Everything Booklikes & Leafmarks discussion
Booklikes - discussions
>
Why is Booklikes preferred site
Sock Puppet Confessional wrote: "Nothing comes for nothing. I think people after seeing GR turn from a readers site into an authors and selling one (which it very definitely is becoming) might be a bit more inclined to pay for a subscription to keep a site independent."..."
Makes sense and given how much I rely on friends' reviews and comments, I would definitely pay for the service.
![Michelle [Helen Geek] (michelle_reads_to_relax) | 8 comments](https://images.gr-assets.com/users/1448463806p1/5557851.jpg)
Bunny wrote: "When Amazon bought Goodreads I created memberships at BookLikes, LibraryThing, and Reading Room. I didn't like Reading Room's terms of service so I deleted my account there. I tried LibraryThing ..."Good to know Bunny. Appreciate this info.
You're welcome Michelle, glad to be of help.
I apologize to the group for being so "out of it." I joined the other group, BL, in a rush and didn't truly understand the purpose of it nor how to use it. (Still don't quiet know how to use it yet.) I was really busy at the time and should have simply waited.OK, I got it now. The BL group that is actually on BL is an anti-GR group due to the purchase of GR by the ugly giant amazon? And apparently there is a suspicion that GR is deleting reviews they don't like?? Right? Hey guys, welcome to the NEW USA!
This group is a discussion about setting up, and the reasons for the BL group? So, how much longer should I monitor this group? Do you guys have a shut down by date yet?
Also, how do you know that some of your reviews have been deleted? I have no idea how many books I've reviewed on GR.
What we need is a librarian who is kin to Warren Buffett! ((o:
Gayle wrote: "I apologize to the group for being so "out of it." I joined the other group, BL, in a rush and didn't truly understand the purpose of it nor how to use it. (Still don't quiet know how to use it yet..."The people who have moved to BL are primarily moving in protest over the current badly articulated, undisseminated policy of arbitrarily removing reviews and shelves based on "intent" to discuss authors instead of being "it's all about the books" ma'am.
And many of us don't live in the USA, old or new.
This has nothing to do with corporate ownership, other than it is likely corporate policy that is causing GR to implement the new policies.
But dont' dismiss this as "we don't like amazon" because it's actually "we don't like censorship".
Krazykiwi wrote: "But dont' dismiss this as "we don't like amazon" because it's actually "we don't like censorship"."Precisely ...
Gayle wrote: "Also, how do you know that some of your reviews have been deleted? I have no idea how many books I've reviewed on GR."You'd have gotten an email if they had deleted any of your reviews -- informing you about it AFTER the fact.
According to GR's new ToU, they will delete anything that they interpret to be "against the spirit and tone" of GR, never mind that this "spirit and tone" is not defined anywhere and no matter how you yourself intended your content in the first place. Nor will they even try to contact you and give you the opportunity to explain how your content is intended, or amend it so your intentions become clearer should they indeed be ambiguous. Your content is simply being axed -- no questions asked. Censorship in its purest form.
And don't say "I'm a nice and well-intentioned person and I'm sure I'm not doing anything that is against the spirit and tone of this place." That's precisely what the people to whom it has already happened (for the record, I am not one of them myself -- yet -- but I'm not holding my breath) have ALL thought. And their deleted content includes everything from purely content-based shelves (which even under the amended ToU are OK!) to reviews on "Harry Potter" books ... simply because someone at GR determined they must surely be intended as a violation of GR's nowhere-defined "sprit and tone".
Jeannette wrote: "Thanks, Batgrl. I do like the fact that BL puts it all up front about what they will or won't do. And, they are very responsive to emails. I just have to decide if I like this open system where ..."Hi Jeannette, I'm new also at BL & I just reblogged a post - it doesn't have any info at the top/beginning about who did it originally, but it does at the very bottom. Now that I know that I will put that info there if I ever do it again
PS: It was Moonlight Reader's blog - definitely one to follow
... based on 'intent' to discuss authors instead of being "it's all about the books" ma'am.I'm not certain how you separate an author from her work?
