Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion
III. Goodreads Readers
>
If you want readers, why aren't you defending them?
I don't mean to be flippant, but I think I can give a short answer to the OP's question.The truly professional writers (SPA or hybrid or traditional) aren't defending anyone on any site, because they're busy writing, and not posting on forums. If I see unprofessional behavior, I've called it out (as a matter of fact, a few of us decried a whiny new SPA right off Goodreads--he deleted his profile because he couldn't take a single opposing viewpoint or 1 star review). But I'll be honest. I'm too busy to know much of what's happening on the Internet.
I don't know what site is being talked about here, this "site that will not be named." I don't know what everyone is calling so bad that it gives all SPAs a bad name.
And that, in short, is why I and others like me who are focused on their writing are not defending. We're doing what writers are supposed to do--working on bettering our products. If I've done my job correctly, a reader won't even know if a book has been indie published or traditionally published.
I guess the good news is any writer you see on that forum or site saying bad things about readers is somebody you can instantly put on your DNR list. Nice of them to show their lack of professionalism that way.
So is anybody allowed to say what this all is about?
ThreeRs (Got Logic?) wrote: "FWIW, I have edited the initial post. Hopefully it is clear(er) that I'm not asking for authors to go looking for trouble. I'm asking you--or maybe I should say more of you-- to speak up when tro..."I wanted to let you know that I have taken matters to a PM once with an author who was being unreasonable to a few readers. Just know that sometimes these things are not public with many people, so though it might not seem nothing is being said, you never know. It might have been in private. :)
Tangentially, I must have missed the day in SPA class where they taught us to buy reviews, talk my friends and family into writing reviews for me and to trade positive-only reviews with my fellow authors.Seriously, it never even occurred to me to do that. The more fool I!
Bit of a digression here, sorry, but...Interesting point about not using GR as authors, but as readers/having two accounts (one as a reader, one as an author). I do exactly the contrary (and probably run my mouth a little too much, too). Maybe it's going to hurt me later, I don't know. For now, the couple of short stories I've published can't really be used against me, so I guess not caring is easy.
Anyway. Do/did we have a thread about this matter? It may be interesting to see who else is in that case, if keeping separate profiles allowed them to avoid problems, etc.
S.L. wrote: "Tangentially, I must have missed the day in SPA class where they taught us to buy reviews, talk my friends and family into writing reviews for me and to trade positive-only reviews with my fellow a..."I missed that day too. And frankly, some of why I resoundingly ignore things like the site that shall not be maned is that they DON'T DESERVE THE DIGNITY OF BEING TAKEN SERIOUSLY.
Some of the issues with writers who do not know how to behave are probably with people who are not as well wrapped as we would like them to be. It has occurred to me that at least some of them may not really understand how literary criticism works. That it's not like your Pinterest Board or your Polyvore Set, where it would be rude for another user to criticize yours.
I don't know that GR would do it, but I'm wondering if broader guidelines detailing both professional behavior and how reviewing books works might not defuse some of the more rational offenders.
Mahala wrote: "Let me commend all you busy writers, all of you who are too busy to notice anything going on in places like GR and Amazon.
The only problem with this is that answer isn't good enough. You want me..."
This thread is becoming a lot like the review complaints: disagree with someone and you get slimed. So, okay, say a reader gives a negative review, and the author acts unprofessionally and slams the reader. I'm supposed to get into that fight? First of all, I haven't read the book, the reader has; so for all I know the review might have been unfair. Sure, the author is unprofessional, but it's not my place to correct him. Why not? If I do, it could be said that I have a vested interest in discrediting other authors so as to reduce competition. That makes my voice less effective than that of another reader. There is so much wrong with one author criticizing another's behavior, and so little good that can could come out of it, that it can only make the environment more combative if we do so. We can only make generalizations, not personal attacks, and hope the word get around that THIS IS NOT HOW AN AUTHOR SHOULD ACT. And with things the way they are, trying to engage it would be a never-ending, futile battle that will take up all of your time, and it's one that you can't win.
