My mooch ratio was .85:1 and now it is 1.16:1. My understanding was that the bonus was to encourage international mooching. I have almost 200 points in my account and I can see where eventually, if I continue to mooch internationally (which I do quite often) I will get to the point where I will be unable to continue to mooch books (even though I earned the points by sending out books) because my ratio will be too high. At that point I will either have to discontinue using bookmooch or post even more books and get more points that I cannot use.

No, if you continue to mooch internationally and NOT send books internationally, what you write about will happen. If you mooch and give internationally in equal amounts, then there's no problem.

But, to look at your account specifically, you have:
Mooched/given: 972/672

Think about BookMooch as a whole for a minute: how can the entire BookMooch economy survive if I encourage everyone to mooch more books than they receive?

You've received 1.45 books for every book you've given, and you've received almost a thousand books. It's great that you send internationally, and the fact that you've sent more books internationally (236 books) vs mooched internationally (176 books) is the reason your mooch ratio is 1.16, and not 2.02 (which is what it would be, taking into account your pending mooches).

I'd say the current system has rewarded you well: because you've sent internationally more than you've mooched internationally, your mooch ratio is well within the less-than-2:1 mooch ratio limit.

Isn't the (old) mooch ratio calculation (& extra mooch points) supposed to encourage international mooching??

It's supposed to encourage international giving, and it still does that.

If you give a book internationally, you get:

1) 3 points to spend in your country

2) a 3 point bonus to your mooch ratio to spend in your country

To reiterate:

1) if you send a book to another country

2) you get to mooch 3 books in your country

3) OR, you can mooch 1 book from another country

Send a book to another country, get a book from another country -- that seems fair to me.

Or, if you don't see books internationally you want, you send 1 book to another country, and get 3 books in your own country.

One of my mooching acquaintances who is from a country with a relatively small mooching population has mooched 302 books and given 435. But because he has to largely mooch internationally, given the size of the mooching population in his country his mooch ratio is 1.72:1. In other words, he mooches books internationally, but gives quite a few to his fellow countrymen. This new ratio system seems to penalize moochers in countries where there are few options but to mooch internationally, especially if they want to read books in English and are not in an English speaking country.

This is an interesting case, but I think it's still correct.

The basic idea of BookMooch is the 1:1 trade. You give a book, you get a book.

Your example above is from someone who presumably has very few books that other people in other countries want to mooch from them. Therefore, they tend to mooch internationally but send books domestically.

That situation can't exist forever, it's essentially an imbalance of trade, with BM books flowing into that country, but not flowing out. On a macro level, that won't be good for the health of BM.

There are two solutions I see:

1) over time, other members will appear on that country who have books that people outside that country will want, and that will balance the country's trade balance out

2) this person needs to find books that people outside their country want, if they want to be able to mooch internationally.

It's very expensive to send books internationally, often more than 3X more expensive. It's important not to take this for granted. If you are willing to pay the extra postage cost to send a book internationally, I think you should be rewarded and be able to ask someone else to do the same.

My straight ratio, for instance, would be 1.27. But my adjusted ratio is 1.33. If i was to mooch my next 10 books internationally, but send my next 10 books domestically - which i can afford to do - my mooch ratio would rise to 1.37 even though i'd be mooching on a 1:1 basis. Keep in mind that as a Canadian, i wouldn't be saving money by sending these books domestically - far from it! I can't see how this change makes any sense. It seems that a desire for "symmetry" is outweighing concerns about encouraging international mooching, as many people are pointing out.

The goal of the points system and mooch ratio is *not* to encourage people to mooch a book from a foreign country if the same book is available in your own country. That would be a misuse of resources: more expensive postage, more airline fuel being used to send books further.

The goal of the points system and mooch ratio is to fairly compensate you if you pay the extra money to the postal system to send a book internationally. That's all it's trying to do.

Therefore, if you mooch a book internationally, that causes the sender to pay a lot more to their postal system. If you then give a book internationally, you've had to bear a similar cost, and they should cancel each other out.

Also note that in your example, you would still be way within the 2:1 mooch ratio limit, and not have any restriction on being able to spend your points.

I'm just adding to all the things said above, but it's still worth the repeating. You had stated previously that the ratio imbalance was a bonus to encourage international mooching. Logically, this change (especially on top of your proposed changes to the points allocation for international mooches) can only be because you no longer wish to encourage international mooches? John, what's really going on here?

Two things prompted this change:

1) I've received many emails from people who have noticed that certain users have hugely imbalanced mooch/give numbers. Often, they would be mooching hugely more books than they were giving. They'd be mooching and giving internationally, but with the old ratio system, you could give as few as 20 books internationally, and receive 120 books internationally (2:1 ratio at a 3x bonus point).

2) As I posted elsewhere, there are some macro-economic signs in the BM economy that some corrections need to be made. Among the more troubling to me is that the total number of books in the system has been declining steadily:

The mooch ratio calculation as it was would contribute to this problem.

So, based on three observations:

1) it "feels right" to many people who wrote to me (and to me) that if you send a book to someone in another country, and pay the extra postage, you should be able to ask someone to send a book to you from another country. That's fair. But, you shouldn't expect more of a reward than that.

2) the old system in fact did lead some people to mooch internationally a lot more than they gave

3) there are some signs of ill-health in the BM economy at a macro level

So, that's why this change was made.

In addition, I saw that Admin Mark made a bunch of comments on the LibraryThing forum, and I'm copying them here as I think they do add to the discussion:

Mark wrote:

The ratio limit only comes into effect when one goes above 2:1, even with this change the accounts I have looked at thus far are still below it, but if anyone is over 2:1 now that was not before, an accommodation can be made. Members quite often suggest something closer to a 1:1 ratio, which is what some other sites seem to favor. I think getting two books for each one sent is quite generous, even though many people choose to either give more than they send or maintain a 1:1 out of their own sense of fairness. The problem was generally perceived to be members in the largest countries, mainly the US, who were not sending books outside of their countries. So the idea of the original change was to try and encourge these members to send more books outside of their own countries. But as the bonus was not evenly applied, people who were equally sending and mooching to other countries had no real ratio limit as other members did, this struck some people as unfair. Quite a few accounts would have been able to mooch 3 or 4 times as many books as sent in time due to this, which was not seen as healthy to the system overall. He really, really does care a lot about international trading. There are many reasons why the other trading sites have not attempted to be international, it has taken a great amount of work to keep international trading growing as it has been through time on Bookmooch despite ever-escalating postal fees, cultural/language barriers, security issues, etc.... I can see how it does seem unfair, but he didn't have a way to make the change and not have it reflect one's entire trading history. I'm sure John will respond. My sense is that he did not see many accounts that would go above 2:1 with the change so he did not see it as blocking people's ability to mooch, even those mooching many more books than they send. The ratio acts more to let someone know that they might be approaching the upper limit, and so few people actually get too close to it. Competing notions of fairness are very difficult to resolve. He is trying to find a balance between encouraging people to send internationally, but still having a reasonable ratio limit in place that is evenly applied. I did look at a series of accounts that had mooched close to twice as many books as they had sent (some with thousands of trades) and they were still not over the 2:1 limit. I hope it is clear how very rarely anyone is actually blocked from mooching based on their ratio limit, and even if it were to begin to happen, it could be lifted for a member in good standing who had points to spend.

2. The points don't work out. If you really want even ratios, then get rid of the extra point for sending internationally. (Note that I think _that_ change would kill the site for international members.)

