John’s answer to “Why does this novel have a 1 star review when it isn't out yet?” > Likes and Comments
9 likes · Like
No need to be rude John, it's a legitimate question. They may have received and advanced copy. I know it happens but people should not be rating a book they haven't even read yet. It makes the rating system flawed and is unfair to the author or goodreads members.
I don't find anything rude in my response.
What everyone seems to not understand is that the ratings of books don't exist for you or for objectivity. It's for the user. If the user wants to rate a book 5 stars without reading it, who cares? That's how THEY are choosing to use GoodReads; it's just not how YOU want to use GoodReads.
Hi John, I don't quite understand your comment ..."rating books don't exist for you or for objectivity" lol. Who do they exist for? What is their purpose? I believe the rating do exist for me and everyone who uses the site. Obviously people can choose to rate a book without reading it... and then you ask "who cares?"... I care, and probably a huge majority of goodreads members care.
There are lots of things people "choose" to do, it doesn't mean it's the right thing, or proper thing, or wisest thing, or ethical thing to do. People "choose" to spit gum on the ground, or cut in line, or not pick up their dog poop, or spread rumors, or be rude, or cheat when they play games, etc.... it doesn't make it ok, or the right thing to do and there's nothing wrong with people calling them out for it. You are an "author" on here... I'm sure you wouldn't appreciate it if 20 people who never even read your book decided to give it 1 star and manipulate the rating on your book. I'm sure you would care if your book rating was significantly lowered because people just chose to rate it that way, just for the heck of it, not because they read it and were rating it based on their honest opinion. Obviously they can do that if they "choose", but it wouldn't be a very honest or respectful thing to do. People do look at the ratings to get an idea if they want to read a book or not and they are hoping that people are honestly rating a book and not just manipulating a score (positively or negatively). Of course, unfortunately, we must take in account that there are hateful, dishonest, divisive, or just ignorant people that will choose to manipulate ratings (or maybe unknowingly rate it while commenting) but luckily they are most likely in the minority.
And what came across as rude was you asking "Why do people constantly ask questions like this?" Like it was a stupid question. It was a legitimate question that she has the right to ask. When you see an unreleased book with a low rating it is a bit curious. Most people would expect that people would not rate a book or movie until they read or watched it, the whole purpose of a rating system is to get opinions on what people thought of the media rated. Rating it without reading/watching is falsifying information and if a lot of people do this it negates the whole purpose of having a rating system in the first place...this is of course IMHO!
John, you're right, GReads ratings are a joke. It's an Amazon site that could be amazing, but instead gives crappy books fake 5 star ratings to sell books. Sad.
The reason that he answered it this way is because this question has been asked literally thousands of times and for more than a decade.
Goodreads isn't a bookselling site. It is a site where readers keep track of their reading, keep track of their TBRs, and rate books based upon whatever system they come up with. Some people do, in fact, rate books that they haven't read. They rate them 5 star, because they love the author and they want to make sure that the world knows that to them, this author is a five-star-always author. Alternatively, they rate books that they haven't read one star because they want to remind themselves not to read it, or not to buy it, or that they hate whatever trope it plays to that they hate.
By Goodreads own rules, this is FINE. Those rules existed before it was bought by Amazon. While this can be confusing to people who think that GR is some sort of a commercial book selling site where the reviews should be an objective rating of quality, that's not what it is. So, there are about a million reasons that this book would have a 1 star review when it isn't out yet, and that's fine.
Maybe, but GR ratings still influence people to buy books, & Amazon sells books, so of course they want every book to sound wonderful. Too many 5 star reviews of terrible books to be legit.
I'm relatively new to Goodreads so I thought it was an excellent question. I would never rate anything I had not read.
Agree! Everyone understands how a 5 star rating system works, & evaluating quality is exactly what it is! It's absurd to say readers can use "whatever system they come up with" & it's ok to rate books they haven't even read just because they "love" the author. If there are no standards attached to the star-ratings, they are meaningless (which is what this thread is all about.)
back to top
date
newest »

message 1:
by
Debie
(new)
Jun 02, 2021 02:43AM

reply
|
flag

What everyone seems to not understand is that the ratings of books don't exist for you or for objectivity. It's for the user. If the user wants to rate a book 5 stars without reading it, who cares? That's how THEY are choosing to use GoodReads; it's just not how YOU want to use GoodReads.

There are lots of things people "choose" to do, it doesn't mean it's the right thing, or proper thing, or wisest thing, or ethical thing to do. People "choose" to spit gum on the ground, or cut in line, or not pick up their dog poop, or spread rumors, or be rude, or cheat when they play games, etc.... it doesn't make it ok, or the right thing to do and there's nothing wrong with people calling them out for it. You are an "author" on here... I'm sure you wouldn't appreciate it if 20 people who never even read your book decided to give it 1 star and manipulate the rating on your book. I'm sure you would care if your book rating was significantly lowered because people just chose to rate it that way, just for the heck of it, not because they read it and were rating it based on their honest opinion. Obviously they can do that if they "choose", but it wouldn't be a very honest or respectful thing to do. People do look at the ratings to get an idea if they want to read a book or not and they are hoping that people are honestly rating a book and not just manipulating a score (positively or negatively). Of course, unfortunately, we must take in account that there are hateful, dishonest, divisive, or just ignorant people that will choose to manipulate ratings (or maybe unknowingly rate it while commenting) but luckily they are most likely in the minority.
And what came across as rude was you asking "Why do people constantly ask questions like this?" Like it was a stupid question. It was a legitimate question that she has the right to ask. When you see an unreleased book with a low rating it is a bit curious. Most people would expect that people would not rate a book or movie until they read or watched it, the whole purpose of a rating system is to get opinions on what people thought of the media rated. Rating it without reading/watching is falsifying information and if a lot of people do this it negates the whole purpose of having a rating system in the first place...this is of course IMHO!


Goodreads isn't a bookselling site. It is a site where readers keep track of their reading, keep track of their TBRs, and rate books based upon whatever system they come up with. Some people do, in fact, rate books that they haven't read. They rate them 5 star, because they love the author and they want to make sure that the world knows that to them, this author is a five-star-always author. Alternatively, they rate books that they haven't read one star because they want to remind themselves not to read it, or not to buy it, or that they hate whatever trope it plays to that they hate.
By Goodreads own rules, this is FINE. Those rules existed before it was bought by Amazon. While this can be confusing to people who think that GR is some sort of a commercial book selling site where the reviews should be an objective rating of quality, that's not what it is. So, there are about a million reasons that this book would have a 1 star review when it isn't out yet, and that's fine.