The only problem with this is that answer isn't good enough. You want me..."
This thread is becoming a lot like the review complaints: disagree with someone and you get slimed. So, okay, say a reader gives a negative review, and the author acts unprofessionally and slams the reader. I'm supposed to get into that fight? First of all, I haven't read the book, the reader has; so for all I know the review might have been unfair. Sure, the author is unprofessional, but it's not my place to correct him. Why not? If I do, it could be said that I have a vested interest in discrediting other authors so as to reduce competition. That makes my voice less effective than that of another reader. There is so much wrong with one author criticizing another's behavior, and so little good that can could come out of it, that it can only make the environment more combative if we do so. We can only make generalizations, not personal attacks, and hope the word get around that THIS IS NOT HOW AN AUTHOR SHOULD ACT. And with things the way they are, trying to engage it would be a never-ending, futile battle that will take up all of your time, and it's one that you can't win.
ThreeRs (Got Logic?) wrote: "There's a huge thread here where the question "why don't more people read self-published books?" is asked. Authors on that thread contend that readers are wrong (for various values of "wrong") not..."I think you're starting with a false premise, which is that none of us speak out against this kind of thing. I've lost track of the number of times I have said to my fellow authors that there is NO EXCUSE for not editing a manuscript -- including "I can't afford it," because one can barter services or even work out an arrangement with a college journalism professor to have an advanced editing student do your project for credit.
I don't think readers owe me a review, so I don't speak out about rating v. review. I DO speak out when people insist that a review should consist of constructive criticism ... because reviews are for readers, not authors. Critiques should come long before the manuscript is published.
I also tell people NEVER to respond to negative reviews. In fact, IMO, it is bad form to respond to any review beyond clicking a "like" button if you so desire.
But, you know, I could be wrong. I'm just one person, after all, whom you have (unwittingly) tarred with the same brush.
Oh, and I'm a hybrid author -- I've been traditionally published and self-published.
Ken wrote: "[...]First of all, I haven't read the book, the reader has; so for all I know the review might have been unfair. Sure, the author is unprofessional, but it's not my place to correct him.[...]"I think the issue is a bit different, though.
I agree we can't and shouldn't comment on the content of a review if we haven't read the book, precisely for the reason you mention: it's the reader's vs. the author's word, and who can tell if the reviewer's been fair? (Now, if 20 other reviewers pointed at the very same defects, it's another matter; but then, we have to check first if it's the case. Also, I'm talking book-related problems here, not ad hominem attacks: that kind of "review" is yet another matter.)
However, I think the real problem is when an author starts bashing a reviewer mainly because the latter didn't like his/her book. Whether the review was fair or not isn't the point. I mean bashing as in posting in various places about that reader, calling him/her names, asking other people to get down on him/her, etc. Because in such cases, the one calling "bully! troll!" IS the bully/troll, and doesn't even have the balls to acknowledge it.
Earlier today, I saw a discussion about a 1-star review (Three R's will know which one) that prompted the book's author to post about how people who write such reviews are mentally ill and psychopaths, or something like that (I don't have the thread's link here, it's in my browser's history on my computer at home, so I can only check later). The review was far from being the worst I've seen, and the person who wrote it sure didn't deserve to be called a troll, an abuser, a psychopath, whatever, just for saying why she didn't like the book. The reviewer wasn't the one who threw such words in the air, blogged about it, reported it to a certain aforementioned website, and got on her high horse to show what horrible trolls readers are. (The words "trolls" and "bullies", by the way, are thrown in the air WAY too often IMHO. A troll isn't someone who posted once about your book. A troll is someone who repeatedly goads you, insults you, tries to get an answer out of you... and from what I could see, the troll in that specific case was clearly the author, not the reviewer.)
So, sure. I won't comment on the novel itself, since I haven't read it. But I think I'm allowed to point out that crying wolf and self-victimisation on the author's part aren't professional behaviours. And I think people have just as much of a right to tell such an author that the one person s/he's truly hurting is him/herself, by flying into fits and making a mountain out of one little review. (Do that with 10 or 20 reviews, and the mountain's doomed to crash on you sooner or later.)
