn't be much longer.

Hector wrote: "The link David shared work perfectly. Betsy do you still need us to test the QR code?"

No. Thanks. The link is much easier.

David wrote: "I really like this concept of ranked choice voting. Just as an experiment, here is a link to the same voting test that Betsy suggests:
https://www.rcv123.org/ballot/1/WfF4R...

"

David, that's great. I don't know why it wouldn't let me do it earlier. It even works in the phone app. Thanks.

Please vote for the book you would like the group to read, at the following poll:

https://www.goodreads.com/poll/show/3...

which will be open through September 1.

I know I said participating in the ranked choice voting test was totally voluntary, and it is. But no one has tried it. Or, if you tried it and it didn't work or you found it too cumbersome, I'd really like to know that.

I think our monthly book poll is a perfect choice for RCV. As Steve noted in message 17 above, the average winning percentage is less than 25% of votes. That's not very good. And I know for many polls there are multiple selections that I would feel comfortable voting for. But the Goodreads poll capability is very limited.

With RCV, you are allowed to vote for multiple choices, ranking them according to your preference. First choice, second choice, third choice, etc. Then when voting is over, if your first choice doesn't win, that vote of yours is ignored and your vote goes instead to your second choice. If your second choice doesn't win, then that vote is ignored and your vote goes to your third choice. This continues until one selection gets at least 50% of the votes. This theoretically results in more people getting a result that they like.

Goodreads does not provide this capability, but I found another site that provides a free, nonprofit RCV system. However, since Goodreads does not permit links to external sites, I had to find a workaround. That's why you have to go to my profile and scan the QR code.

It seems to work fine for me. But I need to know if it works for others and whether you think it's too cumbersome to use. I would very much appreciate if some of you would try it out and let me know what you think.

One thing I have discovered, it's pretty much impossible to do on a phone. Even using the desktop site. So I'd like to know how many of you use Goodreads exclusively on a phone because you don't have a computer available. I set up a poll for that: https://www.goodreads.com/poll/show/3...

Thanks.

Nominations are now closed. I'll be posting a poll in a day or two.

Hayley wrote: "Empire of AI by Karen Hao."

Looks interesting, but it's just a little bit too new, having just been published about three months ago. Maybe you could wait a couple months and nominate it again.

I'm testing whether we can use ranked choice voting for our book club polls. If you would like to participate (this is just a test, totally up to you), go to my profile, click "more photos". Then scan the QR code.

If you don't know what ranked choice voting is, I'll explain more later.

Thanks.

I also think I'll nominate Air-Borne: The Hidden History of the Life We Breathe by Carl Zimmer.

We only have three nominations, so I'm going to extend the nomination period until August 26.

Remember, you can renominate something you nominated previously that didn't win.

Undeleeb wrote: "I am choosing Blue Machine: How the Ocean Shapes Our World based on how wonderful Storm in a Teacup: The Physics of Everyday Life was. Alternatively [book:The Inv..."

All good books. But we've read them already.

Here is the discussion thread for Blue Machine: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

And here is the discussion thread for Invention of Nature: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Is anyone reading this book?

Please post a comment below to nominate a book for the group to read for October 2025.

Please do not nominate a book unless you have read it or you have the sincere intention to read it if it is selected.

Please use the "add book/author" link just above the comment box to insert a link to the Goodreads book page for the book you are nominating, so other members can more easily assess it. Apparently this only works on the desktop version of the site; if you use the app, the link is not available yet, so just be sure to put the full title and author.

To check whether a book has been previously read or already selected to be read, check the following list: https://www.goodreads.com/group/books...

You may nominate a book which has been suggested previously and did not win. You may nominate more than one book, but we might not include all of your nominations in the voting.

Authors and publishers may not nominate their own books.

Please do not nominate a book which is unlikely to be available to most members, such as one which was just published within the last four months or which is only available on Kindle in the U.S. We will be checking availability more strictly than we have before. Any book nominated should be available in at least one print version (hardback and/or paperback), at least one ebook edition, and at least one audio edition.

A nominated book should have at least 500 ratings in Goodreads and it's average rating should be at least 3.5.

Nominations will close on August 21 or when we have about 7 good nominations, whichever occurs first.

I continue to reflect on the amazing information this book contains, and what it might mean to us and our relationships to plants.

If plants are intelligent, what right do we have to play with their genetics and interfere with their lives and procreation. We are so arrogant. And short sighted.

I was never very impressed with vegetarians who profess to refuse to eat animal products because they are living beings. Well, so are plants living beings. And now we know (or suspect) that they are intelligent and complex creatures. I eat both animal and plant products and I would certainly not relish a future where we ate mostly synthetic foods. But we need to have more respect for those beings that are the source of our food. And much less cruelty.

However, it goes beyond just whether we eat them or not.

There is, of course, the Rights of Nature movement, which seeks to establish and codify certain legal rights of elements of the natural world, such as the right to exist without interference from humanity. https://www.earthlawcenter.org/

But that's for the macro. What about the micro?

The other day, I was cutting back the faded stalks of my daisies on my balcony, in hopes of encouraging a second bloom in the fall. But I got to thinking, does this interrupt the daisy's life cycle significantly? And what right do I have to do that? In fact, just forcing the plants away from its natural habitat into small pots on a condo balcony is a significant interference. I love my plants but am I being cruel without realizing it?

I don't have any answers, but I can't stop thinking about it.

One of the most amazing things I discovered in this book was the emerald slug, an ocean dweller that starts out mostly brown with spots. It eats algae and incorporates chloroplast cells from the algae into it's own gut, which causes it to turn green and enables it to photosynthesize. So it's both an animal and a plant. Incredible world!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elysia_...

I finished this book a few days ago and really enjoyed it. Here is my review.

My personal feeling is, well, of course plants are intelligent. They communicate. They respond to their environment. They share resources with both their relatives and others.

The difficulty is with us and our inability to comprehend intelligences that are so different from us.