the poll: What do you think about voting for a book that has not even been written/published? > Likes and Comments
Like
I hate it, I can't trust the Goodreads ratings because those guys.
It’s not fair to the authors, cause I see quite a few use 1 or 2 stars as a marker for the book in their tbr. If you don’t want to forget an upcoming release, enable rankings in your settings on your tbr. I don’t keep it in an exact order, but I regularly move books around in my tbr so I don’t forget about the ones I wanna read the most.
I voted for it skews the rating, because it does. But honestly I think that's more of a followup answer to "It's absurd", because it IS. It's one of the more annoying behaviors on GR for me.
It's an annoying, childish behaviour that should be discouraged. Anyone engaging on that should get a life-time ban.
I really don’t understand how someone could rate a book before it’s released or they’ve even read it. Maybe you love the author and you’re nearly certain you’ll love the book? Or maybe it’s the opposite, and you hate the author and know you’ll hate the book. It doesn’t matter, you’re still messing up the rating system. Even worse is when people hate the author and give the book a 1 star rating without even trying to read it once it’s released!
The only exception I can find for rating/reviewing a book before it's published is if the author sent it to you for an honest review. Amazon no longer allows for reviews to be posted to their site until the book is released.
I like and enjoy reading all that "a whole year of waiting! so excruciating!" and "cover reveal! isn't it pretty??!!" but rating it???
The positive ones are, for me, more okay. At this point, for example, I am as sure as I can be the next Ilona Andrews book will be absolutely awesome and pretty much perfect. I don't need to make it known by hitting those stars before I got my hands on it but some do and I can kind of respect that. Which is why I made it an option 😁.
The negative ratings are what really bugs me. I read and know some books I'd call really bad but rating it just to tell everyone you think it will be bad? When you already said so about the book you actually did read? That's just petty.
I think rating a book before you've read it is absurd. If you're using it as a way to mark for yourself how high your expectations are or what priority it has on your tbr, just create shelves for that instead of using the ratings. What exactly is it you're rating anyway, if you haven't read the book yet?
Goodreads can't/shouldn't really disable ratings/reviews before release because people should be able to rate/review ARCs even before the book is out. So it's really on every individual reader to PLEASE STOP RATING BOOKS YOU HAVEN'T READ.
Much as I also enjoy the "how will I survive the wait" or "we have a cover" or "the author shared a teaser" type of pre-release-reviews, I sometimes wish there was a way of separating those from actual reviews. Because sometimes the people who post these end up not updating their reviews later (for whatever reason). And if these pre-release-reviews have a lot of likes or comments, sometimes even months after the book is released the first pages of reviews that goodreads shows are all about people being excited for the book and you can hardly find a review by someone who actually says something about the book after they read it. I wish there was a pre-reading-thoughts option so that you wouldn't have to write these things into the review box.
If its a previous author that has followers the review can already be skewed because people 'assume' it'll be great. However, they always have people read and review before release for this purpose. So although its before publication release its not totally skewed it still doesn't somehow seem legit or accurate.
I think it's unfair for the authors' work and the main goal for the ratings on goodreads it's to determine how much you like or dislike a book. Why you should rate a book you haven't read?! It doesn't serve a purpose. That's my personal opinion tho.
I receive alot of ARC's. Most of them I really liked. But, what I personally like, does not mean others will. So, I don't go by it.
I block them!
*kisses block button*
I think early reviews should be deleted. Can’t trust reviews to be reliable nowadays between early reviews & ARCs.
I always read reviews with spoilers to decided if I’m reading a book now.
I'm forced to block as many of those as I can. That way even when I'm searching for reviews of other books, the page doesn't show their reviews. They just taint the average ratings of many books, not just the one they rate before publication day. They literally ruin GR for me so I block them.
I would absolutely rate a book if the author has an idea for a story but isn’t 100% committed to the idea unless their readers want it. If I were an author I could see myself posting a potential plot blurb for that exact reason.