According to GR's new ToU, they will delete anything that they interpret to be "against the spirit and tone" of GR, never mind that this "spirit and tone" is not defined anywhere and no matter how you yourself intended your content in the first place. Nor will they even try to contact you and give you the opportunity to explain how your content is intended, or amend it so your intentions become clearer should they indeed be ambiguous. Your content is simply being axed -- no questions asked. Censorship in its purest form.
Yep, that would be the amazon influence! They do the same thing.
This has nothing to do with corporate ownership, other than it is likely corporate policy that is causing GR to implement the new policies.
If this refers to my "Welcome to the new USA" statement, what I was referring to was the statements from the thread regarding being "watched" or monitored all of the time. Should have clarified that, I suppose.
Gayle wrote: "... based on 'intent' to discuss authors instead of being "it's all about the books" ma'am.I'm not certain how you separate an author from her work?
According to GR's new ToU, they will delete a..."
This new policy is just nonsense. Its really unclear, and puts users into a guessing game about what is and is not allowed. But I think its intentionally vague because its purpose is not to provide guidance to users, its to provide a broad justification for staff to delete content at will.
They're trying to stifle conflict by deleting content that they think might upset people or start arguments. Instead of actually dealing with the conflict - because they can't figure out how to deal with it so they just want it to stop. They are trying to shut people up and make them play nice like parents yelling at kids, I don't care who started it, you both sit down and be quiet right now.
Since this is the Why Is BookLikes The Preferred Site I just want to say: Everyone on the Tips & Tricks thread is raving about the customer service & communication
Also, honestly, its pretty! Or at least to me it is.
Gayle wrote: "If this refers to my "Welcome to the new USA" statement, what I was referring to was the statements from the thread regarding being "watched" or monitored all of the time. Should have clarified that, I suppose. "Actually I was reacting more to the idea that the group of GR members now settling in at BL, are either anti-GR or moving because of Amazon ownership.
Well, I guess both are true, in a way, but sort of obliquely.
Losing something you loved, and spent much time on (GR as it used to be) hurts, and I guess some are rather bitter about this GR no longer being that place. And as I said, while Amazon is the likely source of the new policies and the new behaviours, if that were the only reason we'd have been among the first exodus, back when the sale was announced.
To quote Jane Austen (as has been done more than once in the "big" thread) "My good opinion, once lost, is lost forever". It took a lot for some of us to get to that point, but now, we're going where the action is (and like Bunny said: It's pretty!)
Ancestral wrote: "Sunny wrote: "Because of this:Important Note Regarding Reviews"
This doesn't look good, though."
Do you know if anyone has asked this guy, the CEO?
I'm loving the blog function which allows for various multi-media posts. I like being able to post videos and pictures and have it all feed through on one blog. I'm not very computer programming savvy, but it's user friendly at a basic level, IMO.
Also it's kind of like shelfari in that you have a virtual shelf with your books sitting on it. Shallow, but since I am a collector by nature, it feels good to see my books on a virtual shelf.
Danielle The Book Huntress wrote: "I'm loving the blog function which allows for various multi-media posts. I like being able to post videos and pictures and have it all feed through on one blog. I'm not very computer programming ..."I liked the music Sherlocked Video you posted. That was tres coolio... (I hope I sound "dap" when I put it that way.:) )
Man, I can waste a lot of time looking at fan videos...
If there like that one, it was good!
I don't think it's an amazon issue exactly.My big peeve right now is the fact that they are still not announcing site wide or responding to questions about the new policy.
Of course I'm against censorship but at least if announced at large with a clearer policy then everyone could make up their own minds about what they are and are not willing to edit to comply with the new policy. No playing a game while they keep changing the rules but only telling certain players ... ridiculous.
(I'm also suspicious it's to intimidate people into using very few custom shelf names in order to make it easier for the new data scientists they are hiring to make sure we only see the best reviews possible ... ick ... I just got a tummyache just saying that)
Here comes the amazon tag system ... standard shelf names for all.