It's not about me (the aspiring author) criticising another author. It's about me (the person) telling another person "dude, chill out, you're NOT at your best right now". I don't want to be led to think that because we've self-published a couple of books/stories, we now have to shut up all the time in fear of being seen as so-called "trolls" ourselves.
If authors can't tell another author his/her behaviour is unprofessional; and readers can't either because if they do, they're called trolls and bullies... Who's left?
One author can't and shouldn't "play vigilante". However, I don't think it's wrong either if readers in general can tell themselves "well, I read that book from a SPA who was an asshole to me... but there are those other SPAs who're nice people and take their craft seriously to boot, so it's not so bad."
Yzabel wrote: "I agree we can't and shouldn't comment on the content of a review if we haven't read the book, precisely for the reason you mention: it's the reader's vs. the author's word, and who can tell if the reviewer's been fair?"Frankly, authors shouldn't be correcting any reviewers. Period. Whether they think the reviewer got something wrong or was unfair or misunderstood or whatever. It's not their place. Once an author publishes a book and puts it out there in the world, they have no place to tell people how they should feel about it or what they should think.
Usually the authors causing these problems are doing it b/c they felt the reviewer was being 'unfair'. I don't need to read the book or even know the damn title to know that the author shouldn't be commenting on it. Neither does anyone else.
I would never ask people to run around around the Internet looking for things to get involved in. Who the hell has time for that? I don't have the time nor the inclination to stalk the Internet searching for assholes. I'm a huge supporter of readers rights and even I don't do that so I'd never expect anyone else to.
What I do consistently do, however, is speak up when it's right in front of me. I don't quietly disappear from a thread hoping someone else will handle it or just b/c I don't want anyone to notice me.
I can't tell you how many threads I've been on where one of these situations erupt and the majority of posters, usually the authors, conveniently disappear until the heat does down.
That is what I have a problem with. And I think that's a large part of Three's complaint. Say something. If you're on a thread where these things start to happen, say something. I don't expect anyone to go looking for trouble, but I have very little respect for anyone who refuses to step up and acknowledge a wrong happening right in front of their faces.
ThreeRs (Got Logic?) wrote: "FWIW, I have edited the initial post. Hopefully it is clear(er) that I'm not asking for authors to go looking for trouble. I'm asking you--or maybe I should say more of you-- to speak up when tro..."Sorry for being redundant, Three. I haven't had a chance to read through all of the posts since last night. Just wanted to throw my two cents in. Looks like we have the same cents.
Linda, both those words are mine. I'm charging you double for one b/c you used the plural. And I don't take checks from SPA's. I still ♥ you, though.
Martyn, you need to stop flirting with my Linda or I'm going to be forced to fold you into a human swan. ;)
Mahala. What you said. All of it.
It's not my place to tell complete strangers how to behave. Doing so is not akin to marketing in my opinion. Regardless of how you want to twist it, you're simply involving yourself in a situation that has nothing to with you.
The way I see it, self-published authors aren't some special club that self-polices itself and pinky swears all for one and one for all. We're writers who have gone into business for ourselves. As writers, our job is to put the story or book that we want. As business people, our job is market and sell our books. That's it. It's not our duty to patrol message boards to make sure someone isn't being nasty because their sappy romance novel or shitty zombie book is getting panned.
If a reader wants to skip on my work because of another self-published author's behavior, so be it. It takes a special kind of stupid to have that sort of mentality and I'd rather not cater to idiots.
The way I see it, self-published authors aren't some special club that self-polices itself and pinky swears all for one and one for all. We're writers who have gone into business for ourselves. As writers, our job is to put the story or book that we want. As business people, our job is market and sell our books. That's it. It's not our duty to patrol message boards to make sure someone isn't being nasty because their sappy romance novel or shitty zombie book is getting panned.
If a reader wants to skip on my work because of another self-published author's behavior, so be it. It takes a special kind of stupid to have that sort of mentality and I'd rather not cater to idiots.
