Thank you Teheuti for taking the initiative, and thank you all for caring so much about the group study idea. I apologize for my lack of involvement, I've been sick lately, and have been online mainly in a lurking capacity. But I'm back, so that's alright.
Anyway, I'm hearing a lot of good ideas here as well as in the other thread, but also the shadow of unresolved past tensions. Heaven knows the whole "intuitive vs esoteric" debate has been hashed out here in the past, and I have no wish to revisit those times. While I can't dictate terms for discussion, I can offer my "legal" opinion. The last thing we want is to have a good idea derailed by arguments we can already foresee arising, and have already arisen in the other thread.
Firstly, free-associative posts cannot be removed, and there is no reason why they would be. Everyone has a right to post, and I can't even claim that my own kabbalistic musings are any better or more accurate, although they are without a doubt more pretentious. In addition, it is, among other aims, exactly those people who know nothing about a subject but want to learn about it that a study is geared at. Students at all levels should be welcome to contribute and learn, even if their expertise isn't in obscure esoteric literature. This does not mean that more advanced students would find that such a study offers them nothing, I do not want that either. However, a compromise should be found.
Also, suggesting that some posts not be allowed implies someone would be policing and removing those posts, and that someone would be me. That's not how things work.
Secondly, study groups need not have official sanction. Working with the mods is both useful and recommended but not always necessary, as anyone can post what they want, where and when it is appropriate. I myself raised the question of a group not as a mod but as a regular user. If the group takes off but it isn't what someone specifically wants to study, I see no reason why there has to be only one group, feel free to post about what you want, and I have faith that people will join in. Of course, if it gets to competing study groups about the same thing that would be ridiculous, but I myself would enjoy more than one group. If you have any doubts about a group you wish to open, feel free to ask.
I have not voted in the poll in the interest of, well, disinterest, but if I may suggest something, a group study of the chapters on the Trumps, both chapters together (the simple explanations at the beginning of the book and the more occult meanings later on), since that might be relatively fun and educational, as well as light. Not everything has to be heavy, and we can have some fun. And why not have fun? I myself have got the Book of Thoth group to handle, as well as mod stuff as well as life as well as my own personal Tarot studies, so a Trumps study would suit me very well. Keep in mind that although I call a study of the PKT Trumps "light," this isn't to suggest the study would be shallow or meaningless. I'm simply saying that we all know the Trumps in some fashion, and such a study would be readily accessible, even if the conversation veers into deeper esoteric waters.
Also, I believe that at this point doing the whole book is needlessly ambitious, and it is better to start light and see how things get rolling. It is best not to look too far ahead, especially before a single study group thread has been posted. We also aren't under any obligation to tackle the entire thing in one go. While I understand that some members may prefer to take on the entire thing, I think we should also realistically evaluate how viable such a study would be in terms of participation, posting, etc. Although the world wouldn't end if the group fizzled out, it would still be a shame if that happened because of a surfeit of ambition.
Since we can decide on guidelines for our group, I suggest we concentrate less on the deck, but more on the book, although they are (obviously) connected. Free interpretations would be welcome, but posts would have to stay on-topic, relating at least in some way to the quoted text. I feel this would be both inclusive as well as structured enough to make most people happy. This is not in the interest of "idolizing" Waite, as someone here suggested, nor is it meant to enforce rigidity, but merely to add structure and cohesion to the study. The popularity and ubiquity of the deck seem to suggest some structuring of a study is needed. Of course, a certain amount of flexibility will be given, but the general aim would be to base posts on the text in a general fashion. Normal ATF rules would of course apply; stay on topic, be respectful, etc.
I'm not making a decree here, just making a suggestion and dealing with some backlog.