Film Club - a trial run

Both curation and popular vote definitely have their own problems. Here's a potential compromise approach, and I think captures some of Fysh's suggestions too. I think it's the easiest way to ensure everyone feels involved, without loading any one person or group with lots of work.

We make a list of posters interested in choosing films. Participation in any 'film club' discussion is by no means relegated to those on the list, of course, and we can add people whenever they want. Every fortnight/month (whichever works best... a week is probably too short) a person is randomly chosen, and they pick three films they'd think would make for good discussion for whatever reason - we'll call that person the curator for handiness sake. I say three films, but if people think two or five would be a better number, that's cool too - three is IMO a decent limit). They privately run their choices past the previous 'curator', who can veto a film if they think it's, for example, way too popular for inclusion - just a failsafe to ensure, say, a Star Wars or Marvel film doesn't make the cut - of if the choices are wildly inappropriate. In the unlikely event a veto leads to a dispute, they can run it by a mod.

Once the films get the thumbs up, the user starts a thread with a poll of the three films, and a brief description / trailer of each film. Users vote to pick which one they want to see included. What's important here is that we stress that picking a film just because you like it isn't the best option here - instead, people are encouraged to pick either a film they haven't seen or the one they think would make for the best discussion. Thread is locked while users vote (I assume that's technically possible :pac:).

After a day or two of voting, a film is chosen, the thread is reopened, and *hopefully* people go and watch it and discuss it.

After a few days / weeks, the current 'curator' randomly selects next week's on something like Random.org, and the cycle begins again. If that new person doesn't respond in a decent amount of time, then someone else is chosen. If the idea does take off, a poster can't become curator again until the list finishes and everyone has had their turn, at which point everything can be refreshed if needed.

Alternatively, rather than the list, the existing discussion threads could be used to pick the next 'curator', as per Fysh's suggestion. That'd reward participation.

Any thoughts? If it seems a bit convoluted written down, I do reckon it'd be a decent compromise between popular vote and curation... popular curation, if you will If people would rather a trial run without that fuss, I'm sure myself or Sad Prof would be willing to kick things off before a process is formally formulated.