3. Members who find and list wishlisted books do not necessarily get international mooches for those same books. This change in the ratio makes it even less likely for those intl mooches to happen.

4. People who live in smaller countries want any mooches, even if the other member does not send internationally.

5. Fair is not the same as good.

Edit: I just noticed this part, which is a reason for a change. "With the old ratio system, you could give as few as 20 books internationally, and receive 120 books internationally (2:1 ratio at a 3x bonus point)." Then change the ratio so intl mooches count as 2 books, not 3.

The About/Points Explained pages still say that international mooches cost only 2 points (as of a few minutes ago). From what i can tell, this is just an adjustment in ratio calculations, but not a change to the actual point cost of international mooching -- is this correct? (It would definitely discourage international mooching if the point cost has gone up.)

I appreciate that you are trying to prevent mooch imbalance (as in the example you provided). Is it possible to say how many members will now be pushed to near or over the the 2:1 ratio? e.g. how many people are actually going to be negatively affected by this change?

Also, you are assuming that the declining curve of total inventory is due to some economic issues in bookmooch. It might actually be for some other reason, e.g. saturation among those likely to be interesting in book mooching, lower key participation due to our current economy, etc. Do you have any information on comparative numbers for other swapping sites?

thanks

I understand you are always trying to balance so you can make as many people happy as possible, but changes should not be retroactive.

John, I understand that you mean well, but that just sounds wrong. To receive these 120 international books, one would have to spend 240 points. Sending 20 books overseas only gives you 60 points. The other 180 points have to come from somewhere, don't they? Either listing 1800 books (unlikely, but if it happened I'm sure a significant number of books in that inventory would find a new home pretty quick) or sending 180 points to fellow country people, etc. If you want to justify the 2:1 ratio and how the new system helps it be fairer, I'd like to read a more realistic example.

As an exclusively international moocher (both active and passive, because there are essentially no other BM members within my country that share my interests as far as book topic or language is concerned), I find it very difficult to understand the seriousness of what you consider problems in the BM point system - all I see is how the proposed solutions make international mooches rather less attractive. If your aim is to make sure that the number of listed books stops declining, I'm afraid your changes will indeed achieve this goal but for the wrong reasons: the number of listed books will remain high because less people will mooch them!

Without participating members a site cannot continue to grow.

This has been a great community for book lovers and has generated lots of good feeling - look at the 'I give a little' for example.

Sadly I think this will see a change in the uplifting feeling of the site, a lot of long time users, new members, angels and international mooches will surely slow down/stop as a result of this.

It is such a shame. We all, I am sure, appreciate the time and effort put into this site - please listen to what the majority of members would like.

The best person I've mooched from (who has gone out of her way to find me books that I was looking for, or to suggest books and take pictures of them so I could determine if they make sense for me)has been suddenly dumped into the illegal ratio category. The fact that she's been able to get to the point where she has enough points to be in the illegal category is because people recognize that she's doing good things (setting up a local lending library) and have donated points to her. Or they appreciate her efforts after she sends a book and sends a "smooch". It's actually quite hard to get into the illegal zone without people really loving you... part of the community aspect of the site.

there are many more straightforward indicators of abuse of the system than your mooch ratio. I think one might be a "ratio of mooch requests from you to mooches ultimately sent" or "% of people canceling a trade on you before a book is sent." I think people spending points earned from books they haven't sent (and may never send) is the worst abuse on here.

On a more serious note, I'm thinking of asking my brother to return the gift I bought him for Christmas as I spent more on him than he has on me. This whole retroactive way of doing things has really opened my eyes! In future all gifts will be bought on a strict £ spent = £ received basis.

I assume it is simply easier, technically, to make the change retroactively -- but I think people would appreciate knowing this. And even more, they would appreciate you taking the time to do the more-technically-difficult thing, and fix it so this change is not applied retroactively.

Whether or not this new method is fair, or right, or good, you must acknowledge that people acting as they did under the old method were doing nothing wrong at the time. Their previous actions should not be retroactively punished, and they are understandably very upset about this.

Still,the point stands that by and large, people earned points, either directly or indirectly, by inspiring people to support them. .. I'm not sure that using the ratio to limit their ability to use those points, makes sense.

However, I agree that the graph showing the number of books in the system *is* worrying. To me, the solution to that is to encourage more books to get into the system, not to mess with other parts of the system.

1) Getting more people to use Bookmooch. More people starting to use the site means more people adding their books to receive points to start mooching themselves (which is also an argument to not remove the points for listing books, at least not for the first 100 books or so).

2) Somehow giving existing users the incentive to add more books and more desired books.

-- I suggested before to give point bonuses for adding books that are on many wishlists, and I still think this would be a workable idea.

-- Someone else suggested the possibility of a bonus for adding books that are less than a certain age, which I think could also increase the average desirability of books added.

-- Another thing that could be considered would be to make it easier to swap magazines as well. As far as I can tell, there is currently no official way to say that something is a magazine. I suppose a binding type of "magazine" would be reasonable. Still, some people are entering magazines to their inventories but since this is currently somewhat haphazardly done it is sometimes a bit difficult to search for them. Even so, I have found and mooched a few and would happily get more. Some of the magazines I've gotten actually contain as much reading as many novels.

It cost me 19$ a few weeks ago to send a book internationally and 20$ domestically but the prospect that I could get other books from a moocher either internationally or otherwise keeps me going. If you continue with the changes likely you will loose many contributors. It's sad but used on Amazon.com or ca is cheaper. it will put you out of business if you do not keep your contributors happy and onboard.

Just my 2 cents.

Chantal in The Great White North (ie Canada)

In bookmooch economic terms, you're basically putting barriers around international trade. Before, you used to have incentives around international trade. Now you have an incentive for domestic traffic and a disincentive for international traffic. (Bit more complicated than that but let's not argue trivialities.)

If there's any reasonable lesson we can draw from the economies of international trade, it's that protectionism is, in the long run, not a good idea. And you are not looking at the long run here. Even a pure 1:1 ratio and point calculation would be preferrable -- it would remove the incentive from international mooching, but at least not disincentivise it. It would grow more slowly because of postage rates, but at least it would grow. This way it's just going to shrink.

Also, for someone who considers themselves savvy, it's a pretty glaring error on your part to have changed things retroactively. People get out of places where they don't feel protected by the law. You must cultivate a sense of history, because it's let you down.

My recommendation, John : an FAQ or disclaimer somewhere explaining that BookMooch's economy is still in the growing/experimenting stages, and that things point related may evolve over time.

I would also be in favor some sort of general Be Nice policy on these here forums... I mean, I know people aren't trying to flame, but that's how it comes across.

Incidentally, in 2 days it will be my 2 year anniversary of joining bookmooch. Happy anniversary, indeed.

I amassed a large amount of points within 2 weeks because I spent a large amount of money sending them. So yes, if I spend $20 mailing a book, I can get more than one book mailed from the states (Where it usually costs about $5 to mail to me). So what? How is that at all 'unfair'? Frankly it is fair. I live in Canada, and as others have said many Canadian members are now actively *refusing* to send within Canada. So now you have put up walls around countries, and in this case it is a country that has put up walls between provinces. Which leaves a very small pool of books indeed.

Making examples out of individual members is frankly beneath contempt. I *really* wish I could find a nicer way to say this, but I really can't. It does create a hostile climate. Why should you have to behave when it is your site? Literally I suppose you do not. Ethically you need to understand that there is a power differential there. I am a teacher. Despite the fact that some students can be quite rude, I would be punished for making an example of an individual student's work or report card.