Paul wrote: "It's not my place to tell complete strangers how to behave. Doing so is not akin to marketing in my opinion. Regardless of how you want to twist it, you're simply involving yourself in a situation ..."No, it takes a special kind of stupid to completely miss a point that has been reiterated ad nauseam.
TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "Frankly, authors shouldn't be correcting any reviewers. Period. Whether they think the reviewer got something wrong or was unfair or misunderstood or whatever. It's not their place. Once an author publishes a book and puts it out there in the world, they have no place to tell people how they should feel about it or what they should think. "Regarding one's own book: totally agreed. We're not here to tell people that they "didn't get it" or anything else. Maybe a "like", as a way of saying "I read your critique and acknowledged its existence, btw thanks for reading my book", but nothing more.
Oh, and agreed, too, on the running around the internet searching for assholes bit. (Sorry, I'm not sure if your comment was in agreement with mine or not. I guess we do agree on the same thing. Just making sure.)
I'm in a bit of a conundrum, though, when it comes to reacting to reviews as a reader. If I happen to see a review of a book I've also read, and I agree (or disagree) with the reviewer, should I still shut up because I also happen to write, and so I'm "an author, and authors shouldn't react to reviews"? Having to keep mum: well, now that would be quite the irony. :/
And having two profiles is a double-edged sword. If someone discovers it, you can quickly be accused of sock-puppetting (is that even a verb?)—even though it wasn't your aim, and you just wanted to be able to express yourself freely. I already have a pen name, I think it's enough in terms of "living a double life".
(Not questioning your opinion here, by the way. I honestly wonder sometimes what I should do, what would be the best course of action. Granted, I usually stop wondering after the first few minutes, and go all "screw this, this is MY opinion, I thought exactly the same thing when I read that specific book, I don't have to shy away from debating." Still, the question's worth asking, I think.)
TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "No, it takes a special kind of stupid to completely miss a point that has been reiterated ad nauseam."
I didn't miss any point. I was stating my opinion.
Don't like it? Oh well, but you don't have to be a cunt about it.
I didn't miss any point. I was stating my opinion.
Don't like it? Oh well, but you don't have to be a cunt about it.
Mahala wrote: "Good marketing technique. I would keep it and expand on it, it will get you exactly what you deserve."
So how many millions of books have you sold by policing goodreads when you could be writing?
So how many millions of books have you sold by policing goodreads when you could be writing?
D.C. wrote: "By the way, I didn't really go into self-publishing for any of those reasons. I was actively submitting and hoping to be traditionally published, not sure if that was going to be a possibility for me, and realized that KDP was a great outlet for some of my quirkier stuff. "Like I said "- some can't get through to publishing houses because their work lacks the commercial mass appeal sought after by the publishing houses"
Your quirkier stuff is probably not commercially appealing enough for a publisher to invest in, but that doesn't bear any relations to the quality.
Mahala wrote: "Paul wrote: "It's not my place to tell complete strangers how to behave. Doing so is not akin to marketing in my opinion. Regardless of how you want to twist it, you're simply involving yourself in..."Obviously, the personal insult Paul posted is unacceptable. And I'm sure that I'm not the only one who's flagged the comment as inappropriate.
Paul wrote: "TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "No, it takes a special kind of stupid to completely miss a point that has been reiterated ad nauseam."I didn't miss any point. I was stating my opinion.
Do..."
Aw, I'm sorry. Did I hurt your feewings? Were you expecting others to ignore you being a fucking douchebag. Ya know, like you do?
Paul wrote: "It's not my place to tell complete strangers how to behave. Doing so is not akin to marketing in my opinion. Regardless of how you want to twist it, you're simply involving yourself in a situation ..."Not a special club, but aren't we allowed to react as people? I'm not only a writer. First and foremost, I'm a person, I'm also a reader, I'm plenty of things, and if I see another author behaving like an ass, can't I say something about it? Not from author to author, but from person to person?
