Goodreads Feedback discussion

23334 views
Announcements > Important Note Regarding Reviews

Comments (showing 3,651-3,700 of 6,358) (6358 new)    post a comment »

D.A. - don't mock bully victims who suffered more than a star rating -  (Mourning-book-catalog) | 2104 comments La-Lionne wrote: "OldRocker wrote: "La-Lionne wrote: "This whole thing with GR ignoring our concerns is getting really old. I remember a post saying that GR has 20 mil users and that few hundreds or thousands leavin..."

It was all from a dustup of posts between an author and goodreads members that got picked up by Salon and other sites (frankly I honestly do think that originally they were responding to what they thought were rape/sodomy threats to an author); went viral; became almost a national anthem on the site we don't name who hammers every other post and comment they make with a link back to older Salon-etc. posts on the situation as "proof"; things on internet are persistent and never go away.

Once author calmed down, she made various retractions, including tossing Salon site originally jumping to her defense under the bus, posting the actual truth and phrasing of what started the whole kerflunkle, — somehow the retraction and the calmer explanations never went as viral.

Few of the original sites posting about author being threatened with rape followed up with the new information.

Earlier on this thread, a lot of links. I don't even remember author name and pseudonym (or which was which) -- was L ( Laura? Linda?) Howard at start of the debacle and now is L Pippa if you want to research. And yes—a lot of offensive things were said, shelf names were offensive, etc.

Unfortunately, I have a churning in my stomach that in addition to the blowup here on goodreads all this "bully" and "rape" tossing around, while good for promoting your posts in search engine results and gaining new cult followers, will bury some real rape and bully issues. *sigh* derailing 101.


message 3652: by Stacia (out of inspiration) (last edited Sep 25, 2013 01:32PM) (new)

Stacia (out of inspiration) (Stacia_R) | 302 comments I'm slowly trying to figure BL out. I sort of wish now that I'd copy pasted my reviews over instead of importing them because I have hundreds to have to go back and reformat now.

I'm not leaving GR because I'm attached to some of my groups, but for the time being, my reviews will be mostly for galleys so I keep my publisher permissions. My BL http://stacia.booklikes.com/


Karma♥Bites ^.~ (Karma_Bites) | 480 comments Batgrl wrote: "...So wait, there's NOW a new policy of 2 calendar days before take down? While I like the advance notice time - it seems odd that they wouldn't let us ALL know this. ..."


Batgrl, just to clarify, the prior notice and 2-day decisions period only applies to reviews/shelves created BEFORE Sept 21st. Those created after the 21st can be deleted w/o any notice.


message 3654: by Dutch (new)

Dutch (dutchess) | 282 comments Stacia ~ Admittedly Apathetic wrote: "So is Goodreads ever going to send out a site-wide announcement?

The amount of GR members who actually spend time in feedback is a pretty small representation of the community, even if a good por..."



Stacia, follow me back! :) http://dutch.booklikes.com/


Batgrl (No, GR I Don't Trust You With My Paperwhite Data) (goodreadscombatgrl) | 117 comments Stacia ~ Admittedly Apathetic wrote: "I'm slowly trying to figure BL out. I sort of wish now that I'd copy pasted my reviews over instead of importing them because I have hundreds to have to go back and reformat now.

I'm not leaving ..."


Just be sure to turn on the GR synchronization AFTER you work on the html at Booklikes. Once you allow it to synch all changes you make on Booklikes will be mirrored here at GR. (Sorry for repeating folks, I really don't want anyone to make my mistake!)


Karma♥Bites ^.~ (Karma_Bites) | 480 comments Stacia ~ Admittedly Apathetic wrote: "I'm slowly trying to figure BL out. I sort of wish now that I'd copy pasted my reviews over instead of importing them because I have hundreds to have to go back and reformat now...."

Stacia, sorry to hear that. :( But I appreciate the head's up on this as I've been waiting until the stampede to BL died down (and its servers had time to recover).