Making these changes retroactive is disingenuous at best. It does seem as though you are consciously trying to punish those you perceive as having 'behaved badly' in the past. I am sorry if sending a large amount of international books somehow offended you. That does not make changing the rules retroactively the correct thing to do.

In the past I have tried to encourage friends to join bookmooch. Right now it is in a state of turbulence and unrest. I do not know what will happen from one day to another. Will I suddenly have points retroactively taken away from me tomorrow? Will my account be frozen for X reason? I have no idea, no control, and apparently we have no say (Because graphs from one environment without taking the global economy into consideration prove us wrong!). How can I possibly encourage friends to join in a situation like this? I loved bookmooch when I first joined, I wondered why it took me so long. Now I am very very concerned. PLEASE reconsider this John.. I do want to have faith that this system can work without resorting to punishing and belittling people.

I hope this post stays up. Also posting on LIbraything in case it is censored out.

I'm sorry but that's ridiculous. We are not talking about implementing a network stack here. Based on our usage of the site, we already know the database columns are there to separate points by date, and the calculation is triviality itself.

Also copying this post to librarything.

MY BOOKS sent to others to earn MY POINTS, MY RATIO altered without warning -

What else would you describe it as? IT WAS ALL MINE, EARNED BY ME!!!

John, an economic model is nice, but you can't have an economy without a basic social contract and ideally rule of law. People won't participate in something they feel is detrimentally unpredictable, whatever its benefits might be. Deeply unpopular and unwise though the ratio change is, you wouldn't be seeing this level of furore if you hadn't made it retroactive.

Those of us who have a surplus of points got them by investing heartily in the system. My take/give is currently 610/579 and my now-ratio is .79:1. I have 282.6 points unused. I can tell you, though, that I have given away WAY more than those 579 books. I give away books 2 for 1 regularly, sometimes even 4 for 1, and internationally I only ask points to cost of the package, no matter how many books are in there. I give away my points all the time, to other members or charities, and sometimes I don't even ASK for points. I can do these things because 40% of my outgoing mooches are international. I can do these things because the Bookmooch environment made me WANT to do these things, to share what I have in excess. I give a little, too.

All the economics aside, my issue here is that there is an implication here that we are being bad or greedy Bookmoochers by mooching more than sending. I know that's not what you intend, and not what you mean, but that's how it feels, and I just feel that myself, and many of us with long histories (and I'm only here 1.5 years, which is not that long!) give more to the community than is evident through ratios and points.

I also don't think it was right to call out Belladonna directly with a link to her account. The last time I mooched a couple dozen books from her she donated half the points to a BM charity of my choosing.

It really is all about spreading the book love as much as we can afford.

I apologize for any incoherence.

If point inflation is the issue, stop giving the .1 for acknowledging receipt, and set the international points even at 3. Another factor may be the 'quality' of inventory. I will remove unmooched books listed 2 years ago or longer and take them to Goodwill. That will reduce my 'excess' points a bit, and encourage me to list newer books. Maybe other members with a lot of points might consider the same.

JF's idea of rewarding members who bring in new blood looks like a good idea.

Personally, I can see why this type of ratio change could be good but perhaps instituting it without notice was not the best way forward.

Fortunately, I only have 2.6 points, so it won't kill me to walk away from BM, as I am seriously considering doing. I have given some of my points to charities and some to other members, just because, so I hardly ever have any! But, because I have done a lot of angel mooches and sent frequently internationally, I am one of those who has actually received more books than I have given. My ratio used to be 0.97:1 and now it is suddenly 1.34:1. I'm not in any danger of hitting the cap, but why does it matter to anyone? I didn't steal the points or get them somehow illegitimately, so why I can't I do what I like with them?

I would suggest that the use of macroeconomics is inappropriate in a situation which is cleary a microeconomy. If there were less books sent last year, could it be due to the shaky world economy? It seems to me the system has been humming along just fine until some of the recent changes.

The trouble with having a straight 1:1 ratio is what do I do? I have about a third of my mooches as angel-requests, which is why my stats are so skewed. If it was 1:1 I would not be able to get books for me too, and would not have any recompense for the high cost of postage I pay for all those angel-request sends! Think about that before you suggest it people - not just what affects you! which is where all these complaints came from originally - from members only concerned about their only selfish situations. Shame you are the ones that get listened to, while the members who strive to make this site so much of a community don't.

John, you could have used my account as a better example of a bad ratio between gives and gets; I don't do the deals belladonna does - I just send angel mooches non-stop! IMHO - disappointing. Poor decision that, along with the advice you seem to be getting. Entirely unwarranted too.

It has really broken a lot of the trust that has been built up over the years between you and your members. Please reconsider.

Now my Mooch Ratio is 1.44:1

If we went to a 1:1 Mooch Ratio my ratio would be 2.2:1

So I must be a very bad Moocher according to BM standards.

I must be taking advantage of BookMooch!

I must be taking advantage of the BookMooching system by spending the points I have earned & been gifted. All points which have been earned by sending books out by myself or by others.

I angel Mooch & get books for others where I live. I donate mooched books to the library & get books for people at my church who can't get books for themselves & for their kids.

Most of the time when I angel mooch for someone, they also smooch me a point or two extra. Other moochers smooch me or charity me points when they see I'm low because they know that all the books I mooch are not for me.

I do smooch others & charity points, just not as much as I am smooched.

I followed the rules as were set out.

But I must be a very bad person and a very bad moocher!

You "picked on" Belladonna for her ratio. Well mine is higher.

So I must be a very bad moocher!!

I have 4 large copy paper boxes of books waiting to post on BM, but MY ECONOMIC SITUATION is such that I cannot afford to send out 150 books a month!! I want those books GONE!! But MY ECONOMIC SYSTEM says that I need to eat & pay rent & pay my heat & light bills. Those come first!

So, the world economic crisis doesn't affect BM? Baloney!!

Now this BAD BOOKMOOCHER will now stop ranting!!

Since I have the good fortune to live in a country and a city with easy access to large amounts of English books, and have a postal system which makes it (relatively) affordable to mail internationally, I make a point to find and send books to moochers in countries with very small mooching populations whenever possible. I think in this case comparing these transactions to world trade is perhaps unfair. A better comparison would be international relief efforts;) Perhaps there could be a special accommodation in the ratio for moochers from countries with less than 20 members? "On a macro level" it actually has very little effect on the health of BM, there are not that many users in this category in comparison to those in the top two or three countries.

My ratio was rather silly, my new is quite reasonable, I have more points than I can use and have sent through charity or smooches approximately 1000 points to other moochers and charities over the years, so my concern is not for myself but for a) international moochers in countries with fewer members, or difficult postal systems and b) trying to figure out how to encourage more moochers in the U.S. and U.K. (the big two countries) to consider international mooching. I understand the "fairness" of this new ratio system, but the world economy is not "fair" (slipping dangerously into politics) and perhaps the Bookmooch economy should reflect that?

BTW "stealing" is a bit harsh. We haven't lost points, just had a rather sudden and shocking change in the TOS of this website we all feel rather passionate about.

Firstly, I am not impressed by the statistics and especially think the explanations are far from correct. I am convinced they do not explain the dynamics on the site. For example, international trade should be split in US--non-US trade and all outside US trade. Another thing is that trade seems dominated by book in English. Books in other languages hardly go.

I think John's basic idea that the site should strive for 1:1 is correct. The 1:1 principle means that everyone is always hungry for books, which will stimulate mooching. The current system leads to saturation. I have exchanged 720 books (out) for 1150 books (in). I am getting more books rather than less. It will be about 10 years of solid reading to read all those books! Basically, I should already stop mooching.