Hmm I won’t rate a book I haven’t read yet.
So if a new title has been announced that I want to read will be added to my tbr pile
If it is a new book that I have been given an arc of I will review when I finish it but always say I was given an arc.
Hate when I get my hopes up seeing rating for books I'm not so patiently waiting on, thinking it's finally out. That said it balances out the "badly behaving author" one stars in my head. If one group can blindly give 5 stars, the other can blindly give 1 since neither have read said books.
I think rating before reading is wrong, but a lot of the books I read and review are advance copies, so my review will likely go up before publication.
I don't often find myself looking at the ratings of unpublished books (unless I'm browsing NetGalley or similar and checking people's impressions for upcoming novels here on GR), so in all honesty I really don't care. That said, though, it's dumb and unnecessary to rate something you haven't read.
Why would this ever happen? It is beyond ridiculous. Rating a book you haven’t read? Nonsense. Unbelievable. Just plain stupid is my thought.
I would never rate a book I hadn’t read. Having said that, I will rate books that I started and could see from what I did read that they are total losers. After reading several thousand books over my life, you can understand fairly quickly that the book isn’t going to improve. I have wasted too much time on books that never ended up worth reading, I kept hoping that the story would miraculously turn into something it wasn’t. Rarely, and I mean like less then 1% of time, I am surprised that a book turns into something better that starts out awful, but usually not. I just stop when it becomes clear it isn’t going to improve.
But, to give a review on something that I haven’t read, never going to happen. Not from me. I have too much integrity to ever do that. And, why? I see no reason whatsoever to do this.
ARCs are totally different. You read these and then review.
I occasionally will look at reviews as I have been “burned” by the book ‘teaser’ and found later the story was terrible. But, others reviews don’t always sway me, as we all have different tastes.
If I've read it as an advanced copy since I'm a blogger then it's fine to do so. But if you haven't already read it then don't. Now the monthly most anticipated reads voting to boost the book up the chart is different just as long as you're not rating it.
I agree that a rating is only warranted prior to the official release if you've received (and read) an ARC.
Like voting for the best quiche Lorraine that hasn't been made and yet to be served by a restaurant that's currently out of business.
I think there are so many ARCs now floating around, that nearly every book is going to have at least one review -- and usually more -- before the official release date. These early reviews -- especially if they're from people I know (whether IRL or on GoodReads) -- makes me decide whether I want to preorder a book. Which I've done often enough, LOL!
It's idiotic. Another reason to ignore the GR ratings and trust your instincts. If the cover and synopsis are good and the first chapters get me hooked it's likely I found a winner.
Some of these answers kind of seem to be the same thing. I voted for "early reviews are great if you've read an ARC", because that's kind of the point of ARCs. Early reviews from people that have not read the book are absurd. I don't care if they're high or low ratings - rating a book that you haven't read makes it harder for other people to evaluate if they would like to read the book.
It kind of kills me to provide a bad rating to an author that I love, but reviews are supposed to be your honest assessment of the quality of the novel, not an indicator of how much you love or hate an author, and definitely not based on any controversy or hype surrounding a book you haven't even read.
It's misleading and makes for untrustworthy ratings. I find it totally annoying and unfair. It shouldn't be allowed.
Marian wrote: "It's misleading and makes for untrustworthy ratings. I find it totally annoying and unfair. It shouldn't be allowed."
So true!
I don't like them under any circumstance. The whole ARC system is annoying. There must be some exceptions, but I'm convinced that when people receive books for free their reviews will be tainted by that fact.
I am one of the rare few then. If you ask me to read your book, I will give an honest review. I do not believe in leading someone to read or think a book is anything but what I have read. Let the chips fall where they may. So, author, beware. If you write crap, then that is the review I leave. If you write an exceptional story, then that is what I leave. There is lots of space between those two, but, I will trash garbage, as I would hope others will. No loyalty here- if you want my opinion, that’s what you get. Especially if you want me to read an ARC.
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Elisa G.