Alicia (is beyond tired of your *ish) (OstensiblyA) | 346 comments Batgrl and KarLynP: Okay. It's getting hard to keep straight at this point.

Bitchie's in an M/M state of mind. wrote: "I love knowing that my review might lead to another reader trying a new to them author, and I love knowing that my review might help someone who deserves to make it in this business."

Ugh, I know. The greatest thing is to see people add a book I had strong positive reactions to to their TBR. I love that.
In the same vein, I like getting thanked when I've warned someone of a potential problem or something that may run afoul of their ethics.

Batgirl: Kara's first response to us on Monday was stating that they'd notify before deleting. So that was something we were actually told here. I think they thought that would completely mollify us.

Yo, how long has been since we've gotten a response?


Batgrl (No, GR I Don't Trust You With My Paperwhite Data) (goodreadscombatgrl) | 117 comments Alicia wrote: "Batgrl and KarLynP: Okay. It's getting hard to keep straight at this point.

...Kara's first response to us on Monday was stating that they'd notify before deleting. So that was something we were actually told here. I think they thought that would completely mollify us."


Ah ok, so the 2 day notify thing is post-start-of-this-thread, and is also for shelves older than this week/Sept 21.

And - in theory - that's a notify just for shelves or for shelves and reviews?


message 3659: by Karma♥Bites ^.~ (last edited Sep 25, 2013 01:43PM) (new)

Karma♥Bites ^.~ (Karma_Bites) | 480 comments Debbie R. wrote: "...(frankly I honestly do think that originally they were responding to what they thought were rape/sodomy threats to an author)..."

Actually, it was b/c the author herself posted such 'info' on her blog or some other social media site. The other outlets simply latched onto her words and her phrasings--which were gross mischaracterisations (as well as very liberal interpretations) of the actual shelf names.


Bitchie (M/M addict) (Bitchie) | 205 comments Stacia ~ Admittedly Apathetic wrote: "So is Goodreads ever going to send out a site-wide announcement?

The amount of GR members who actually spend time in feedback is a pretty small representation of the community, even if a good por..."


Yep, I've mentioned this change in several of my groups, and every time, I run across a bunch of people who have no clue what has been going on. GR really needs to get off the pot, and send out a SITEWIDE announcement, not just in this group.


Karma♥Bites ^.~ (Karma_Bites) | 480 comments Well, if anything, this whole mess introduce many, many members to the back-up function. Which is very important, in and of itself. :)


Alicia (is beyond tired of your *ish) (OstensiblyA) | 346 comments Nenia wrote: "I got an email about my stgrb-supporter shelf. They want me to take it down: http://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_...

WTF."


You have GOT to be kidding me. That actually feels like them kicking us in the teeth. What is it about those people that are more important than the safety of their users?

And since they refuse to get it. I'm posting this again in response to this asinine request/threat/whathaveyou:

Lyn (The Heartless) wrote: "I am writing/shelving about the BOOK. The writer of the book will attack me and find out my personal information to use against me"

Why is this not clear?? We were going along just fine that way until people started threatening us and our safety just for POSTING REVIEWS COMPLETELY ABOUT THE BOOK ON GOODREADS. And now that can be dangerous and we should have the right to warn other users.

A Goodreads user got a phone call at home. HER HOME. 'We can find you, bitch.' For posting negative reviews ABOUT THE DAMN BOOK ON GOODREADS.

And now she is silenced on this fact? On who did it?

Goodreads users home locations, names, THEIR CHILDREN, pictures, and hang out locations were posted on an external website by these lunatics. AFTER THEY WERE BANNED FROM GOODREADS. Because of reviews ABOUT THE MFING BOOK ON GOODREADS.

WE FOLLOWED THE RULES (that weren't even rules at the time). And some of us got severely burned for doing so. And now our only real recourse is being taken away for what reason? To coddle the ones who are causing this danger and strife? Are you kidding me? Because if we go back to the way it was it will be all sunshine and rainbows? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?

