So I’ve just now looked into bookwyrm despite knowing of it for a while. From what I can tell, it doesn’t federate with lemmy … please correct me if I’m wrong! And this seems to be largely because bookwyrm is largely user based, or at least that’s how mastodon sees it.
But it seems that lemmy and bookwyrm would actually be a good fit? Lemmy is communities with posts with comments. Bookwyrm seems to be books with reviews with comments. This feels like a one to one mapping could work well, no?
From what I gather, there are various bookwyrm instances with different focuses. So from lemmy you could search specifically to an instance for a book/community using key words, which would also work well. Then you could delve into the various reviews and comments etc.
More importantly, this would cross pollinate between the two platforms! And of course, any good review could be easily cross posted to any relevant community here, where all comments from here would also be federated with bookwyrm.
Thoughts?
Thanks! Not a user of bookwyrm, so my thoughts could be nonsense for actual users.
Main reason why I thought there might be something to my idea was that book reviews could be good seeds for conversations about the book itself, whether the parent reviewer is involved in the conversation or not. Which is basically how link aggregators like lemmy work. Except in the case of bookwyrm federation, you wouldn’t need to post the link to an external source, the review itself could naturally work as the parent post.
I don’t know how common it is for conversations to start beneath or around reviews. But maybe it’d be a good thing?
I don’t use Bookwyrm either, but coming from the perspective of Storygraph, I don’t really think the average user there wants their review to become a talking point. I’m not really writing them for deep discussion or analysis, just my off-the-cuff thoughts on finishing a book, more for my own sake too. I also don’t want to see threaded conversations when i’m skimming over reviews to decide on a book to read. Hence why I think it makes more sense for a publicly follow but don’t interact type of federation for those types of services.
Cool. Thanks! Interesting platform … didn’t know it was so sort of inward facing (which I say with no criticism).