(last edited Oct 11, 2020 01:22PM)
(new)
Oct 11, 2020 01:18PM
I hate it, I can't trust the Goodreads ratings because those guys.
reply
|
flag
It’s not fair to the authors, cause I see quite a few use 1 or 2 stars as a marker for the book in their tbr. If you don’t want to forget an upcoming release, enable rankings in your settings on your tbr. I don’t keep it in an exact order, but I regularly move books around in my tbr so I don’t forget about the ones I wanna read the most.
I voted for it skews the rating, because it does. But honestly I think that's more of a followup answer to "It's absurd", because it IS. It's one of the more annoying behaviors on GR for me.
It's an annoying, childish behaviour that should be discouraged. Anyone engaging on that should get a life-time ban.
I really don’t understand how someone could rate a book before it’s released or they’ve even read it. Maybe you love the author and you’re nearly certain you’ll love the book? Or maybe it’s the opposite, and you hate the author and know you’ll hate the book. It doesn’t matter, you’re still messing up the rating system. Even worse is when people hate the author and give the book a 1 star rating without even trying to read it once it’s released!
The only exception I can find for rating/reviewing a book before it's published is if the author sent it to you for an honest review. Amazon no longer allows for reviews to be posted to their site until the book is released.
I like and enjoy reading all that "a whole year of waiting! so excruciating!" and "cover reveal! isn't it pretty??!!" but rating it???The positive ones are, for me, more okay. At this point, for example, I am as sure as I can be the next Ilona Andrews book will be absolutely awesome and pretty much perfect. I don't need to make it known by hitting those stars before I got my hands on it but some do and I can kind of respect that. Which is why I made it an option 😁.
The negative ratings are what really bugs me. I read and know some books I'd call really bad but rating it just to tell everyone you think it will be bad? When you already said so about the book you actually did read? That's just petty.
I think rating a book before you've read it is absurd. If you're using it as a way to mark for yourself how high your expectations are or what priority it has on your tbr, just create shelves for that instead of using the ratings. What exactly is it you're rating anyway, if you haven't read the book yet?Goodreads can't/shouldn't really disable ratings/reviews before release because people should be able to rate/review ARCs even before the book is out. So it's really on every individual reader to PLEASE STOP RATING BOOKS YOU HAVEN'T READ.
Much as I also enjoy the "how will I survive the wait" or "we have a cover" or "the author shared a teaser" type of pre-release-reviews, I sometimes wish there was a way of separating those from actual reviews. Because sometimes the people who post these end up not updating their reviews later (for whatever reason). And if these pre-release-reviews have a lot of likes or comments, sometimes even months after the book is released the first pages of reviews that goodreads shows are all about people being excited for the book and you can hardly find a review by someone who actually says something about the book after they read it. I wish there was a pre-reading-thoughts option so that you wouldn't have to write these things into the review box.
If its a previous author that has followers the review can already be skewed because people 'assume' it'll be great. However, they always have people read and review before release for this purpose. So although its before publication release its not totally skewed it still doesn't somehow seem legit or accurate.
I think it's unfair for the authors' work and the main goal for the ratings on goodreads it's to determine how much you like or dislike a book. Why you should rate a book you haven't read?! It doesn't serve a purpose. That's my personal opinion tho.
I receive alot of ARC's. Most of them I really liked. But, what I personally like, does not mean others will. So, I don't go by it.
I block them!*kisses block button*
I think early reviews should be deleted. Can’t trust reviews to be reliable nowadays between early reviews & ARCs.I always read reviews with spoilers to decided if I’m reading a book now.
I'm forced to block as many of those as I can. That way even when I'm searching for reviews of other books, the page doesn't show their reviews. They just taint the average ratings of many books, not just the one they rate before publication day. They literally ruin GR for me so I block them.
I would absolutely rate a book if the author has an idea for a story but isn’t 100% committed to the idea unless their readers want it. If I were an author I could see myself posting a potential plot blurb for that exact reason.