This is what you're now insisting on protecting, Goodreads? Is it going to take someone actually getting physically harmed for you to see what you're doing?


La-Lionne | 159 comments Debbie R. wrote: "La-Lionne wrote: "OldRocker wrote: "La-Lionne wrote: "This whole thing with GR ignoring our concerns is getting really old. I remember a post saying that GR has 20 mil users and that few hundreds o..."

Thanks for clarifying it, Debbie R. I was wondering where this GR's paranoia of us bullying each other to death was coming from. I've read all the comments posted here, there were a lot of names and links dropped, but I was too chicken to check them out after someone posted a comment about someone tracking down someone's IP address. Freaky stuff :-S.


D.A. - don't mock bully victims who suffered more than a star rating -  (Mourning-book-catalog) | 2104 comments Please everyone keep in mind that prior the new policy announcement, goodreads could and did delete content (including reviews, shelves, comments, etc.) that was against TOS ( including threats such as but not limited to acts of violence or bully, hate speech, etc.).

That's a non-issue to me because it's not a new policy.

The new policy is stated back at start of this thread; read for yourself. Up to this post, no other staff comments if you are worrying about how many of screens of this you need to read to find policy and staff posts (Kara edited op to include any later staff comments). And was announced only in this small group versus sitewide. And has been applied so oddly most of us no longer are sure what is and is not acceptable content.


Alicia (is beyond tired of your *ish) (OstensiblyA) | 346 comments Batgrl wrote: "And - in theory - that's a notify just for shelves or for shelves and reviews? "

Shelves and reviews. The notification I got from them had both.


SubterraneanCatalyst -Censorship is for the Weak (TheLazyAbsentmindedReviewer) | 4 comments Well I've been trying to keep up with this thread- and I am SHOCKED that GR hasn't seen fit to make this a site wide announcement given what a huge impact this swerve in policy has on the user experience and quality of experience of this site. This move not only lacks due diligence to warn users of potential deletions until after the fact- it seems a blatant disregard for the concept of being a reader oriented site.

I can understand the desire for a policy of balance and being civil but I do not understand how censoring naming of shelves in anyway improves anything except for liability concerns. It certainly smacks of hardcore irony that this being a website about books that censorship is their resolution.


MrsJoseph | 1475 comments Karma♥Bites wrote: "Exactly, Bitchie. And this sentiment also goes to the small portion of authors who feck up things for rest of their peers. Frex, how many readers decided to eschew all but personally known SPAs b/c they didn't want to even deal w/ the possibility of a new or relatively new author having a meltdown? Who needs that agita to taint the joy of reading and discovering new authors? "


*raises hand*

I stopped taking SPA review requests when I realized that the ones I saw the most acted like batshit crazies.

Only from personal recs or i know the author already.


D.A. - don't mock bully victims who suffered more than a star rating -  (Mourning-book-catalog) | 2104 comments Karma♥Bites wrote: "... this sentiment also goes to the small portion of authors who feck up things for rest of their peers. Frex, how many readers decided to eschew all but personally known SPAs b/c they didn't want to even deal w/ the possibility of a new or relatively new author having a meltdown? Who needs that agita to taint the joy of reading and discovering new authors? ..."

*sigh* and yet this new policy (plus the secret sauce algorithm of whether or not shelf and genre feature even shows on certain book pages anymore) is disappearing some shelf names because of users worried they'll be deleted -- a goal no doubt of the few bba causing this vandalizing of the goodreads community data.

I don't have a good answer.

I do know that while short run the ★☆☆☆☆ ratings books now get in lieu of shelf/reviews are upsetting to authors, it's already being used as a battle cry of "see, bullying!" and every rating moves a book up in the ranks (even a 1-star rating) of various goodreads features including search results, exploring by genre, exploring top shelves, etc. The bba behave childishly and like any child's temper tantrum thrives on attention -- the more attention a book gets, particularly not one widely discovered, the more free promotion they are getting plus can play the sympathy card of mistreated author.