However, 1:1 works very well within a country. The international shipping fees require a different award, and I think the current point system covers that well. There is even room for small changes there, such as proposed in the other thread, although I would rather keep the points system as it is.

I would like to high-light this comment by John: "If you are willing to pay the extra postage cost to send a book internationally, I think you should be rewarded and be able to ask someone else to do the same. "

This is a concern many international members are worried about, nl that many US-members mooch but not give internationally, while BM mantra is that we have to serve them. Personally, I don't care where my books go, in fact, the US is the cheapest shipping destination. But changes as above will further sharpen this divide.

I think many people on the site respond like frustrated children. Nothing is taken away from us! The ratio is descriptive, it does not stand for points. I am sure with some creativity, you can make BM work for you.

Some people don't need BM, in their countries they have 2nd hand shops, yard sales, ex-lib books, amazon etc, etc. I need BM, there are no other sources of books for me. I must buy all English books at new-value imported prices and books in other languages are not even available anywhere on this continent.

BM is a great site, and it works very well,and I am sure it will, even with these minor changes. I don't think these changes will solve the problems, but they do not spoil the game.

I tire of comments from members only concerned with their own small environment - which in some cases is by their own choice.

All I care about is for all of us, all of us, to be able to use the points we have paid for, with exorbitant postage fees, to mooch any book we want, when it comes available, by any means allowed. I don't believe I should be worrying about my mooch ratio when lots of my books are sent by (still very expensive sea mail) and my mooch ratio is dependent on their arrival and then me having to send a huge number more - and so accumulating more points - which I won't be allowed to use due to a sudden change in ratio calculation. Especially when there are so many members who won't send to me, have huge numbers of delayed mooches and books which are listed, then mooched and which will never be sent. The change in the ratio was to stop members mooching many, many more books than they sent - the international bonus was to help encourage sending internationality with much higher postal costs.

With the ratio issue, I am assured this won't happen - well I knew it wouldn't before; but I don't now. As long as there is a guarantee that members in good standing; who are have great feedback and send all over the world, are not going to be stopped mooching I don't really care what happens. But I certainly have a different opinion about BookMooch from the last few days.

How can anyone mooch more books than they receive unless they get lost in mail? =D
Anyway, what is it to the Bookmooch economy if people can mooch more books than the ones they send? That's the incentive, right, to keep the site alive? Hence the site is called bookMOOCH?

I would say that frequent users/ readers, even if they mooch 2 books and just send 1, chances are they will be adding those 2 books back to the inventory again, so no BIG blow on the Bookmooch economy that way?
No certainty they will do that, but for how long has the site been functioning?
If you make it all rigidly fair and square, many people will probably start double thinking the validity of bookmooching and for sure that will affect the economy and movement...

IMHO, and when talking specifically about international trades (so far something unique to Bookmooch), you should at least consider:
1) Shipping costs are not the same worldwide
2) Not all the books weigh the same/ cost the same/ have the same value
3) Even in US, there are valuable books you can only find elsewhere

Therefore, if a worldwide community is of any importance here, it isn't weird at all for people to be encouraged to mooch internationally and to be a bit compensated by doing so, even if just by points.
That extra point was just a bonus, but felt nice, a little appreciation for the willing to send internationally and spend that money. Yes, you aren't only giving away the book, but also paying for the shipping costs.
If the shipping costs s*ck and everyone just starts getting stingy about their points and books, then why bother?
Just use that money to buy a used/ new copy of the book. Maybe it's even more helpful to the other party as well.

So many things that could work better on Bookmooch (like purging inactive members or at least preventing them from appearing in the search results, book listings, etc.), and you had to start with the point system?
I would even prefer a book weight point system rather than an international-domestic one. Maybe that's just me though.

PS
To point it out one more time, I don't care about books in the database belonging to inactive members. Those are useless.

As someone else correctly pointed out as well, you can't mooch 120 books internationally by just sending 20^^;;
When you send internationally, you would gain 3 points, right? So by sending 20 books, you could mooch internationally 30 books, or 60 within your own country, NOT 120!

I don't want to anger anyone, I just felt it was important to offer a more neutral perspective. I just think everyone needs to calm down a little bit, take a breath and realize that this isn't such a big deal. Nothing has been taken from us moochers, we are not suffering because of this and we all need to try to remember that.

I think a large chunk of the anger come from the fact that these sudden changes are made retrospectively. As someone else has mentioned, it is a bit like trying to charge someone more money after the fact, or changing a points system so that you now need to spend more $$ to get the points, and taking away points retrospectively. While no points were literally taken away, effectively many might be. Many international users may find themselves unable to use the points they have accrued. Points they accrued under great expense with a certain understanding. If they had known what changes were coming, many would have behaved differently. That is where I see the anger coming from.. many will have spent a large amount of money on points that may become useless to them. The fact that this is not happening to the majority of users (In the US) does not excuse it.

Perhaps people are reacting strongly, however they may feel that they are not being heard. The responses to the past two blog posts may be leading them to conclude this. I sincerely hope that they are wrong and that we are being heard. I understand that John wants to keep the site running well, and that he puts in a lot of hard work... I sincerely hope he wants to keep the site running well for everyone (And not just the US members, or 'the vast majority' according to Emmy).

Emmy, the "few" users you talk about are probably the ones who use and support this site and its features the most...
In my view, and maybe I'm not even qualified to say so due to my little contribution, those generous people are what makes bookmooch the international community that it is and who keeps it going.

If you mooch and give internationally in equal amounts, then there's no problem. As an angel I give internationally more than I mooch. While I have happily mooched a number of books from members of other countries, I don't find books that I wish for from other countries as often as I receive requests from international members to help them obtain books. The simple solution, of course, is to curtail my international sending to the number of books I find internationally that I want to mooch. But members from other countries already complain that too few US members want to mail out of the country. Do we really want to discourage international mailing just so that we won't look bad by accruing too many points, which gives us the ability to mooch too many books? Again, I realize that technically my ratio is not limiting my ability to do this, but the perception of being a "bad" BMer simply because I've acquired the ability to mooch more books than I've actually sent might. (And keep in mind that, for angels, not all of those books that we mooch have been for ourselves).

As an American, I can easily find most of the books I want in my own country and domestic mailing is cheap, so it would be very easy to join the many who simply send within their own country. That would be a simple way of maintaining a 1:1 ratio. Do we want BM to just become an American site?

a bigger objection is that this seems to fly in the face of what i loved about bookmooch: that each member does whatever she can. if it's too expensive, don't do it. but if you can afford it and you want to do it, then do it. there shouldn't be any requirements beyond sending books TO SOMEBODY and getting points for them. then we should be able to use our points as we like.

However, since this would be a problem for some angels, why not also take the opportunity to integrate angels a little more into the site and allow people to be officially recognized as such, and as part of that be allowed to ignore this limit of outstanding sends. This angel privilege of course needs to be clearly indicated on their profiles so that people don't think they are scammers. As long as official angel status isn't granted to new users, I can't see how this would be a problem.

I appreciate that Americans in particular have been hugely inconvenienced by the removal of the surfacemail/ground/seamail option by USPS, but it would be appreciated if Americans requesting international mooches would themselves appreciate that the cost of sending mail to the States from the UK is actually more expensive than the other way around. I have lost count of the number of mooch requests which the users have abandoned once they found out that I won't send the heavy book they wanted by airmail, and they aren't prepared to wait.

