David’s comment > Likes and Comments

Thanks for joining the discussion, David. Interesting to see some of the criteria by which critics may rate books.

However, the proposed system merely proves why a ten star system would be fairer. If someone was to actually follow this rigorous 25 criteria system and take the time to come up with 25 different ratings for each book (a distinct improbability for the vast majority of readers) you most certainly would end up with an accurate rating. However, here is where the proposed system proves my point. Look at a situation where you do all of this Critical Performance Indicator stuff; you follow the 25 criteria, you add it all up, divide by 25 etc Now say you end up with a mean score of 3.52. Hmmmm... With the Goodreads 5 star rating system you must now round it up and give it a 4 star. What a pity. If only it were a 10 star rating system, then you could give it the 7 (3.5) that it truly and accurately deserves.

You see, I think people often know how they feel about book after reading it, without having to fill out a lengthly criteria sheet. I don't think that's the problem. The problem is that currently there are not enough options (stars) with which to accurately reflect that feeling.

I agree that a 1 -10 system would offer a more accurate way to rate a book.

David, I read the full CPI column by Mr. Lentz afforded by the link you provided.

It is the most vainglorious, supercilious commentary I've ever read, exacerbated only by its virtual endlessness.

I shan't be reading anything further from Mr. Lentz thanks to your thoughtfulness.