Rachael's recent posts

Recent public posts (showing 81-100 of 117).

If the book were from Shay's POV, I definitely think I'd be more in line with your interpretation. But getting it all from Tally's POV, I feel like there is always enough doubt surrounding cutting and enough of a feeling that this isn't solving anything and isn't making her any more part of the group than she was before that teen readers would pick up on the problems with cutting from the start and just have them confirmed by the end.

I came away from the book with a completely different interpretation of the cutting angle. I thought it was shown over and over that the Cutters were teenagers who felt there was something wrong with their brains and emotions both at Pretties and Specials. They knew something didn't feel right and were doing everything they could to find a solution. Cutting was their answer and it was a poor one that didn't solve much of anything. As Specials, cutting kept them "icy" but I don't think icy means what you think it means. Being icy was about heightened senses and awareness but it also brought the kids further into their programming, not out of it. It is when she thinks about cutting, after all, that Tally makes the decision to give Shay the locator chip even though she knows that isn't what her real self would do. The cutting is making her less true to herself and more true to the programming and it is only after she stops cutting that she is able to break free. Eventually all the Cutters realize that the cutting might have felt like the answer but it really wasn't and the actual answer is to seek help from a trained and trusted medical professional. If you want to take away any message about cutting from this book, I would think it would be "Something feels wrong and cutting might seem to help for a while but it doesn't actually and seeing a doctor is the only way to get real help."

December. I think early December, but I'm not positive.

The author is there if you are on the "main," "list," or "print" views and isn't if you are on "reviews," "covers," or "edit." All you need to do is change to a different view by clicking one at the top next to where it says "Views:"

Occasionally there is a box that shows up at the top of the home page about inviting friends. Click the "x" to close it and it will go away. Other than that, my home page is all about books added by my current friends with no mention of finding new friends.

I really like the new Facebook and look forward to it cleaning up the clutter of a lot of my friends' pages. The GoodReads app never updated for me before unless I forced it to and now it is the same so I don't see any difference there. You can get it to update by clicking the "refresh box" link.

As to wanting GoodReads to feature more prominently on the new Facebook, there could very well be several ways to do that in the near future. When GoodReads created their Facebook application, there were two basic profile boxes that had to be created: a large box for the larger column and a small box for the smaller column. Both of those boxes still work on the new Facebook they are just on the "Boxes" tab. I currently have GoodReads as the first box on that tab and that is good enough for me for now.

With the new Facebook, there are two other options for viewing an application. First, users can supposedly select up to three applications to display as small boxes on the left side of the wall and info pages. This will ensure everyone sees those boxes even if they don't go to the "Boxes" tab. I say supposedly because the new FaceBook is still in Beta testing and this function doesn't appear to be working correctly yet. Secondly, users can create a tab for one application. So after "Boxes" you could have a tab called "GoodReads" or "Books I'm Reading" or whatever you want to name it that would display just information from GoodReads. That feature is currently working on Facebook's end but not GoodReads as far as I can tell.

Both of these options, the box on the wall and info pages and the separate tab, require that GoodReads design those boxes just like they had to design the wider and thinner boxes for the different columns. As far as I can tell this hasn't yet been done. I'd like to see them in the future, but I'm ok with what I've got for now and would rather have the GoodReads team prioritize improving GoodReads over improving the GoodReads Facebook app.

That said, if anyone does get a chance to tweak the Facebook app, could we get the new "All" shelf added as one of the options to have displayed over there? It isn't showing up for me in the drop-down menu to customize the content.

You might want to consider looking at Gods of the Greeks and Heroes of the Greeks by Karl (Carl) Kerenyi if you still need to track down some sources. The stories aren't as well written as Schwab's versions, but Kerenyi does include his sources. Based on the similarity in the tellings, I suspect if you looked at Kerenyi's sources, they would be the same ones Schwab used.

I am a fan of science fiction in all its variations and have many friends who are as well. We all use the term sci fi as an abbreviation of science fiction to refer to anything within the broad genre. I am aware that there is a different opinion within the sci fi fan community and have my opinions on that, but all I'm going to say is that I don't have any problem with sci fi and know many others who don't as well.

SF won't work for the GoodReads name for the genre simply because the list of genres is supposed to be for everyone. Someone who is a fan of sci fi will know immediately what SF means. Someone who reads mostly romance novels will likely never have encountered SF as an abbreviation for Science Fiction before and will have absolutely no idea what it means. An abbreviation is not at all useful if most the people encountering it will have to puzzle for a while to figure out what it means.

If you sent them a message, I won't this time. No sense inundating GR with the same message. I'll keep your suggestion in mind as the way to go if I run across something like this again. Thanks.

I just saw a group on the "active groups" list called Official Goodreads Roleplay. The description says it is an official group monitored closely by goodreads staff. That's not right, is it? Is there a policy on groups claiming to be official that aren't?

This seems like it will be a lot of fun.

Would it be possible to have what lists a book is on added to the book's page along with the discussions/groups pertaining to a book?

1) Go to my books
2) Upper right corner is a list of "tools." Click "widgets"
3) Under "My Book Widgets," select "javascript book montage widget (for blogs)."
4) Customize and play to your heart's content :)

EDIT: Laura apparently types faster than me.

I think GoodReads' official policy seems to be that fanfic is allowed.

http://www.goodreads.com/blog/show/84.Do...

Grumpus-

I'm on FF as well and I can't see them.

On the home screen, there should be essentially a large light-grey box with the updates in it. The top of that box is text rather than a line. The text tells you what kind of recent updates you are viewing. Directly under that text is a series of links for the different types of recent updates. Groups is the middle link and I think is what you want.

Authors are on the print view. I've always printed my to-read list directly from the print view window and never had any problems.

I'm using FF on PC and I had a slight problem with it earlier. I think it was when I was adding a book and the add shelf drop-down menu and the already added shelves were overlapping. I've not noticed it anyplace else.

It is labeled as spoiler. The problem is that the "spoiler" is a lie. It says something happened that doesn't in any shape, form, or fashion. I think the intent is to upset people who look at the review before first reading the book because it is a pretty upsetting "spoiler."

I see it at the bottom of every comment but not the reviews. I must be blind.

EDIT: Found it. I think I was missing it earlier because it comes right after the bright "yes" for do you like this review and just says "flag" rather than flag abuse as it does everywhere else. Since it is so dull after something that is extra bright and was not what I was expecting, my eyes were just skipping over it.

I don't think there is a flag abuse option on reviews. Unless I'm missing something obvious.