This morning I have had yet another international mooch declined by a giver in the USA and I am inclined to wonder how much the recent changes have contributed to this. I rarely decline international mooches, but I notice that others are not quite so generous.

In summary:

I have no objection to people preferring to mooch within their own country, but please don't expect me to send a book internationally if you will only send domestically to others.

When requesting heavy books, please don't get ticked off if I won't send it airmail. I am prepared to wait months for books I really want. If you really need that book for your class project next week, then borrow it from the library, don't expect me to subsidise you.

When you offer an international option, please be clear about the countries you will send to.

The ratio of books sent/mooched should be just that - books and not points. Where you mooch them from/send them to is up to you as this is then down to points.

However, I do believe that points needs to be 1:1. It should cost the same to mooch as you receive to send and the 0.1 for listing and receiving should be compensated for by adjusting the mooch values to 0.9.

I send 2 books internationally, I get 6 points.
If I live in a country where there's some domestic mooching traffic, I would be able to use those points to mooch 6 books. My ratio would be 1:1 and everything would be great.
If I live in a country with very few bookmoochers, or it just happens that all the books that I want are international, I could mooch 3 books with my 6 points. My ratio would then be 1.5:1. If I'm just spending my points, and I have little or no domestic options, why am I being penalized with a worse ratio for that? I just don't think that it's OK that spending 6 points is good for your ratio only if you have the chance to mooch domestically (and it's those on countries with few bookmoochers that are affected).

I just don't get how we can incentivate international giving if we discourage international mooching... it's two sides of the same transaction!

Changes with the points system may be coming... I agree that points for feedback have to go and points for listing books should be capped. Changing the international system... I know that it may be too generous points-wise but it's the international aspect that gives a lot to the community as well (I've given away books in Spanish to people all around the world and that's one of the things that I love the most about the site).

Reading the thoughts of those English speakers located in countries such as Japan and Finland who rely on international mooches because their domestic market is practically non existent...how cut off they must feel. Such a betrayal....

I have to say I'm now a bit embarassed to have actively promoted this site for so long and to have emphasised the international option which made it stand out from so many other sites. It seems as though it's becoming very much a site for American users only and if you happen to be unlucky enough to be located elsewhere, ....we might as well just hang up our reading glasses now.

This leaves a bitter, bitter, taste.

I do not understand these fears about the Angels. The Angels mooch domestically and then send internationally -- that should only boost there potential.

People in countries without a domestic BM community can always receive 2 books for 1 given. The situation for people in Japan or Finland is no different from mine in .. China. My ratio has made a big jump, but I do not foresee an immediate problem.

I think the fear and worries uttered here do not warrant the actual effect of these changes. Do they? I agree the retroactive move is not elegant, but think everyone's worries are having a greater impact than these changes.

When I checked my wishlist this morning I wondered if I would mooch a wishlist book that was from outside my country. Multiply that hesitation by everyone on the site and that alone should tell us this kind of change is going to affect international mooching in a bad way.

The change was applied arbitrarily. There was no post stating that x had been chosen as a solution and this is how it would be implemented, as of this date.

The change was applied retroactively. Previously, mailing books internationally was considered a good thing to do. Some of us went so far as to "angel" books to people in other countries, thinking we were acting for the good of the site and its members. We spent the points we earned, or saved them up. Overnight that was revealed as a very bad thing and one of us was singled out for criticism. While we can decide not to do so anymore, we can't change our bad behavior in the past, nor even think of it properly as bad, since it was a good thing until yesterday.

The least popular option was chosen. A few options were suggested for lowering point totals. People wrote in, and the consensus seemed to be that while many did not think the system needed changing that the option to get rid of the 0.1 point for feedback was the least onerous option. Several people also asked that international mooching not be altered. So the least popular option was chosen, keeping the majority of moochers from feeling any impact and penalizing only those who engaged in the bad behavior of sending and receiving internationally.

The impression has been given that the owner of the site behaves capriciously and doesn't really care about those members outside of the majority. There has also been a clear indication that the rules can and will change without notice and retroactively.

I took a closer look at my own mooched/given books.
I've mooched 50 books, of which 43 books are international mooches. So, If i'm not mistaken, 86 percent of the mooches I do are international mooches.
Now, if I look at the amount of books I've given. That's 31, of which 25 were sent internationally. That means 80 percent of the books I send are international.

Still, I have a mooch ratio of 1.68:1. Isn't that weird?
I suck at maths, but if you look at the numbers, and not at the percentages, it seems that I'm very eager to send books internationally, which isn't reflected in my ratio.

Next to that, I've got a few remarks, being from Belgium, a country the size of a peanut.

- In my country, we have three official languages (Dutch, French, German), of which Dutch is my mother tongue. Now, most books that are offered in my country are French apparently, a decent amount are Dutch and just a small percentage German. Too bad I suck at reading French.

- 108 people on Bookmooch are Belgians. They offer 1195 books. Half French, Half Dutch let's say. So, that's around 600 books, without making any closer into inactive accounts, books I'm not even remotely interested in.

- The only other big Dutch country in the world is the Netherlands, a country where mooching isn't that popular. If i want to mooch Dutch books, I almost always mooch internationally, since I need to get my books in this other country. In the real world, that would be like a 50-minute drive. In BookMooch-land, it would kind of affect my mooch ratio in a weird way.

- 135 people in The Netherlands are mooching. Weird for a country that has twice the population of Belgium. 1448 books are offered, even less than Belgium! Probably, it has to do with the small amount of Dutch books on here. the French-speaking people in Belgium have more opportunities to read books in their own language.

- Now, most of you guys live in the US. A mostly monolingual country the size of an entire troop of elephants (compared to peanut Belgium). John used a kind of ecological argument that people who mooch books international that they could get in their own country is not right. But ithat doesn't really seem a valid argument from a Belgian-Holland point of view. The books I get from the Netherlands (an international mooch) can be delivered by bike if possible, whereas a book sent from NY city to San Francisco would hurt the environment a lot more.

- I kind of get the feeling that I get punished (although I don't care too much about this change, I just point out the things that are weird from my point of view), because I live in a small country, because my country uses a language most other people in the world won't use, because i want to be a person with a cosmopolitical attitude (reading books in English), even though I am more than willing to send books internationally.

I never asked for the system of getting 3 points for every international mooch. I just used the site. I just did what I was supposed to do. Get books out of my house, get new books in.

I think the site's decline has other causes, and a lot of people seem to think likewise. the lack of new books added to inventories, the fact that people get points for just accepting a mooch, so that they can use those points virtually even if they haven't really sent out a book, the lack of U.S People sending out books internationally - which is normal, but still conflicts with the whole idea of an International book trading site.

You've probably thought long and hard about this, from your U.S Point of View. Now look at Europe or every other small, non-English country.

I'm an IT-journalist by the way who is about to write a review about bookmooch. I still think it's a great iniative, but it's getting less international - not just by this change. It's been going on for a longer time. For Europeans, there is no alternative. Most bookswapping sites are U.S Domestics only, and there are no local initiatives. (maybe a few very small ones, where someone trades books with himself).

Just because we like graphs off course (but also it would perhaps show how the change of ratio could affect the international aspect of mooching).

Just an idea.

If the concern is to better balance the books/points in the system, there are easy fixes: set international at 3/3 and remove the fractional point for acknowledging receipt. A second, regional tier at 2/2 (certainly for the US/Canada) could help keep things moving and keep points/cost more in line.

