Djrmel Djrmel's Comments (member since Mar 03, 2009)

Djrmel's comments from the Goodreads Feedback group.

(showing 261-280 of 304)

1 Eric wrote: "I was able to test some things today. Here's a summary of the problems I encountered:

A book review, posted from the Goodreads website, was successfully sent to Facebook and Twitter. However, once..."

Eric, I'm curious about the Facebook post. Did you achieve this by checking the Post to Facebook box on the Review Edit page or was that box left unchecked and you used the Post to Facebook box on the "Your review has been updated" page? I'm asking because that seems to be where my review posts to Facebook go astray.
1 Ben wrote: "let me know if there's a box checked that says "Publish content to my Wall"

Forgot to answer this...yes, that box was checked.
1 Yep, definitely still not working automatically. The Twitter app disables itself every time I post a review (it posts to Twitter, then disables); and Facebook only goes through if I uncheck the box on the review edit page and then check the box on the "review has been updated" page.
Apr 07, 2010 01:01PM

1 Patrick wrote: "Djrmel wrote: "Otis wrote: "We do have a policy where if a person doesn't respond to a swap in 5 days and the swap expires, they are put on vacation mode and all their books are removed from swap. ..."

Ahhhh...the ol' scroll to the bottom of the page answer! ;-) I should have known I didn't look everywhere! Thank you, Patrick.
Apr 07, 2010 12:56PM

1 I had four swaps to ship out this morning and I rec'd that "can't connect" message many, many times, but eventually the labels did all print. I was using Safari the whole time, so it might not have been a browser issue.
Apr 07, 2010 12:49PM

1 Otis wrote: "We do have a policy where if a person doesn't respond to a swap in 5 days and the swap expires, they are put on vacation mode and all their books are removed from swap. The person can come in and remove vacation mode at any time."

Is there a way that we do that to our own accounts, when we know we're not going to be able to check on the requests or ship books out for a few days/weeks? I looked through swap help, and looked around for one box that could be checked to temporarily remove all "available books" and then later put them back into the swap, but couldn't find anything.
Apr 04, 2010 08:36AM

1 mlady_rebecca wrote: "I like the addition as Becky has explained it. Basically, removing infrequently used shelves from the drop-down box by manually specifying each of those shelves as "closed" or "hidden" or "pick a b..."

How about "non-active"?

I'd definitely like the option of moving a shelf out of the "Choose shelves" drop down, but still have it show in my Bookshelf list that shows on the the left hand side of all the various views of "My book". I don't use the type function to shelve books because I always end up missing a shelf or two, and have to go back and add them.
1 On the first try, Twitter posted fine, nothing went through to Facebook.

Everything was checked on my Apps page before I started. The new Facebook checkbox on the review page was preselected, I had to manually check the Twitter box.

I went back into edit mode on the review page, unchecked Facebook, and then selected it on the "your review has been posted" page, saw the "permission request" box flash a couple times - and then it posted to Facebook.

And now I notice that Twitter has been disabled on my apps page.
Mar 24, 2010 06:07AM

1 Would it be possible for the received/not received buttons to show up a little sooner? As an example, I rec'd a First Reads book yesterday, about 2 weeks after I won it. I always start reading First Reads books right away, so it would be really nice to be able to check off the "I've received this book" button at the same time I move it from "wants to read" to "currently reading". With the delay of those buttons showing up, I'm going to have to remember to go back in at some other time, perhaps even after I've read, rated, and reviewed the book weeks earlier.

Or, is the real interest in this only for the books NOT received, and it's not going to matter if Goodreads doesn't get notified about the ones that are received?
Mar 22, 2010 07:10AM

1 I'm back to nothing posting to Twitter ("to read" had not been a problem in the past) and only "to reads" on Facebook. No rated/reviewed books going through on either feed, and I waited at least 15 minutes before checking.