No notice is best revenge; however, the star ratings are all that currently have been left to us to catalog book interest. And for most of the bba that average rating is important enough to use socks to get and to scream bullying when a reviewer marks a book "I liked it" with a 3-star rating on goodreads because they are so stuck in their own little worlds they don't bother checking out the goodreads community or what the ratings and such indicate -- if amazon says on their site that 3-stars means a book was only okay then every other book site on blogosphere using 5-unit ratings must also mean it that way.

Frickin' not kidding; seen lots of posts from authors flaming out to the supporters how they got a bloody 3-star ( or 2-star) rating on goodreads. So for most bba's, I do think the 1-star expressing your interest in or cataloging order for reading of their book is effective.

I just hate that their tantrums are giving them attention and spoiling it for the more professionally behaved SPA.

( and seriously, goodreads, can you stop sounding like we can rate a book zero stars in your new author popups? So far goodreads policy has not changed where you have to star rate in order to write a review.)

[ETA for typos that made me sound illiterate]


Heather (creaturefromthesea) | 72 comments I have been on here since January of 2008. In that time, I have made over 24,000 librarian edits and added over 1700 books to my library.

In that same time, I was bullied by two authors; one was for calling him on the white supremacist overtones of the book I tried to read, and the other was for daring to flag his trivia question because it didn't mention the book title. Both called me stupid(one even used the phrase "If you opened your eyes, you'd see I'm correct"), and both left me frustrated that this kind of behavior was allowed. Needless to say, I took action against this in the only way I knew how: by letting other users know. Now you, the admins at Goodreads, have taken that right away from me and from other users doing the same thing.

Unless you rectify this new policy, this horrible mistake, I will delete all of my books and only use this for a few group discussions I'm involved in. This means no more reviews, no more edits, no more trivia questions. If you continue to make your policies less user friendly, I shall completely delete myself from this site.

For anyone who follows me who comes across this, I'm on Booklikes, and you'll know how to find me.


Brandi (BrandiDado) | 149 comments GR Staff,

I'm legitimately confused as to why you'd direct people to this thread for help. The fact that this thread is so enormous means the majority of people won't read it, and it's a lot of conjecture really, since you're not clear enough in your announcement. If you were there wouldn't be the many posters asking for clarification.

For the love of humanity, make a site announcement! Or, kindly explain the reason(s) no such message will be forthcoming.

That'd be great.


D.A. - don't mock bully victims who suffered more than a star rating -  (Mourning-book-catalog) | 2104 comments For those of you loving the new changes, undecided, staying, leaving, staying just for groups, at least staying long enough to see what the outcome is, or whatever ...

It bears repeating that you should keep a good backup of your content (under "My Books" "import/export" and export to *.csv file; if file looks funny when opened in a spreadsheet program, format some of the columns like review column to have word-wrap).

Whether or not you are importing to new sites.

Even if you absolutely adore the new "tone of community" policies, not necessarily a bad idea to have your content on other sites as well in case something does happen on goodreads.

There are more sites than just the one that keeps being mentioned here so often. Depending on site used, maybe tag or somehow note in your profile something like "goodreads refugee" so we can find you. Or maybe not as the bba could also follow and find you.

After all, everyone bullied and threatened with rape always follow after their attackers and want to live in their neighborhood.


Rachael (Bratty) | 79 comments So I can't have shelves of African American authors, or LGBT authors, or of Nobel Laureates since the Nobel in Literature is always given for an author's entire body of work not a specific book?


message 3674: by Iola (last edited Sep 25, 2013 03:00PM) (new)

Iola | 32 comments Rachael wrote: "So I can't have shelves of African American authors, or LGBT authors, or of Nobel Laureates since the Nobel in Literature is always given for an author's entire body of work not a specific book?"

On that point, you'll also want to be careful about shelves like YA Authors or NA authors, because that could be about the age of the author.

