Jasmine’s Comments (group member since Nov 21, 2010)

Jasmine’s comments from the The Extra Cool Group! (of people Michael is experimenting on) group.

I'm generally of the opinion I review for myself. and I review the way I talk, I fuck around and get off topic and just generally make an ass of myself.

I use to worry a lot about how other people think of me and if I come off as smart, but since graduating from undergrad that's become a lot less important to me.

I do still worry if I'm going to piss people off. I don't like fighting although I enjoy a nice philosophical argument. But I am not really in a head space where I feel the need to go around justifying myself I sort of landed in a philosophical relativity space so that doesn't do much for me these days. so when I review and get comments from people I've never said along the lines of "your wrong" I ignore it just like I ignore the "your review doesn't match your rating comments" it's my review, it's my head, I'm the only one it needs to make sense to.

Brian wrote: "Jasmine wrote: "mean I didn't read william gaddis because greg reviewed it. ..."

My reading never used to be influenced reviews, but GoodReads has changed that- mostly for the better. Eric W_Wel..."

yeah but was that because of the review or because no one will ever shut up about it

I just spent 20 minutes watching videos about how to do tricks in the new tony hawk game. I don't even own a wii. This should count as a guilty pleasure.

Jason wrote: "people would be offended if i threw my boxbriefs at them.

but if i were to do so, it would be toward Myrlin Hermes

http://www.myrlinahermes.com/

i kinda fell in love with her at WordStock this y..."

that's adorably geeky

write in...

I will be keeping my panties.

Msmurphybylaw wrote: "Anything by Melanie Rawn

And I have on a lovely pair of Granny Panties in a shade of teal so large, you could sail the seven seas with."

only if you were a walter moers character

Actually after seeing it, I would add that I actually don't like having my "real friends" (outside the ones I work with on here, a few are) because I like to talk about them in my reviews which I can't do on facebook cause they'll get offended, but periodically one joins and I never find out till they see a review and mention it.

What information should we include in a friend request?
Perferably I wouldn't need information cause I'd already know you. MJ talked to me about bs johnson then friended me, I didn't need much else. Michael did friend me without me knowing exactly who he was possibly because his name is common, he said my standards must have been low because I was friends with caris. This made me laugh so he was in. Generally honesty is good. I told mike reynolds I wanted to be friends because we had the same birthday, I didn't have any other reason, that turned out okay. If you are friend whoring say your friend whoring, I might not friend you but I'll respect you.

What expectations do users have for their friends/ network?
depends on the friend

also now that I saw michael's thing about cataloging books, periodically I come across a book in my apartment I've read and I add it to my goodreads to remember I've read it but I tend not to review them unless something really stuck with me about them.

I review almost everything including books I don't finish.

I don't always review books that I just looked through for the pictures, I also write some really short reviews that say things like read it yourself.

also my reviews tend toward the negative no matter how much I like a book.

Aloha wrote: "I'd rather have discussions with people who can have an intelligent discussion about erotica or the metaphysical, and not get judgmental or silly."

I can do that.

Jason wrote: "nice list you have there, you ever have nightmares where choke/fightclub and disc worlds collide? "

no. I like palahniuk he makes me happy not scared. IF I was going to have nightmares they'd be about sade.

I find following creepy and I hate when I get emails saying new people are following me. I don't like the idea that people I have never talked to for some reason want to see everything I write. For a while I friended anyone who started following me to lower the creepy factor, but I realized that wasn't helping.

I don't like when I feel like I'm part of a "mass friending" so I have it so people have to say something to friend me. I will friend any bizarro author (I know that's a weird standard) or anyone who mentions one of my friends in the request (I get a lot of, "a friend of caris is a friend of mine" type requests, pretty much specifically about Caris).

As far as me friending people I try not to be creepy. I friend people that I actually want to talk to as a rule and I try not to friend people who won't be able to identify me. A couple of people I friended after I met them in person because I hadn't felt like I knew them well enough before that even though I thought they were cool. I generally comment on a review first then friend someone. I also tend to compare books with people before or soon after I friend them, just to be sure I actually want to associate with them.

On facebook, I delete people that I don't talk to anymore, I friend almost no one. I don't even friend based on who I know, I friend who I would associate with outside of their current context. (e.g. if I work with someone, but don't want to see them outside of work I won't friend them on facebook).

1) terry pratchett, rathy reichs, chuck palahniuk, bataille, Sade, logic puzzle magazines... Even my guilty pleasures are going to end up sounding pretentious if I keep going.

2) wow really, you were seriously detailed there. I am wearing the least sexy underwear available for women. boy shorts and a sports bra, basically in new york I could walk down the street in just that and people would think I was overdressed, it's a creepy city.

Richard wrote: "I only write reviews for Ceridwen to read. If she likes them, then I consider them a success. Everyone else is icing."

that's sweet

Jason wrote: "Jasmine wrote: "I use to shelve by year till goodreads learned to sort that for me. I love that function"

by year that you read the book, or year that the book was published?"
that I read, it has never occurred to me to sort by year it's published

I use to shelve by year till goodreads learned to sort that for me. I love that function

I shelve by country too.

I use to have a lot of different shelves based on psychological themes in books but I never used them again after I made them so I deleted them all. I think that there are similarities to books written in the same culture, so I like knowing what country a book came from and whether I like or dislike that country as a rule.

I also have more exclusive shelves than a lot of people. I have to-read and want separated (not perfectly though) so I know what books I haven't bought or just saw (like I said a good number of these are incorrectly just on to-read and some I have bought didn't move over, there isn't good upkeep on those shelves). I also have partially read and I think a couple others that all exist because I don't think about all books the same, something marked as partially read is something I would consider going back to usually, whereas something marked as read could be something I didn't finish because I didn't like it. Usually partially read, I forgot where I put the book or got distracted.


****
In real life I sort first by read vs. unread then by genre, until they get mixed up again which happens quickly, I also have a soon to read section.

other than humor picture books and craft books I approach everything the same. I focus mainly on negatives (probably for the same reason I talked bout reading negative reviews) I talk about what could have made the book better, what should have been in/happened in the book. Alternative explanations/scenarios.

there are minor changes based on genre but I think it comes down to fitting the review format over the book.


I do usually review short story books differently. I either talk about one story, or I ignore the book completely.

If I don't finish a book I apologize in the review and explain why I didn't finish it, then review it the same way as if I had.

As far as classics, I always include a note that I as a rule don't like classics.

Basically I am one for meta-explaining, but then the meat of the review stays the same.

I vote for reviews I don't agree with all the time. on people I don't know most of the reviews that I vote for are bad reviews, simply because when deciding to read a book I tend to check why people don't like it and see if any of those things tend to bother me. I don't tend to read 3 star reviews, mainly because I don't like odd numbered likert scales.

1. on the like/dislike issue, i think a better idea would be amazon's this was helpful vs. this was not helpful it isn't as mean.

2. I assume no one is reading my reviews, I generally write them to make myself laugh. also I process in writing, so if I don't write something down I won't remember anything about the book and I will have to go ask greg what it was about.

3. I do really like when authors email me and thank me for reviews/like my reviews, although I've had some weird occurances where the review is kind of mean but they like it anyway. I don't complain.