Edit: Moved a book from "to read" to "currently reading" and it posted to both feeds. The connection between Goodreads and Twitter/Facebook is still there, but something is stopping "read" books from going through.
Mar 21, 2010 01:07PM

1 Thanks Becky and Lisa, for answering my questions about email notification. I can understand that unless the First Reads notifications could be blocked along with all the other emails, sending a "did you receive it?' reminder is not a good idea. I withdraw my request. :D
Mar 21, 2010 08:38AM

1 Lisa wrote: "Djrmel, You do get an email when you've won a book, but you don't get anything after that. When it comes, it comes.

That's what I was wondering, if members who have all email notifications turned off still get a "you've won!" email. Does this mean that the First Reads notification system overrides the individual account settings?
Mar 21, 2010 07:17AM

1 Becky wrote: "I wouldn't want an email reminder. I have all notifications turned off. I would rather the button just be available."

Just curious...does that mean you don't get a notification when you've won a book?
Mar 20, 2010 07:53PM

1 Are we supposed to watch our "won" book list for the buttons to show up? Like others have said, it's not going to be the easiest thing to remember. Would it be possible for Goodreads to send an email (using the same notification system used when the books are won), at whatever time period the buttons are going to show up, asking the winner to go to the page and indicate if they've received the book or not?

Also wondering, like others, if we should go in and click the rec'd buttons for all the previously won books?
Mar 19, 2010 05:38AM

1 Another vote for choice #2 here. The minimal effort it takes to click (or unclick, depending on what the default is set at) those boxes is greatly offset by having more control on what goes out.

As for ratings without reviews not going out to Twitter and Facebook, it was my experience (when the process was actually working) that if I opened the review box but didn't type anything in it before hitting save, the link did post to Twitter and Facebook.

(Edit - just tried it, and yep, you don't have to write a review to get the links to post to Facebook and Twitter, you only have to open the edit page and save it as a blank review. The Goodreads description carries to Facebook.)
Mar 15, 2010 07:05PM

1 Both Twitter and FB are updating for me, but I just noticed that instead of my review comments carrying to FB, the GR description of the book is posting. So yeah, still working, but now in a new and not quite satisfactory way.
Mar 14, 2010 10:49AM

1 I would fully support hiding the reviews of privately shelved books, if such a shelf is ever implimented. But if I understood the private reviews discussions that have taken place before, hiding individual reviews within an account was a major programming problem. It was going to have to be all or none.
Mar 14, 2010 09:49AM

1 Dena wrote: "Drjmel - I don't think that having a private shelf would affect ratings at all. I have a private profile right now, but I assume that my rating of a book is still aggregated even if only my friends..."

You're correct - private account ratings do count in the averages, and your reviews show up as well. There have been requests that members can limit that from happening, but so far it appears the answer has been no. Personally, when I read a review and click through to the reviewers account to get a feel for their reading background before deciding how much weight to give their opinion in making my reading decisions and I find a private account, I usually disregard the review. I accept that I'm limiting my own use of Goodreads by doing that, the same way someone who chooses to have a private account is accepting limits to their visability. But at least there's some traceback (or accountability, if you will) for the review. Private shelf reviews and ratings would appear to not belong to anyone.
Mar 14, 2010 09:12AM

1 Wooohooo! Facebook worked! (Twitter is down for me, so can't check that one yet). I don't know if this had anything to do with it, buy I went back to my "old" order of Stars, Shelf, Review, Post; which means that the link is showing up on Facebook before I've actually written the review, but that's far better than nothing showing up.
Mar 14, 2010 08:32AM

1 If a book were to be shelved privately, would there still be an opportunity to rate it? And would that rating go towards the book's average rating on Goodreads?

For my use of Goodreads, I like to be able to follow a rating back to the reader. Without context, the rating loses much of its value. But again, that's just how I use the site. However, it's been mentioned in other suggestion/request topics that there are already members artificially inflating some book's ratings. Would hidden shelves give them another tool?

And last but not least, I have to agree with what SF SQRL pointed out in that other discussion. Once private shelves are a possibility, it will only be a matter of time before members start requesting that certain books must be hidden.

topics created by Djrmel