And don't even think about a Male Authors shelf.

So is my Christian Romance shelf safe? After all, Christian romances tend to be written by Christian authors ...


message 3675: by AH (new)

AH | 479 comments Jennifer (Sanity is overrated) wrote: "My latest tweet on this issue. RTs welcome!

https://twitter.com/addicted2lifeca/s..."


Retweeted.


message 3676: by Karma♥Bites ^.~ (last edited Sep 25, 2013 03:53PM) (new)

Karma♥Bites ^.~ (Karma_Bites) | 480 comments Debbie R. wrote: "...I do know that while short run the ★☆☆☆☆ ratings books now get in lieu of shelf/reviews are upsetting to authors, it's already being used as a battle cry of "see, bullying!"..."

Oh, I don't doubt that. But ever notice how it gets incredibly quiet the minute one questions why someone is bitching about a 1-star non-read but not a 5-star non-read? Or how it's perfectly fine for readers to express their interest in a book w/ 5-stars even before publication but how fecking dare they rate their disinterest w/ 1-star, before or after publication?

(BTW, here's a reminder: that's GR's policy so don't hassle readers for it; take your grievance to GR.)

And oh, let's not even go into some authors who bitch and moan about readers (1) rating books that they've never read but feel free to do so themselves, and (2) having 'offensive' and 'rude' shelf names but a quick look at their own shelves reveal even worse.

For me, it's the hypocrisy and double standard which rub me raw. *SMFH*

etc: typos


ETA: The above post reflects the fact that I am incredibly frustrated b/c this mess brought to the surface my basic gripe of recent months. Namely, most readers don't tell authors how to write their books so I can't understand why some authors think that they have the right to tell readers how to read said books, much less how to express their opinion of them.


message 3677: by Taja (new)

Taja Meadows (Tajanator) | 26 comments I just happened to see this through a group of mine.

Why no site-wide announcement? It may be a good idea to notify everyone of the changes via notification. It might help prevent your need to remove unwanted reviews, or to notify individuals who -if notified earlier- may have time to fix it before they are flagged. It could lessen your work load on the subject.

Just a suggestion.. :)


Literary Ames {Against GR Censorship} (amyorames) | 418 comments Iola wrote: "And don't even think about a Male Authors shelf."

Crap! I have that one.


message 3679: by ThreeRs (Got Logic?) (last edited Sep 25, 2013 03:25PM) (new)

ThreeRs (Got Logic?) Just want to leave this here, since the Lauren Fiasco is still haunting us: http://wp.me/p2j8xW-2Y

Part of me feels ashamed for defending Goodreads in that post, now that it seems they're throwing us under the bus. Especially since I'm still getting new pingbacks for it every day -- which means every day I'm telling people how awesome you are about responding to concerns, while you sit here and ignore ours.


message 3680: by Linda (new)

Linda Hilton (Linda_AHS66_Hilton) | 352 comments Three wrote: "Just want to leave this here, since the Lauren Fiasco is still haunting us: http://wp.me/p2j8xW-2Y

Part of me feels ashamed for defending Goodreads in that post, now that it seems they're throwin..."


♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ all over again.


Batgrl (No, GR I Don't Trust You With My Paperwhite Data) (goodreadscombatgrl) | 117 comments Three wrote: "Just want to leave this here, since the Lauren Fiasco is still haunting us: http://wp.me/p2j8xW-2Y

Part of me feels ashamed for defending Goodreads in that post, now that it seems they're throwin..."


I think a lot of us can relate with that Three - up to now I've had nothing but good to say about GR and it's been really helpful in keeping my books organized (and helping me remember what I already own). If I didn't like using this website so much I'd have given up on this thread a lot sooner.


Thalia (thaliaanderson) | 416 comments I like how staff have time to respond to other threads in Feedback, but still refuse to answer our concerns here.