This massive brouhaha about a statistic that isn't of interest to most users just seems counterproductive. The ratio need not be published; what a moocher needs to know is the number of acknowledged books sent. Far better figure out how to bring in new and better inventory, encourage international mooching, and improve users' ability to find books.

Nothing new will be equally fair to everyone.

1) Reserved or wishlist e-mails being read more quickly (thanks to portable devices), hence those books mooched more quickly.

2) I'd be very much surprised if there aren't an increasing number of BookMoochers who log in to the site to browse (and mooch whenever they see something interesting) on a regular basis.

3) The site's been around long enough that lots of people have had time to form relationships with BookMooch friends! Given this, there may well be more recommendations flying around (officially and unofficially) than there used to be. Do you have any data on this?

Have you been able to look at the number of books mooched, and compare it with the number of books available online? If the number of books mooched has been steadily growing, and the number of books available has been steadily shrinking, that *might not* be an alarming sign -- it may simply be a sign that people are mooching things more quickly.

Just a consideration.

I have to save money to send more book internationally, so that I can mooch books worldwide and I my mooch ratio can be normal and everybody happy.

:facepalm: (and today it's the second time)

I've felt rather lost and excluded by all the charts and complex economic explanations as if that justified going over people's heads. This site is about having fun swopping books after all or that's what it has been. I applaud John for all the work he has done and his imagination in creating this site. I sincerely hope that it will continue with the same ethos in the future although I am unlikely to be mooching books from abroad now the point has been added.

I do this as well, for whenever it offers a financial advantage to the sender, and have mooched many books I am only marginally interested in, or looked for books for my school, church, friends and family. Although John posted in a previous blog entry that he wants to encourage multimooching, this change actually will discourage that.

I think books should be weighted in the ratio equally regardless of whether they are international or domestic mooches. I did think the old ratio system was silly and weighted too far in the other direction. But I think it should be one book in one book out is 1:1. This would adjust bio:andyboi ratio to the positive side (thanks Andy for using your ratio as an example).

I think the fact that English readers in non-English countries are often net importers of books and then share them with their compatriots is not a bad thing and is one of the services Bookmooch contributes to the world reading community.

About the ecological argument: As in many places in the E.U., there is no green benefit from mooching domestically over internationally in Canada, in fact the reverse is true. There are many U.S. states which are closer geographically to me than much of my own country (or even my own Province).

And I apologize, Rebel Sun, for any trouble caused by my charitying you points, and to all my international mooching friends for whom I have scoured charity shops and used bookstores, I am sorry if my efforts have caused your ratio to be skewed;)

If I remember correctly, the bookmooch economy is a touch inflationary. it costs 1 point a book, but you get .1 point for confirming that you got it, in effect pricing books at .9 points.

bookmooch is my favorite book swapping site but economics (as outlined above) have pushed me to paperbackswap.

my 2¢.

I think this example (multiplied by thousands of moochers) is the answer to why there is a decline of books being posted on Bookmooch. Some of us continue to post books (although in my case somewhat reduced) and send even though it has resulted in more points than I can use, especially given the change in the ratio.

My current ratio demonstrates my willingness to send books internationally (which is expensive in cash to me, but good for the reading community) while seeking to mooch most of my books domestically (which saves resources and cash for everyone).

So I'm a greedy member, according to the metrics. It's true, I'm greedy for books. That's why I joined.

And setting aside the theory and all that economics which few of us follow, when did any business or any organisation or any collaborative effort continue to work when 99% of members were against a change that was implemented?

Btw I have mooched internationally because that was the only way my wishlist books turned up, and have sent both domestically and internationally (iirc) because that was what moochers asked for, and most of the time I couldn't send books (before I emptied my inventory) because no one was asking for them. Must be my fault for not, in general sharing popular taste in reading matter ... though I'm sure that applies to plenty of other people too.

What does bother me, and what is very unusual I think within BookMooch, is that in the past John has always proposed something and then listened to BOTH sides. At least if a decision didn't go the way a moocher wanted, they knew they'd been listened to. And that maybe the next time, the decision would work in their favour. That was key to the spirit of BM - knowing that the moochers had some say in the way it worked - we would be listened to. Maybe not always agreed with, but at least listened to ;-)

But this time, one group of people complained and a decision was made. The group that might have argued the other way never got a chance to have their views aired. They weren't even aware complaints were being made, so had no change to argue an alternative view. It's almost out of character for BM, for a decision to be taken without all views being heard.

I've not BMed in a while, as I moved to London and left my inventory with my parents (as well as having less funds for postage). But I'm hoping to get back into mooching again now I'm more settled. I don't think the mooch ratio will make much difference - I've always chosen to receive books domestically if possible, due to the lower costs. And it's just happened that most of my posting out of books has been domestic to. Entirely by accident, my ratio has been good.

What is a slight concern, is that it might well happen that through no fault of your own, the books you want only come up abroad, and the only people wanting your books are domestic. Then you either drive your ratio to the point where it might freeze your activity, or you have to decline mooches/not request books, because it will affect your ratio. I don't know how much activity would be required to make such a change. Mine is very close to 1:1 so I hopefully won't find out.

The ratio to me is largely an academic detail. But the points are the dealbreaker. The points are in effect a currency - tied to the money you pay in postage. If the point amounts for mooching abroad/domestically were changed, that might well stop mooching. If it costs 3 times as much to post abroad as domestically, you have to EARN 3 times as many points. Otherwise basic maths would take over and people would only post domestically - and global circulation of the BM inventory would stagnate.

John - you and your team do an incredible job running BM. Please know that, and know that it is appreciated by a great many people (many of whom probably think it but never say it). You invest time, energy and money, and so thank you for all you do. But part of what made BM such a success was the community here, and the fact of feeling that our voices were heard. Sometimes changes would go in our favour, sometimes not - but we were always listened to. It's what makes BM a stand out place.

Now to get back to reading, so I can restock my inventory pile!

What happens to my mooches that are rejected by the book owner? Or the ones that I cancel because I can't get the owner to return my emails?

Those books still appear on my History page, as books that I have mooched, even though I got my points back because the books never actually changed hands.

Are those books counting in my ratio as books that I have Mooched?

That seems like an unfair penalty. Say I never got the book and I got my point back, which I then use to mooch something else instead. Does my ratio reflect two mooches with the same point?

This isn't a new problem, but then again, I never worried about my ratio until it just changed...

Canceled and Rejected mooches have never counted in the ratio calculations. I believe that hasn't changed.

Points: 277.9 (I am always donated points to charities and Friends who need them)
Books to Send: 7
Books Sent: 8
Books to Receive: 9
Books Mooched: 502 (International - 92)
Books Given: 663 (International - 176)
Ratio: .67:1 (Mooch Percentage - 694/1030, 1.48 given for 1 received)
Feedback +660

I only have 32 books in my inventory at present. I used to have many more (100+), but I have had to limit the number of books I can mail out due to being out of a job for almost 2 years and only working part-time for the last few months. I don't want to list a lot of books and then have the moochers waiting for months to get them because I don't think this is fair. I also want to keep the journals moving as fast as possible, so I tend to list and mail them more frequently. I have 538 books/journals on my Wishlist and 128 on my Save-for-Later list. Between the two lists, only about 13 are available to mooch! I would love to spend more of my accumulated points, but I can't find books to mooch as frequently as I would like. I think this points to one of the major "problems" with BookMooch - lack of availability of very popular/current titles, people willing to send internationally and more members having to reduce their BookMooch sending due to the real world economic system.