❂ Jennifer wrote: "They just added a scanning app for iPhones (and are working on Android and windows apps too). Wheeee!!!!"The BL app scanner is too simple and will I probable use it in the future :) However, I use an app called " BookCrwaler" that can upload and download Shelves from GR. Also with BookCrawler I have my shelves and books stored in the cloud and on my own devices as well as GR and soon BL.
The booklikes app scanner, according to their blog announcement of the thing, is just the first of a series of apps they are launching.
Ancestral wrote: "Sunny wrote: "Because of this:Important Note Regarding Reviews"
This doesn't look good, though."
I think it is OK - I saw in the huge announcement thread that the CEO has tweeted that he opposes the whole STGRB philosophy. Just because STGRB quotes someone doesn't mean he approves of the context.
Ian wrote: "Ella wrote: "Can I import my books and shelves from Goodreads to Booklikes, guys? I really don't feel like manually adding all my books again."You also need to export your books from GR to a CSV..."
Yes, it's very easy, but if you have a substantial number of books and reviews it will take a while. Be patient. My 3227 books and reviews took 7 days.
I think my 2K books took four days. I started the import Friday morning, and sometime between last night and this morning got the "you're done" email.
From Dawid, CEO of BookLikes"We would like also to confirm that BookLikes is independent, doesn't support or is linked in any kind with STGRB community, or any other."
Sock Poppet Fishy Wishy wrote: "From Dawid, CEO of BookLikes"We would like also to confirm that BookLikes is independent, doesn't support or is linked in any kind with STGRB community, or any other.""
Even better, in a discussion dealing specifically with the STGRB whinos:
"When they mess with our users they mess with me! ]:-|"
(8th "main" comment down. Posted within minutes of the thread's initial post.)
That'd have been the day when we'd have heard THAT from one of the GR overlords ...
I like the groups here too. A private page is a nice idea, I think everyone would like that.What I dont like so far is that I can't see all the reviews. That is the main reason I am on Goodreads, to check the books out and the reviews. I do agree that LibraryThing is boring, also I thought it was quite snotty.
I have high hopes for BookLikes though because Dawid is so responsive.
Generally I am NOT a reviewer, but more of stats tracker/keeper. I like GR's database and the ability to edit editions, I like yearly challenge, and I like the statistics it provides. I like talking to fellow readers whose taste in books I admire. I like to check out books they start reading in case it's something I'd want to add to my shelves. Discussing author's personal life and disagreeing with their worldview does not appeal to me. I ignore the author beyond their role of creator of something that engages me. I also do not write reviews, but jot down quick personal reactions and feelings that I elaborate on later in my private reading journal. So overall the situation goes right over my head. What I do hate about GR is their lack of consideration for users' requests. People keep asking them for same damn features and bug fixes for ages, and they either:
a) ignore it
b) say they are too busy to deal with our insignificant problems at this moment
c) claim that our requests are too unrealistic to execute due to technical difficulties.
You tell me, how hard it it to add a freaking option to list more than one read date, so I can track re-reads? How hard is it to switch "read" shelf to be sortable? Is it too much to ask for auto-sorting to work properly or implement subsorting like the LibraryThing does?! Just thinking of their unresponsiveness makes me furious.
I would migrate to Booklikes, if it offered the same level of organization as GR. It does not. I already have a blog that I barely update, because all I want is to read in peace. So that aspect of the website does not interest me. I care for all my covers to be the same height and match my desired edition. I am ridiculous like that. I want GR (or Amazon, or Illuminati, or whoever else runs this gong show) to stop being an ass and get their act together.
So no, I do not think BL as it is right now is anything superior to GR, just because the scope of my usage does not fit BL. If they change more and implement similar features that I am currently using, then by all means. My only concern stands with BL ending up being sued in the future if they try to be more like GR with improvements. I doubt Amazon will permit that.
Dutch wrote: "My profile can be seen by anyone. (And hey -- if someone out there can tell me how to hole up my profile/blog/shelf, then please tell me how it's done!)"Sites visible at your webpage:
blog
shelf
timeline
I think marking only the blog, will show only that for others?