I'm sorry; I'm not usually this passive aggressive/angry-sounding, but this whole situation irks me, and the only reason I'm still here is because I want to know if there will ever be an end to the questions, and if there will ever be a time when GoodReads comes out to clarify all the things we've been asking about.

*throws hands up*


message 3683: by Chris (new)

Chris | 41 comments Thalia wrote: "I like how staff have time to respond to other threads in Feedback, but still refuse to answer our concerns here.

I'm sorry; I'm not usually this passive aggressive/angry-sounding, but this whole ..."


I think that is what everyone is doing.


message 3684: by [deleted user] (new)

I haven't read all the comments (!) so apologies if this has been suggested before, but it seems to me that if GR staff won't make a site-wide announcement of this change, it could be a good idea for a link to this post to be made in as many GR groups as possible. I think it is important that ALL GR users know what is happening so that they can make informed decisions about their future use of the site and feedback their response to the GR staff.


message 3685: by Anke (new)

Anke | 295 comments Thalia wrote: "I like how staff have time to respond to other threads in Feedback, but still refuse to answer our concerns here.

I'm sorry; I'm not usually this passive aggressive/angry-sounding, but this whole ..."


+1

My guess? It's only a matter of time and they will shut down this discussion as well.


Richard Reviles Censorship Always in All Ways (Oldfan) | 265 comments I suspect they're waiting for the post count to drop before doing the next logical thing, which is shut the thread down.

Boy howdy, will THAT blow up on 'em.


message 3687: by Anke (new)

Anke | 295 comments Richard wrote: "I suspect they're waiting for the post count to drop before doing the next logical thing, which is shut the thread down.

Boy howdy, will THAT blow up on 'em."


Ha - great minds and all that :)


❂ Jennifer (reviews on BookLikes) (jennevans) | 868 comments GR has no intention of making a site wide announcement. Rightly or wrongly, they probably think that the majority of the people these changes apply to are already members of the Feedback Group.

GR also has no intention of EVER responding to this thread. They're just going to let everyone blow themselves out over it. I'm sure they're confident that there will be people who will rush in to take the place of the top reviewers and major users that have left.

These are my guesses, based on GR's past habits.

I'm almost done with my move over to BookLikes. I'll stay here for my specific genre groups, but as I've said before, I don't think I'll review here any longer.


❂ Jennifer (reviews on BookLikes) (jennevans) | 868 comments Looking at the rest of the Feedback threads, I gotta laugh at how super responsive Kara is suddenly being everywhere else. She's practically bowing...


Stacia (out of inspiration) (Stacia_R) | 302 comments ❂ Jennifer wrote: "there will be people who will rush in to take the place of the top reviewers and major users that have left...."

And there will be. The graduating class of GR is moving on, but there's an up-and-coming class of new kids who will happily step in and vie for those top spots.

Like it was said before, all of the top users who put years and multiple man hours into this site, helping to make it as big as it is - every last one of them is expendable.

It's sad, but true.

Other sites will use the GR model to eventually implement a greater social aspect (groups, messaging, etc.) but it would be hard to knock GR out of the running because of the Amazon backing. The new kindle-to-GR sync will bring in a certain amount of fresh blood as well.

At this point, we're all yelling into the void. It feels good to get out the concerns, but not much will likely change.


Richard Reviles Censorship Always in All Ways (Oldfan) | 265 comments Anke wrote: "Ha - great minds and all that :)"

Yes indeed. I cannot wait to see the kerfuffle when they do that.


message 3692: by night music -- bring on the clowns ♫ (last edited Sep 25, 2013 04:26PM) (new)

night music -- bring on the clowns ♫ (pjreads) | 459 comments ❂ Jennifer wrote: "GR has no intention of making a site wide announcement. Rightly or wrongly, they probably think that the majority of the people these changes apply to are already members of the Feedback Group.

G..."


Except that the changes apply to ALL members because content that many members used to screen authors is now missing and the range of reviews is not as broad as it used to be.

A site-wide message needs to be communicated.