I worry that the continuing real world economic crises and the new changes to BookMooch will force some of my best BookMooch "friends" to opt out of journalling and/or sending books internationally - especially members from Canada, the UK and Australia where the shipping costs are very high.

maybe putting a way to change points into a mooch ratio reduction
this can be a solution

It's a mere illusion to think that points earned in international book sending can be easily used to mooch nationally: in our little European coutries domestic moochs are much more difficult to arrange. Or do you honestly think that the chances I have to find something interesting in the 700 inventories of Italian subscribers are the same I would have if I lived in the US, who has 17.000 subscribers ??

Please rethink about it, John. This change will kill BM in all European countries.

BookMooch_Angel_Network

The_BookMooch_Journal_Project

(Fingers crossed that they are the correct links!)

don't forget that last year has been very difficult for many of us, so that many "leisure" expenses - books & shipments of said books included - have been drastically cut. If you go and check on Publishers Weekly you'll see how high was the decrease of books sales last year. Some publishers discontinued their pb series ( one name for all: Dorchester ), some big online libraries are close to bankrupcy. The huge increase of postal fees in many countries didn't help moochs either.

So please, don't take as a BM system issue what is the result of a worlwide economical crisis.

We had got used to a generous comfy system, although I'm sure I'm not alone in not having the maths capacity to understand fully how mooch ratio was/is worked out. I tried, I even got a former pupil who is a post-grad. Pure and Applied Maths specialist to try but he said it was impossibly complex to explain simply, well to ME anyway!

However, I had realised when I joined Bookmooch that it seemed like a pyramid selling system and that without constant expansion the point system or something would have to change, give or collapse.

I've taken time to look at the changes, noted that it would have been impossible to instigate the change without including one's entire history, that there will be accommodation made for people who have unwittingly made their mooch ratio dangerously high and that the actual points have at present been left as they were, and it does seem a more equitable system.

People complain it should not have been done retroactively, but come now, if one collects airmiles, frequent changes to the points required for flights has devalued all the points I have collected over years, so obviously in the real world retroactive changes to savings of all sorts frequently do occur.

I think we need to think up strategies we would prefer rather than condemn John for trying to consult, and then make changes based on feedback.

My suggestion would be to confirm that an interim 2 points awarded for continental sending (N. America, C.& S. America, Asia, Europe, Australasia, might be worth investigating. One could still pay 2 points for the mooch as now, but not receive the bonus point from Bookmooch.

I tried to do the maths on angelling but fail to understand why people predominantly mooching from their own country but sending internationally, would be disadvantaged by the change.

As for people who are point-poor - students wanting study books for example - I will be more likely to remove a second book from my inventory and send with one mooched to Bookmoochers like that that I know, now, than I was before, although, like many here, it is something I have done previously.

I think you are correct. I don't think this change should adversely effect angels. However, that said, that doesn't mean it won't, and as we have heard from some comments, it seems it will. The problem was the change happened without prior notice or clear communication of the effects this would have on how we can mooch. Some moochers are angry and confused. As you said, the math is hard to understand, trying to predict what will happen based on possible future choices even harder. Perhaps a system-wide email explaining that as long as you *send* books internationally, you are free to *mooch* books either internationally or domestically. The reverse is not true. You can't *mooch* internationally and *send* domestically without messing up your ratio (a mistake I think). You also can't just use all the banked points you have earned (through the 3rd point from mooching internationally) and keep mooching books without sending; it messes up your ratio (sigh). I understand why that latter point needs to be true, as painful as it is. There are too many of us with more points than we need (in spite of giving away many, many points) with no motivation to post any more books. That is what will cause the Bookmooch economy to collapse. However, "all we have to fear is fear itself": Moochers panicking and deciding they had better stop mooching and sending internationally because it will mess up their ratio will also cause the Bookmooch economy to collapse. The mistake was in how this was instigated and communicated.

The ideal would be to send internationally as often, or more often than one mooches internationally. But even though I agree to send worldwide, it's not under my control who mooches a book that I put up. If someone in my country gets to it first then I have to send it to that person. It would be ridiculous to tell them "no, I'm waiting for someone in another country to decide they want it..."

It is under my control how often I mooch internationally, but like many people here, I have a long wishlist of books that rarely come up. If a wishlisted book pops up in another country and I have the points for it, I will definitely mooch it.

It seems like it will be pure luck whether my ratio stays acceptable or not. If international moochers like my books better than domestic moochers then I'm in good shape to spend all of my points. If domestic moochers take a lot of my books then I am going to end up with a backlog of points that my mooch ratio won't let me spend.

If this is how it has to be to keep BookMooch healthy, then okay, but it promises to be frustrating.

Another problem with the perception that angels mooch far more than they give is that many of the books we mooch are never read by ourselves. We are simply a conduit to pass them along to other people. They show in our total books mooched, however, and if that sets us up for criticism as people causing inflation in the system, as happened to belladonna (how can the entire BookMooch economy survive if I encourage everyone to mooch more books than they receive? ), then I think that many will say they may as well just step back and not deal with the hassle.

Basically, angels would like to think they are doing a service to the community, and many will be tempted to quit because of public criticism even if they aren't having a problem with the ratio itself.

I agree with you. The people that this change negatively impacts are those, like you, who are net importers of English books into a non-English speaking country. I think this is a mistake and is contrary to the spirit of Bookmooch (at least the community of international Bookmoochers of which I am a part). It has almost no effect on the vast majority of American moochers who largely mooch domestically and always send domestically. And if there was a "poll" I think most would indicate that they don't care one way or the other. Nothing against all those Americans, they have little to gain (and a fair bit to lose ie spend and risk) to send internationally. Other than, of course, the wonderful experience of sending books to like-minded readers all over the world.

> Your example above is from someone who presumably has very few books that other people in other countries want to mooch from them. Therefore, they tend to mooch internationally but send books domestically.

> That situation can't exist forever, it's essentially an imbalance of trade, with BM books flowing into that country, but not flowing out. On a macro level, that won't be good for the health of BM.

Taking a step back, is imbalance of trade a bad thing? Seems to me it's The Way Things Are Done in the real world, as innovation pushes older products into other markets. What you seem to be promoting with the new system is "let new and old pile up in the countries that produced it". But people like to share, and they're perfectly happy to let the umpteenth copy of "The Colour of Magic" disappear into countries that don't produce much of interest to them. Who knows, eventually writers in those countries may produce such books because they've been reading them, and the flow will reverse.

It seems to me that you need a sytem that does allow and encourage such unevenness between countries, but somehow protects against abuse of that system. Wasn't that why you changed the way the ratio is calculated in 2008?

I wanted to add that it also hinders those that mooch and send only internationally, as if they spend all of their points on international mooches (as there is no option for them to mooch domestically), their ratio will be around 1.5:1 (and they'd have all of the 0.1 bonuses leftover, I'm not counting those). Someone who exclusively mooches and sends domestically (no bonuses) would have a 1:1 and I don't think that either moocher would be a better bookmoocher than the other (as the ratio would seem to indicate).
I know that a 1.5 ratio is OK, but it's still pretty high...
Most people who mooch and send only international do so because there are very few bookmoochers in their country. I'm from Peru and there are only *3* active members there (and they are all friends that I invited to join).

We're also gonna need a new kind of Angels, those who have a ratio good enough to mooch from other countries and send the books locally to those who can't.. :-)

Ok, here is my point. If I continue to add books to my inventory in order to send these books out, I will continue to accrue points. I already have 200. I will never have a way to successfully use all or most of my points (under the new ratio changes) without continuing to send more books out so it doesn't affect my ratio, thereby adding more points to my account that I can't spend. People say "Give points away" or "Give deals on multiple mooches". I do both of those things regularly but I also don't appreciate being told what to do with the points that I have accrued by sending out books. I have earned them and feel that I should be able to "spend" them however I wish.