Dutch wrote: "This is not a preferred site to me. It's just one more site. I joined LibraryThing because that's where people thought it was at once upon a time, and almost instantly I got bored. GR is still s..."I agree with you. I can't say BL is the same as GR is or at least USED to be, and that is why the thing going on here is pissing me off so hard. I still have faith in BL though, at least they pay attention to their users and have respect for them.
Dutch wrote: "And hey -- if someone out there can tell me how to hole up my profile/blog/shelf, then please tell me how it's done!"Haven't figured out how to make blog posts private yet (FWIW, this is something that you should bring up with BL admin in feedback, if you haven't already; I'm sure you're not the only one who would love this, for precisely the reasons you stated). But there is a way to make your books private:
Go to "Shelf". Switch to "Table View" (button in the right hand upper corner). Check off the books you'd like to make private (there's a "check all" option in the menu above your table of books as well). Click "add to shelves" in the menu above your table of books. This opens up a popup screen not unlike those we know from GR, which includes all of your shelves and, above those, a few preset options provided by BookLikes. One of those is "Private." Click on that. You should now have a shelf featuring all your private books.
If you want to double check whether this works, just add a single book to the "private" shelf (preferably from page 1 of your bookshelves :) ) and tell us here which book it is, so we can have a look whether it's still visible to others ...
Dutch wrote: "And hey -- if someone out there can tell me how to hole up my profile/blog/shelf, then please tell me how it's done!"Wait. Figured out how to (presumably) make your BookLikes pages private (i.e., invisible to others) as well, though I haven't tried this and you'd probably better double check with BookLikes admin whether these assumptions are correct:
On your Dashboard, find the "settings" button (it's the little cog second to right in the upper right hand corner of your Dashboard page). Click on that, then on the "Settings" page, find the "Blog" tab and select it. At the bottom of your Blog Settings page, there is a header saying "Sites visible at your webpage." Under that header, you can check and uncheck all three of the main pages provided for by BookLikes: "blog," "shelf," and "timeline." I assume if you uncheck any/either of those boxes the page(s) in question will still be visible to you, but they won't be visible to others any longer. As I said, better double check with BookLikes admin whether that assumption is correct, though.
Andrea wrote: "Generally I am NOT a reviewer, but more of stats tracker/keeper. I like GR's database and the ability to edit editions, I like yearly challenge, and I like the statistics it provides. I like talkin..."Andrea - Liked your post. I've checked out BL's and it's very attractive and colorful. But not as easy to navigate/read like GR's site. I'm reading all these posts on problems, etc. and about things BL's need to add. Just think I'll wait a bit longer before adding BL's, but I won't be leaving GR's. There are too many things I like about GR's and use there. I depend on GR's friends reviews and it's easy to see what all my friends are reading at a glance. Not all my friends will hop on the BL's train and I don't want to leave my GR's friends behind.
Since the advent of the Great Kerfuffle, I've been trying out several sites. Here are my initial impressions. Booklikes has a great GR import feature and is terrific for backing up. They are very responsive to questions and are working hard to become a real competitor to GR. The site has much more of a bloggy feel to it which can sometimes obscure reviews and book info although you can limit your view to just reviews. Not for those who really get off on editing bibliographic data. Customization is possible but hardly easy except for the techies. Synchronicity to GR is what makes the site fascinating. Works really well and you can have all your reviews, etc. ported immediately to GR.The LibraryThing is more for hardcore librarians and is very sophisticated in the software's ability to manipulate bibliographic information. Changing covers is a blast. I haven't been on long enough to see what the social aspect is like, but then it took six years on GR to accumulate a set of friends I enjoy. The import from GR was really quite easy although the import file size is limited to 2 MB so I had to split my 4 MB GR download into 3 files in Excel - easy enough to do - to get them to import. I had one minor glitch, emailed support, and it was fixed in just a few minutes. LibraryThing would be the preference if your only interest is in backing up what you have on GR. They have a very large database, definitely a plus, something Booklikes has yet to accumulate but will soon, I'm sure. For some reason, it has kind of a DOS feel for me, but then, I'm old. LibraryThing is not free ($25 for lifetime unlimited use or $10 per year.) But that's a good thing as it provides a measure of financial independence lacking at the other sites and offers stability. I like it - didn't at first, but do now.