I hope when a site-wide message is finally sent that GR has decided to stop deleting innocuously named shelves because they think they can read a user's intent in having the shelf.

It would be amazingly wonderful if GR also decided that readers/consumers need information about the authors/producers of books/products. But I haven't spotted any pigs flying yet.


Stacia (out of inspiration) (Stacia_R) | 302 comments I'm guessing that they might be able to use making the announcement in Feedback as a loophole to say the community was informed, but by doing so only here, it limits the shit-storm that a site-wide announcement would cause.

I understand why some people are choosing to post the info in their groups, otherwise many people won't know. I've had a few people ask me today what I was referring to.


Randolph Carter (us227381) | 176 comments Stacia ~ Admittedly Apathetic wrote: "❂ Jennifer wrote: "there will be people who will rush in to take the place of the top reviewers and major users that have left...."

And there will be. The graduating class of GR is moving on, but..."


The thousand mile journey starts with a single step, or a single voice. Boycott GR. Use it as simply a book database and do your biblio-social networking somewhere else.

BookLikes is getting bombed. It's almost like a DNS attack it's so bad.


message 3695: by ♡Karlyn P♡ (last edited Sep 25, 2013 04:31PM) (new)

♡Karlyn P♡ (KarLynP) | 317 comments Debbie R. wrote: " Depending on site used, maybe tag or somehow note in your profile something like "goodreads refugee" so we can find you. Or maybe not as the bba could also follow and find you."

This really made me laugh, as I am a moderator of a GR Group call 'Romance Forum Refugees', and the founding members are all refugees from Amazon's Romance Forum. Amazon once let the spammers, socks and self-promoters run the site into the ground and it ran off so many good members, so we formed the new group on GR (where we can actually moderate!!) and had over 300 members within days. The group quickly grew to over 1,000 within months, and now is close to 2,000 (though few new members are actually refugees anymore!) Amazon did create the 'Meet Our Authors' group around that time, and finally began enforcing their 'no spamming' policy (which was never new, just never enforced), but it was a horribly executed solution.


Ingrid  (initch) | 3 comments Stacia ~ Admittedly Apathetic wrote: "❂ Jennifer wrote: "there will be people who will rush in to take the place of the top reviewers and major users that have left...."

And there will be. The graduating class of GR is moving on, but..."




Stacia (out of inspiration) (Stacia_R) | 302 comments Randolph wrote: "Stacia ~ Admittedly Apathetic wrote: "❂ Jennifer wrote: "there will be people who will rush in to take the place of the top reviewers and major users that have left...."

And there will be. The gr..."


I will be slowly migrating, but I will not discount the friends I've made here who are not leaving. Those friendships do mean something to me.

Many of us are stuck with the dilemma of groups/social interactions we don't want to leave behind, but will slowly be migrating reviews away from the sight, even if not overnight.


Stacia (out of inspiration) (Stacia_R) | 302 comments ♡KarLynP♡ wrote: "Amazon once let the spammers, socks and self-promoters run the site into the ground and it ran off so many good members."
..."


Yep. That's why I left the Amazon forums in the first place. Someone on Amazon recommended GR, I checked it out and thought : wow, this is so much better than all of the crap that's going on over at Amazon!

Joke's on us all now.


Shera (Book Whispers) (SheraBookWhispers) | 24 comments Personally I don't think shelves should be messed with.

I understand reviews, but shelves are for the readers personal use. What I can have a "fave authors" shelf but a "unfave authors" shelf is a no go.


Green Troll | 8 comments You guys are killing this site! Many came here for honest, uncensored reviews. Some reviewers DO go off the deep end, but mature people can see it for what it is. This place is becoming a politically-correct utopia that favors authors and money over content, and I suspect it will only get worse. Many of us value honestly over the superficial, but I see more fluff around here more-and-more each day.

The author thing is also a joke. They'll just create sock-puppet accounts, like they do now, to harass reviewers. The behavior of many author's on this site has repulsed me, and that is something people should know about!


back to top