Hmm I won’t rate a book I haven’t read yet.So if a new title has been announced that I want to read will be added to my tbr pile
If it is a new book that I have been given an arc of I will review when I finish it but always say I was given an arc.
Hate when I get my hopes up seeing rating for books I'm not so patiently waiting on, thinking it's finally out. That said it balances out the "badly behaving author" one stars in my head. If one group can blindly give 5 stars, the other can blindly give 1 since neither have read said books.
I think rating before reading is wrong, but a lot of the books I read and review are advance copies, so my review will likely go up before publication.
I don't often find myself looking at the ratings of unpublished books (unless I'm browsing NetGalley or similar and checking people's impressions for upcoming novels here on GR), so in all honesty I really don't care. That said, though, it's dumb and unnecessary to rate something you haven't read.
Why would this ever happen? It is beyond ridiculous. Rating a book you haven’t read? Nonsense. Unbelievable. Just plain stupid is my thought.I would never rate a book I hadn’t read. Having said that, I will rate books that I started and could see from what I did read that they are total losers. After reading several thousand books over my life, you can understand fairly quickly that the book isn’t going to improve. I have wasted too much time on books that never ended up worth reading, I kept hoping that the story would miraculously turn into something it wasn’t. Rarely, and I mean like less then 1% of time, I am surprised that a book turns into something better that starts out awful, but usually not. I just stop when it becomes clear it isn’t going to improve.
But, to give a review on something that I haven’t read, never going to happen. Not from me. I have too much integrity to ever do that. And, why? I see no reason whatsoever to do this.
ARCs are totally different. You read these and then review.
I occasionally will look at reviews as I have been “burned” by the book ‘teaser’ and found later the story was terrible. But, others reviews don’t always sway me, as we all have different tastes.
If I've read it as an advanced copy since I'm a blogger then it's fine to do so. But if you haven't already read it then don't. Now the monthly most anticipated reads voting to boost the book up the chart is different just as long as you're not rating it.
I agree that a rating is only warranted prior to the official release if you've received (and read) an ARC.
Like voting for the best quiche Lorraine that hasn't been made and yet to be served by a restaurant that's currently out of business.
I think there are so many ARCs now floating around, that nearly every book is going to have at least one review -- and usually more -- before the official release date. These early reviews -- especially if they're from people I know (whether IRL or on GoodReads) -- makes me decide whether I want to preorder a book. Which I've done often enough, LOL!
It's idiotic. Another reason to ignore the GR ratings and trust your instincts. If the cover and synopsis are good and the first chapters get me hooked it's likely I found a winner.
Some of these answers kind of seem to be the same thing. I voted for "early reviews are great if you've read an ARC", because that's kind of the point of ARCs. Early reviews from people that have not read the book are absurd. I don't care if they're high or low ratings - rating a book that you haven't read makes it harder for other people to evaluate if they would like to read the book.It kind of kills me to provide a bad rating to an author that I love, but reviews are supposed to be your honest assessment of the quality of the novel, not an indicator of how much you love or hate an author, and definitely not based on any controversy or hype surrounding a book you haven't even read.
It's misleading and makes for untrustworthy ratings. I find it totally annoying and unfair. It shouldn't be allowed.
Marian wrote: "It's misleading and makes for untrustworthy ratings. I find it totally annoying and unfair. It shouldn't be allowed."So true!
I don't like them under any circumstance. The whole ARC system is annoying. There must be some exceptions, but I'm convinced that when people receive books for free their reviews will be tainted by that fact.
I am one of the rare few then. If you ask me to read your book, I will give an honest review. I do not believe in leading someone to read or think a book is anything but what I have read. Let the chips fall where they may. So, author, beware. If you write crap, then that is the review I leave. If you write an exceptional story, then that is what I leave. There is lots of space between those two, but, I will trash garbage, as I would hope others will. No loyalty here- if you want my opinion, that’s what you get. Especially if you want me to read an ARC.