And whither Shelfari? I've been cross-posting there for years, but frankly, it's a bit boring. No way to import from GR that I know of although anecdotal evidence suggests it is possible but doesn't bring along reviews (so why would anyone want to do that?) My guess is that with Amazon's purchase of GR, Shelfari will die a slow death or users will be exported to GR.
I would LOVE to see a study showing how much overlap there might be among power users among the major sites. Cross-posted all over the place. :)
BookLikes is, so far, fingers crossed, independent. I know it takes data from Amazon, but they all do.Shelfari is 100% Amazon-owned, as is GoodReads. LibraryThing is 50% owned by Amazon. So much for its independence.
So far the main problem (for me) with all the other sites is that only GR has the ability to backup your files in a csv (or any other file). (I thought LibraryThing had an export files option but I can't find it now.) WeRead.com is looking to have an export function in the future. Booklikes is new enough that it's not strange that they don't have a backup option yet.So as long as I want to keep a spreadsheet of books that I can easily backup and save - I have to stick with GR. (PLEASE correct me on this, I'd love an alternative.) But that doesn't mean I'll keep reviewing here, and I get the idea that what they still need are reviews and the ability to call the site impartial (since Amazon reviews are now suspect and it's generally known you can't assume any of them are unbiased).
Seconds later: AH HA. LibraryThing has it - search help with the term Export and you'll get there. And you can export in three formats.
OR I could just be helpful and link it (sorry, I'm slow today):
http://www.librarything.com/more/import
Booklikes is adding groups and does have a lot of familiar goodreads faces.Honestly, I haven't found the alternative or answer. I'm currently discouraged with the actual book features on booklikes, I still can't find saved as draft blog pages (likely just newbie error) and a blog post I made last night questioning one book feature has disappeared, including from my timeline ( it had that "die therapies" bookcover that overwrites so many books imported so maybe "die" was an issue?) Booklikes could be the one, particularly since adding features every Thursday. One thing stopping me from copying over my reviews is that I don't see a setting for opting in/out of third party sharing to sites like kobo-- with all that said, I'm new, they are new, and they are certainly already more responsive than goodreads.
Booklikes is also now on the STGRB hit list (pun intended) which is a big recommendation to me. (That site is so laughable, don't visit without masking your IP address, just look at cached screenshots , but they have been putting booklikers on their pogrom lists based on who is followed/following -- funny because booklikes randomly assigns you 25 people based on genres selected when you join. One of their targets had been a site member from startup, never wrote reviews, never joined goodreads, and had no clue what bba's were, who STGRB was or why they were suddenly threatening her. Another was from goodreads but had only written two reviews, one for an SPA and both 5-star ratings. Yes, their usual thorough research.)
I'm not impacted by the announcement either. I have no reviews here; I pulled my reviews when amazon bought gr but even if you believe the announcement means goodreads is finally taking a stance against "bullying"*—well, at first I never knew anything about the bba or other authors to have mentioned in a review and the most/worst thing I'm likely to have said remotely about an author is that a copyeditor was desperately needed. My shelf names only mentioned authors as "favorite author" and "due to author" (which was a list of which author made me a fan of specific genres) but otherwise said stuff like "to read not bought" "to read have bought" "sample to read" "format reading is kindle" "format reading is nook" "not age group genre or whatever for me" "dnf" ... Plus formerly a lot of shelf names to help put book in correct genre ... just in case I renamed my shelves.
Whatever your opinion of the policy announcement and the whole kerflunkle, it has made me very confused as to what shelf names are safe. Then when Kara added (not updated on the 1st post of that huge announcement thread but in another post on that thread) that it wasn't the shelf names that were objectionable but their "context" -- I really have no idea if even my now mostly coded shelf names are safe. I have read indie authors. Even indie authors I knew were on bba lists; even one I felt was put on a bba list for hilarious reasons (not for threatening or bullying a reader/reviewer) I deliberately read and discovered a fave new series -- I makes up my own mind after looking at lists, screencaps, public posts, my friends reviews, reviews from reviewers whose reviews strike a chord with me -- and I never felt I knew enough to ever post anything about an author in a review or in a shelf name unless I was directly spammed or attacked.