Aw, I'm sorry. Did I hurt your feewings? Were you expecting others to ignore you being an fucking douchebag. Ya know, like you do?"
Nope, just call things as I see them.
How exactly was I being "an" fucking douche-bag?
Because I don't think it's my job to tell grown ass people how to behave?
Nope, just call things as I see them.
How exactly was I being "an" fucking douche-bag?
Because I don't think it's my job to tell grown ass people how to behave?
Mahala wrote: "Hello? Is any author here going to address that comment or is this what you don't want to get involved in? Right here, right now, people."
My actions are mine and mine alone. Take it up with me if you have a problem.
My actions are mine and mine alone. Take it up with me if you have a problem.
Obviously, but you don't want to tell him? He just insulted every woman on this thread and you don't want to say anything? "
No dear, just one.
No dear, just one.
Paul wrote: "Aw, I'm sorry. Did I hurt your feewings? Were you expecting others to ignore you being an fucking douchebag. Ya know, like you do?"Nope, just call things as I see them.
How exactly was I being ..."
I simply repeated your words back to you, but I'm a cunt and you can't see where you were being a douchebag?
Cut the shit.
Eta: Paul's comment that he couldn't handle being thrown back at him.
"If a reader wants to skip on my work because of another self-published author's behavior, so be it. It takes a special kind of stupid to have that sort of mentality and I'd rather not cater to idiots. "
Paul wrote: "Aw, I'm sorry. Did I hurt your feewings? Were you expecting others to ignore you being an fucking douchebag. Ya know, like you do?"Nope, just call things as I see them.
How exactly was I being ..."
Jumping into a conversation and calling people cunts is pretty typical douchebag behavior.
...I think the whole topic would bear more weight if people didn't resort to insults. Right now, this is clearly not the most clever behaviour to make one's point.
This is a fascinating thread. I rarely participate in converstions but this time I just had to jump in.I'm amazed to see the level of maturity and professionalism on this thread. All of you aren't arguing. You're debating and it's a beautiful thing to watch.
I do feel the need to point out a few things. There is no market. We are not all the same. Personally, I'm an independent author for now, working on my writing career. Currently, my next novel is with agents and we'll see how that goes. I fully intend to pursue traditional publishing for novels, and online publishing for short stories and poetry. I'm very comfortable with that. It's my choice. However, calling the whole internet a market is as unsubstantiated as calling the iPhone a market just because iTunes exist. The internet is a vast communication tool, and that's all it will ever be.
I've never had a reader bashed and hopefully I never see it happen. I thank every reviewer, even if they simply didn't like the story. I have received a handful of commentaries and reviews via email, because the person didn't want to participate in an online forum. I feel this is a very important consideration. All websites, especially online retailers, have reviews set up as a forum. End result, many online reviews, whether good or bad, exhibit a group mentality. I honestly believe it's this group mentality that's bristling the overly sensitive, which in the context of pixels on the screen appears like unprofessionalism. Sure, there are some very unprofessional people out there but when I see honest reviews linked to a series of bashing comments on, say, Amazon, I can't help but wonder, who's being more unprofessional, online authors or online readers?
A huge part of the problem, from my perspective, is the fact that so many online authors are not connecting with readers. It's a sad fact. Many online reviews of online published works are written by other online authors. It's a vicious cycle. Infighting, plain and simple. And it's pointless. The internet is international. We're living on a planet of over seven billion people. To see so many fight with each other in this giant playground called the internet is more sad than anything else.
Last but not least, money. It's unfortunate. There's a huge myth that's prevalant online that anyone who publishes anything automatically has the right to make lots of money. The fact remains, whether online, independent, or traditonal, creative writing is simply not a job. It's a craft. Many are not receiving the money they expected, get offended by less than glowing reviews, and this adds to the vicious cycle. I feel the biggest thing that should be promoted to educate new authors is the brutal truth that there are no guarantees of money. One would have a greater guarantee of an income by applying to McDonald's. If an online author gets lucky, good for them, no need for jealousy. Their luck is no more meaningful than winning the lottery jackpot.