Until this change, I wasn't ever concerned about any of these things. I sent books out as an Angel for the joy of getting books to people who really wanted them and I mooched "almost 1000 books" according to John because I am a book lover and like to surround myself with them (and read them and try not to create avalanches with them).

Another though is what if I have to discontinue my Angel mooching for financial reasons at some point. I have no control over who mooches from me out of my normal inventory. I will have to begin to pay careful attention to that and only mooch internationally the same amount of books that are mooched internationally from me. What a pain!

I guess ultimately I am mostly saddened by the way that changes are occurring on BM and less by the changes themselves. There is a huge sense of community here and I have made what I consider to be very dear friends. Regardless of what John does, I will continue to be here. I will continue to mooch and be mooched from and I will do it because I love many of these people and I love books. :)

I have about 190 points (and 57 books winging there way around the world as we speak). . Say somehow I manage to spend all but 40 without screwing up my ratio (unlikely). In Canada that is at least $3 a point, but more likely 4 or 5 (Overall). This is taking into account the .1's. That means that I would have between 120-200$ of my own money (prepaid!) trapped in the bookmooch system due to these changes. Posting more books is simply cycling in and out new points, it would not help me access $200 worth of banked but potentially useless points.

Even if there is some way to eventually gain permission to use our points, people may behave 'punitively' if they think my ratio shows that I am taking more than I give. People are already refusing to send internationally to those who will not, therefore this is certainly a real risk.

Links if you want to check the prices for yourself:

http://www.usps.com/prices/first-class-mail-international-prices.htm

http://www.canadapost.ca/tools/pg/prices/default-e.asp

1) 3 points to spend in your country

2) a 3 point bonus to your mooch ratio to spend in your country

That's fine and all, if you mooch almost exclusively in your country. This is good for the US or UK moochers. But what if you have to mooch almost exclusively internationally to get the books you want?

Worry about getting the books back in the system John. Not about some stupid point ratio that went in place to defeat the scammers.

ETA: My tone is snarky and for that I apologize, but the content remains, so I'm leaving as is with the additional of an apology for the snarky tone.

I've never had one of my wishlist come up from my own country. Almost always the book's gone before I get the email about it, though checking my email is one thing I do manage every day.

Do people decide who to send to on the basis of how active they are in BookMooch? It takes me 3 weeks to read an average novel. I know I'm not typical but surely systems like BookMooch should work as well for us 'gradual' users as anyone else? I can't help it that I'm into the writers that are less often offered.

A long wait is ok; it's not so much that I'm looking for authors that are little-known, as authors little-known in the UK. Others have said this on here, too - BookMooch is a great choice for books rarely found in shops over here, but would be better if the random moochers were emailed, say, half a dozen at the same time in order to give us all an equal chance (with the time difference). On Freecycle there's the same problem unless the giver chooses to wait 24 hours for all requests to come in.

I bet some people do prefer the active moochers, when they have a few to choose between, but that's humans for you and I don't believe in legislating / enforcing / nit-picking to that degree. As for checking my wishlist, if you mean searching for those books on it instead of waiting passively, it's in the category of activities I would do if I was able to spend longer on the computer. One of the drawbacks of disability, just like low income, lack of social life, and being unable to visit Machu Picchu.

I'm not simply whinging. I'm aware of detailing my own specific problems, but also aware that I can't be the only one, and surely things like this need to be inclusive.

a) only available abroad and
b) owned by people (USA) who no longer sent internationally.

In fact this has often been the case, but the change has made it much worse. I see that no protest had an effect and understand the reasons behind the change, but even months later, the mooching situations for me/us Europeans became the opposite of what has been predicted by the changer.

I can only guess that apart from being miffed at first, the new system will never work because there's so much nationally on offer in the US that this "incentive to send" turns into the opposite; I don't quite understand why this hasn't entered John's reasoning? Maybe I missed it

Many of us agree with this and I notice a proliferation of "I'll only send to you if you also send abroad" messages in bios. I also know that some people in the past were suspended for saying this publicly. Many of us continue to send whether the recipient posts abroad or not, but I do think people should have an option in preferences saying "Will send anywhere to those who also send abroad". That would certainly coincide with John's fairness principles.

I am also shocked that when new members join the "About" and "Points explained" sections still say you pay TWO points for a book, and believe this and the promised change in wording about much-wishlisted books and BMjournals should be made.
I spend much too long each day chasing up journals that moochers have decided to keep permanently or worse still throw away because they requested them not understanding journalling. A mention in the introductory notes would considerably help us journallers!

I specifically quoted what John had said in this blog" "If you are willing to pay the extra postage cost to send a book internationally, I think you should be rewarded and be able to ask someone else to do the same."
I also said I do send worldwide, despite financial restrictions, whatever the status of my moochers, but I recognise the rights of people who like to send overseas but also have limited budgets, to be able to choose who they send to.
Many already discriminate without mentioning it in their bio, whereas those who do say it risk suspension, because as you say, and I inferred, it is against the current rules. The rules are changing. If we want to be 'fair' we might give Americans three point for agreeing to send three books abroad because in a flatpack it costs the same as sending one book; give UKians extra points for any book deeper than 2.5 cms. packed as it costs more than one the same dimensions and weight but thinner, give people without surface mail or economy options extra points, give Canadians 3 points for inter-country mooches because of their postal rates.
I do not advocate any of the above, but I do feel having a preference available which many already operate without stating why, is both pragmatic and realistic. It would mean people would be able to request an angel instead of having their request rejected and often missing the book entirely.
Until then I will go on advising people, where I see them state they will only send abroad to others who do, that it is against the rules, and may cause them to be suspended.

I think keeping it simple is better...otherwise it would be way too much work for the admins.

However, there could be *some* special cases, like the Canucks, I just don't quite know how that could be made to work.

For Canadians, bookmooch is dying. Not so slowly, either.

It's too expensive for me to ship within Canada. I can always ship internationally more cheaply than I can ship domestically.

Unless somebody wants to mooch at least 3 books, no Canadian bookmooch user will allow another Canadian to mooch from them. It's just way too expensive.

Watch the Canadian stats - if John changes things (for Canadians only) so that all domestic shipping counts as international, I'm CERTAIN that there will be more usage by Canadians.

And they'll be happier too.

How would you feel if you had to pay almost $12 to ship a book to the next town over? (And our CDN dollars are worth more than US dollars, also.)

But the same book would be about $7 to ship overseas (or about $5.50 to ship to the US).

Hmm... 1 domestic point for $12, or 3 international points for $7.

It's a no-brainer. Bookmooch is essentially dead for Canadians UNLESS they can focus only on the international mooches.

And now it costs 1 point more to mooch from me (before, a user in Ohio could mooch my book for 2 points, but now it costs him 3 points). So this Ohio user is more likely to simply wait until the book is listed somewhere in the USA and bypass mooching from me.

Joyn... at least allow Canadians to mooch from each other for the 3 points. All Canadian domestic mooches should qualify as international.

Why worse? Because there is only one copy extant of each journal and once stalled or lost it deters journal creators from participating in journalling. A journal tends at present to average 4 entries a year - say 8 pages, so a 100 page journal would take 12 or 13 years to complete! Often one journaller will keep a journal for a year despite the rules specifying that journals should be relisted within two weeks.

At least with a book cancelling and looking for another copy s a possibility.