Until I just simply blocked, an author did try to start something with me because I gave his book a rating of "I liked it" both here and on amazon. It was really weird. And other than his own author review and rating, no one else had rated, reviewed, or shelved the book. My review mostly just listed some things I liked about the book although I did say not enough to continue reading the series because too many horror elements for my personal tastes. So I removed book from my shelves completely after deleting all updates, ratings and reviews. And I let it stop there.
*So, no, I'm not impacted by the announcement. And I don't want to turn this thread into one staff will close or that will get 5,000+ comments or derail OP but I do have issues with that announcement
Everyone including staff posting announcement keeps ignoring that threats, hate speech, bullying or any such content were always subject to deletion whether reviews, posts, messages, shelf names, comments or whatever. Clearcut in the TOS. So why the new author context announcement?
If only 21 out of 20 million members are a problem, just deal with them from deleting content after being warned to actually banning from goodreads if warnings persistently ignored. Online site TOS enforcement 101. 102=never make your members think you wil change the rules with no notice and start deleting content for no stated reason.
If deleting content about author behavior, why only negative content? That's where the big flaming, derailing "censorship" is getting fired up everywhere.
Why not announce, if a policy change, sitewide before members have content they did not even know violated new policy deleted? Otis and everyone on staff until Sept. 20 always vehemently told members shelves would never be touched unless against TOS.
I have no idea what shelf names are acceptable, what "context" might be construed from what I think are shelves just categorizing my books. The policy is as clear as mud. I have no trust that anything of mine at any time won't be deleted and totally ruin the book catalog/organization I spent years perfecting for my own use. I mostly have no clue if what anyone posts about their own behaviors or deleted content is true; but, friends shelves I used to shop for good books to read are gone so I do know some of it is true. If a tiny fraction, or even the targeted 21, are telling the truth -- it's not even reviews or shelf names that are deleted but rather any of their content referring to only certain authors is being deleted.
As much as I stay out of all the bba listing, boycotting, etc. crap, even I know that most of the authors whose presence in your content means it gets deleted are ones that goodreads banned from this site for threatening reviewers.
Sock Poppet Fishy Wishy wrote: "BookLikes is, so far, fingers crossed, independent. I know it takes data from Amazon, but they all do.Shelfari is 100% Amazon-owned, as is GoodReads. LibraryThing is 50% owned by Amazon. So much ..."
According to the Wikipedia, the owner, Tim Spaulding is still a majority stakeholder and Amazon owns 40% with Cambridge and Bowker other minority owners. But thanks for the clarification. I was not aware of Amazon's part ownership. I suspect the end goal of many of these sites is to eventually sell out for a substantial sum. I remain unconvinced that Amazon is behind the current suppression of reviews and shelves. I think STGRB has applied some pressure somewhere.
Sock Poppet Fishy Wishy wrote: " ...I know it takes data from Amazon, but they all do. ..."Actually, no, booklikes does not take its data from amazon exactly. You can choose each time (or customize your settings permanently for booksellers you want to use) if amazon, Barnes and Noble, or Powells, etc. are used in searching, pulling book data, etc.
And, no, they do not all do. Ironically, pre-buyout goodreads did not because a year or so back amazon changed their data use TOS so that no bookseller or purchase link other than amazon could show on the screen (a link to others or to more purchase sites could show but no other vendor names).
That data TOS from amazon is why you see sites like fictfact showing "amazon other" as their purchase links, why booklikes shows only one vendor at a time when searching, changing book editions, etc. Why some sites show one vendor at a time alphabetically since it justifies amazon showing first.
On booklikes, anywhere you see amazon you can click and other booksellers can instead be selected.