Yzabel wrote: "Not a special club, but aren't we allowed to react as people? I'm not only a writer. First and foremost, I'm a person, I'm also a reader, I'm plenty of things, and if I see another author behaving like an ass, can't I say something about it? Not from author to author, but from person to person? "
I'm not saying that YOU should or shouldn't do anything. If that's what you want to do, then fine. But it appears to me that a certain level responsibility is being pushed on self-published authors that isn't being asked of others.
I'm not saying that YOU should or shouldn't do anything. If that's what you want to do, then fine. But it appears to me that a certain level responsibility is being pushed on self-published authors that isn't being asked of others.
We are all responsible for what we write. Authors have to take lots of flak from readers who don't like their work for whatever reason. If they don't like it, tough! Let's face it, not everyone is going to like your book. Readers, keep reading and reviewing, but remember you are responsible for YOUR words too. An ounce of courtesy doesn't hurt anyone and is usually reciprocated. When you review, remember you cross the floor from reader to writer. The minute you review a book, you become a published writer, author of a review that is up for the world to see and judge.
If your review is well thought out, fair and well written, displays an understanding of what you have read and a grasp of what literature is about then, even if you hate the book and say why, you should have no backlash to worry about.
If it is none of those things, then perhaps you might get an author backlash if the author is silly enough to respond, but hey, they are only reviewing your writing when all is said and done! You tell them to grow a pair or develop thick skin, perhaps as you are now a writer too you need to do the same?
If it hurts having to take harsh, rude criticism, don't dish it out yourself! The trouble with throwing scatological material up in the air is that - like an arrow - it usually falls to the ground and never ever knows or cares where it lands.
Mahala wrote: "Let's go elsewhere, Tina.I'm done with you, all of you. Paul isn't the problem-you are."
It's okay. Paul's just upset b/c he thought to be clever and show us all what's what and nobody applauded his brilliance. It happens.
If nothing else, he proved the entire point of the thread. My first post mentions just this thing. So, thanks, Paul. It's good for people to see a speshul snowflake in action.
TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "Paul wrote: "Aw, I'm sorry. Did I hurt your feewings? Were you expecting others to ignore you being an fucking douchebag. Ya know, like you do?"
Nope, just call things as I see them.
How exactly..."
Oh so, you're one of those readers who faults an entire group of authors because of one? Cool.
Have a good one.
Nope, just call things as I see them.
How exactly..."
Oh so, you're one of those readers who faults an entire group of authors because of one? Cool.
Have a good one.
Lily wrote: "I'm amazed to see the level of maturity and professionalism on this thread. All of you aren't arguing. You're debating and it's a beautiful thing to watch."Well, it was, at least. I think you were typing all that up while it was all going to hell.
Martyn V. wrote: "D.C. wrote: "By the way, I didn't really go into self-publishing for any of those reasons. I was actively submitting and hoping to be traditionally published, not sure if that was going to be a pos..."Thanks for the quality comment, Martyn, but who knows? You might think it was terrible.
I suppose so, but I don't really think of it that way because I was able to get my more commercially appealing work published, and I tend to assume that all writers have stuff that has never seen the light of day for various reasons. I think of that as an outlet for the stuff that's obviously traditionally unpublishable, like Bigfoot porn, or things like poetry or some kinds of literary fiction that there is a vanishingly small market for.
Gregor wrote: "Lily wrote: "I'm amazed to see the level of maturity and professionalism on this thread. All of you aren't arguing. You're debating and it's a beautiful thing to watch."Well, it was, at least. I ..."
I typed too late. Oh well. It's been interesting. I wish everyone the best of luck with your own writing careers.
Gregor wrote: "Lily wrote: "I'm amazed to see the level of maturity and professionalism on this thread. All of you aren't arguing. You're debating and it's a beautiful thing to watch."Well, it was, at least. I ..."
It always saddens me to see supposed authors with such poor reading comprehension.
