So about goodreads and indignation

No I'm not being disingenuous. I really don't get the rules. see note below. When I wrote that, I hadn't been thinking about the topic for more than five minutes. Now I have and duh. I remember my one and only rule.

Here's a review:
redacted [because it breaks goodreads policy, I think, maybe, but also perhaps people's feelings were hurt and isn't that ironic.

Whoa, calm down. I get being offended by something other people don't understand. I mean that an article about the topic about the genuine sorrow of butthurt would create butthurt.] [removed because of derp factor]

I get that the reviewer is allowed to have an opinion--but why can't J the Punkin [name changed to protect me.]? Is it because he's [a few names removed.] on the thread attached to the review? Is that why he gets in trouble for commenting?

The reviewer is making his comments on a book on that book's thread. So why is that any better -- or less worthy of scorn--than J's comments? Because goodreads is set up that way?

People seem very possessive of review threads, as if they are building a house and anyone who disagrees with them are unwanted visitors. It's a personal space.

If someone finds something in a review objectionable, should he start a new thread? Keep it to himself? Why should he keep quiet except to avoid trouble--and is that reason enough? Or should he just say what he wants and move along and not engage?

I seriously don't know how to approach things I suspect are hurtful on goodreads--laughing at an author (not a book) sometimes goes way, way too far but I'm not going to win friends or influence people if I say something. I'll get the focus turned on me.

On the other hand, I know it hurts.

All the "well, he put the work out there, he should live with it" justifications in the world do not erase that fact: It. Hurts. Pain is real. Perhaps it's butthurty hurt, but there's actual pain.

Do I click past? Do I say something because I know the author is probably reading the reviews (particularly a new author) and it's probably comforting to see someone acknowledge your reality?

Yes, as author you grow used to it and the stomach-churning response to awful reviews eventually turns into a few minutes of ick.

Eventually.

But at first the whole thing can feel fairly devastating, and maybe some kind of support would ease that. If I can't change a reader's mind about writing reviews that are mockery--and god knows I won't--should I dive in to say something anyway? should I do it the way Jason does?

I don't, ever, because I'm an author and no one wants to see authors babbling about this stuff on reviews--even if it's not their book. I get that. But sometimes, I can just feel the pain and I'm not sure a non-author would.

Maybe not that review but some others. . . is saying "hey, you're being mean and hurting someone for no good reason" Is it worth hurting my own sales?

A private note is probably called for, I suppose. I wonder if Hallmark has a card for that.

The basic message I see on author loops is always the same:

"Your work got torn to shreds and you were called a hack. You'll get past this to write again. In the meantime, stay the hell off goodreads and keep your mouth shut."

Some comfort....no actually, it really is.

edited to add: I've read this a few times now, mostly trying to get all the names out along with anything remotely tetchy/mean out, although I might have added some of that because now I wonder why people paid any attention to it. Nothing remotely new in there. "Authors are people." with the follow up of "Okay but maybe it's best to move along, authors." I was sad when I wrote it so there's real emotion in it, but so what. My posts about about chickens...those are worth reposts.