Debbie R. - Why still no site-wide announcement of new shelf name and review policies? - wrote: "Booklikes is adding groups and does have a lot of familiar goodreads faces.Honestly, I haven't found the alternative or answer. I'm currently discouraged with the actual book features on booklik...
....I still can't find saved as draft blog pages"
I couldn't either at first! At Booklikes, go to the menu at the top with Dashboard, Blog, Shelf, Timeline. Choose Blog, then check the right hand column for two options that say All Posts, Drafts. Your default is All Posts - click on Drafts and you should only see your Drafts.
(That didn't seem at all obvious to me - probably because you have to scroll down a bit depending on what you have in that column - but someone else pointed me to it.)
Bless you! I had to scroll ridiculously far down below the fold, but I was able to find the drafts.
Batgrl wrote: "Debbie R. - Why still no site-wide announcement of new shelf name and review policies? - wrote: "Booklikes is adding groups and does have a lot of familiar goodreads faces.Honestly, I haven't fo..."
I was just going to give directions.
Also, for people who like to post status updates of their current books, but want them all on one post to keep comments, I figured out a workaround last night.
I created a post for my book (in my case, it was The Count of Monte Cristo) and titled it:
The Count of Monte Cristo: Master Post (creative, huh?). Write the first update.
Now, when you want to update again, go back to that post and edit it. Here is the key - after you edit it, in order to get it to the top of the dashboard, you have to go to the right hand box where it says: "post date."
Change the post date from what it says (which is the date & time it was originally posted. If you leave it, the update will remain where it was on the dashboard, and no one will see it), to the date and time that it is when you are posting. This is more complicated than it sounds (I really wish you could just reset it to "now" which is the default for a new post). If you click on the box, it pulls up a calendar. Click on the calendar date that you want (so, in this case, date would be 10/1). That will pull up a little box that gives you time options. Set the time to the present time. If your time is different from the BL time, you need to account for that when you set the time.
It worked for me. I actually added a page break, and I will be moving the old updates below the page break and putting the newest updates above the page break, so the post doesn't get too long and overwhelm everyone else's dashboards.
Added a screenshot to group photos of where you find your drafts if it helps anyone else -- http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/...
Moonlight Reader wrote: "Batgrl wrote: "Debbie R. - Why still no site-wide announcement of new shelf name and review policies? - wrote: "Booklikes is adding groups and does have a lot of familiar goodreads faces.Honestl..."
Oh COOL! Yes, that's exactly what I want! I really hate the format of the quotes (giganto-FONT!), so yours is a much better option.
Debbie R. - Why still no site-wide announcement of new shelf name and review policies? - wrote: "Sock Poppet Fishy Wishy wrote: " ...I know it takes data from Amazon, but they all do. ..."Actually, no, booklikes does not take its data from amazon exactly. You can choose each time (or custom..."
The only alternative to a major data stream is Ingram, which is the world's largest distributor of English-language books. I, and a lot other booksellers, internationally, buy from them. Because they aren't a retailer, they don't benefit from click-to-buy, so they sell their data. Where do you think Amazon, Barnes & Noble etc get some of theirs?
CSV export is apparently on the list for the near future, and Dawid says they release new features every Thursday.
I'm enjoying the responsiveness of the site as opposed to the monolithic silence here on our concerns.
I'm not proseletyzing for BookLikes, I just wanted a group that would help friends link up with each other if they got an account there and the group has grown from that. I think it is possible to be a member of many sites online and enjoy them all. Lots of people have Facebook, Twitter, Skype and others essentially just for communicating with friends and family. There isn't a conflict.
Saw a post from Otis Chandler, (or someone with that acc't name), on the Feedback thread about a bug, last night. Immediately people started jumping on it/him about what's going on. Why bother, he's not going to address it & it will only bog up the thread & get it closed down. Oh well. I also like BL responsiveness. They actually get groups & PM's over there I'll probably start spending more time there than on GR. I am so partial to all the 'whistles & bells' we have here, but absolutely hate what's going on, whether it effects me or not. The 'good men remain quiet' quote always comes to mind.
So far, it seems to be a good product. But how to make it work to suit my needs as a reader and booklover?