Have a nice day, Paul. :)
Mahala wrote: "No, Paul, not because of you, because of them. Still you don't get it and you won't ever but the Pauls of the world I can handle, it's the rest who are determined right now to be silent that I can't stomach.
ANd now I really am gone. Things to do that have, mercifully, nothing to do with writing."
Quick question...
Did you boycott Dean Koonst when Stephen King said Meyer couldn't write worth a darn?
That's the mentality here. Holding an author responsible for actions (or lack there of) of a different author is nothing short of insane.
ANd now I really am gone. Things to do that have, mercifully, nothing to do with writing."
Quick question...
Did you boycott Dean Koonst when Stephen King said Meyer couldn't write worth a darn?
That's the mentality here. Holding an author responsible for actions (or lack there of) of a different author is nothing short of insane.
Gregor wrote: "Lily wrote: "I'm amazed to see the level of maturity and professionalism on this thread. All of you aren't arguing. You're debating and it's a beautiful thing to watch."Well, it was, at least. I think you were typing all that up while it was all going to hell."
My thought exactly.
Paul wrote: "I'm not saying that YOU should or shouldn't do anything. If that's what you want to do, then fine. But it appears to me that a certain level responsibility is being pushed on self-published authors that isn't being asked of others."
Well, considering some answers I've seen here, I can understand where the OP came from (perhaps s/he saw similar posts elsewhere before, I don't know), because it seems there's also extra care put into NOT stating our opinions in fear of 1-star retaliation ratings, targetting us as authors, among other things. (It's somewhere on the first page, I think.)
I don't want that responsibility... but I also don't want to look at myself and realise that I didn't say anything just because I was scared of hypothetical retaliation. I like to think of that first post as some kind of wake-up call.
Max wrote: "If it hurts having to take harsh, rude criticism, don't dish it out yourself! The trouble with throwing scatological material up in the air is that - like an arrow - it usually falls to the ground and never ever knows or cares where it lands."
I think that kind of attitude is part of the problem. It's a version of the "if you can't say anything nice then don't say anything at all."
So tell me, if I post quotes from the book and point to them and say "This is stupid, this infuriates me, this is why this book is garbage, and I believe this author is a complete bigot." and the author retaliates by calling me a liar, that those things aren't actually in the book, and calls me a retard to boot....I was asking for it by being harsh? Sorry, I can't agree with you.
Stefani wrote: "Max wrote: "If it hurts having to take harsh, rude criticism, don't dish it out yourself! The trouble with throwing scatological material up in the air is that - like an arrow - it usually falls to..."
An author shouldn't be replying to reviews of their book. Period.
An author shouldn't be replying to reviews of their book. Period.
Yzabel wrote: "Gregor wrote: "Lily wrote: "I'm amazed to see the level of maturity and professionalism on this thread. All of you aren't arguing. You're debating and it's a beautiful thing to watch."
Well, it wa..."
It was no one's job to wave their finger at me for accusing TinaWhatever of being a cunt. If they were a offended by my use of the word, then sure. But they aren't required to out of some moral obligation because they happened to write a book.
This whole idea that I have to be someone's keeper because they write and I write is beyond bonkers.
Well, it wa..."
It was no one's job to wave their finger at me for accusing TinaWhatever of being a cunt. If they were a offended by my use of the word, then sure. But they aren't required to out of some moral obligation because they happened to write a book.
This whole idea that I have to be someone's keeper because they write and I write is beyond bonkers.
I think Paul's response kind of proved a lot of what people were concerned about in terms of authors going off on readers in general. Personal insults have no place in this conversation, especially a derogatory term like that.I've been following this thread since the beginning, and I see Three's point about illuminating the problem and speaking up about it. I've been reading the responses to try to gain an understanding of how people feel about this, though I already know where I stand on the matter. I wouldn't say there's a demand (or command, as some have perceived it, but that's really not the case at all) to throw oneself into every conflict out there, but each time an author (SPA or not) goes off against a reviewer and then subsequently gets drafted in cult-like fashion to a hate site that belittles readers for writing critical reviews (apparently some think a 3-star rating is a critical review - how that is I'll NEVER understand), it does affect the reputation of authors and reception/projection of feedback from a reader's perspective. I was just talking the other day to at least three different people IRL about how they would never write reviews online because of the "drama," with authors trying to tell them how to receive or even rate certain books. That saddened me. So the reach goes much farther than people think, not just on the internet, but in person as well. Those who take the time to reflect and review what they read are valuable, whether they're positive, negative, or opinions in the far medium of a work. Even those who take the time to leave a rating are valuable, but they need to be taken for what they are - personal opinion.
An opinion is an opinion. An author does not have the right to tell someone reading their work how to perceive it or how to reflect on it. Period. The reason for this is because we come into the experience of reading with different backgrounds, manners of reception, and a review is a way of being able to interpret and present how the experience of reading it was received.
This is enough of a growing problem that, even if people don't know how to address it, people need to be aware of it and how harmful it really is. You can't control every action of every author who thinks they're entitled to a great review for selling a work, or one who wants to tell their readers what to think - but it's still something that needs to be illuminated because it is affecting the way readers perceive the industry. In this case, one (or several, albeit small) bad apples do end up spoiling the bunch, and many people don't realize that.
As much as some may think it doesn't involve them because of their own writerly "bubbles" if you will (between marketing, writing, etc.) - I think that perception is also part of the problem. Writers don't completely exist in a bubble or their own spheres - not in this age.
If authors are using the internet to market and build a connection with their readership and work, it makes sense that you have to be aware of the things that are occurring in that medium, because it affects perception and reach towards your audience. If you can find ways of improving that reach, wouldn't it mean that you have greater chances to extend and market yourself? So being aware of things like this that hinder reach would be a more fruitful venture than just staying in the same bubble, and keeping distance from it/pretending it doesn't exist.
Even if the problem's not one where a solution is immediately recognizable, it's worth knowing about and discussing it to see what solutions can be had about it. And any person who can speak up about it helps because education the best start to taking action.
For starters, it's spelled Dean Koontz. Second, Stephen King never said Meyer can't write. He said, from strictly a story perspective, Twilight isn't very good. Third, apple meet orange.Are all writers responsible for their writing?
Yes. Leave your insecurity at the door and deal with it.
Are authors responsible for each opiniated and childish infighting rant posted online?
No. Seven billion people.
End of argument.
Paul wrote: "I didn't miss any point. I was stating my opinion.Don't like it? Oh well, but you don't have to be a cunt about it."
Oh, I could say soooooooo much in reply to this. Instead, I'll just copy & flag your brilliant response.
Lily wrote: "For starters, it's spelled Dean Koontz. Second, Stephen King never said Meyer can't write. He said, from strictly a story perspective, Twilight isn't very good. Third, apple meet orange.
Are all w..."
Oops on Dean, but...
http://bestsellers.about.com/b/2009/0...
One author taking heat for another author is exactly the point, and not an apples and oranges situation.
But agreed on everything else.
Are all w..."
Oops on Dean, but...
http://bestsellers.about.com/b/2009/0...
One author taking heat for another author is exactly the point, and not an apples and oranges situation.
But agreed on everything else.
Amanda wrote: "Hey Paul, thanks for making my job harder and welcome to my Never-Will-Buy list. You should be completely ashamed of yourself for calling a person you do not know a cunt. That comment has been flag..."
Maybe it would help your sales if you didn't have a private profile?
Maybe it would help your sales if you didn't have a private profile?
Wow, while I was out this thing got completely out of control. Since we can't seem to agree on anything, or even agree to disagree pleasantly, let's approach it from another angle. A few years ago I went to a big box store and bought a bargain lawnmower. The thing quit in 3 months. Did I call Toro and complain about the way they allowed inferior competitors to make and sell inferior lawnmowers, making the entire industry look bad? No. I did the logical thing; I went back to the box store and complained to them about selling inferior products, even if they are bargains. Similarly, when a reader buys a bad book from an author, and writes a negative review, that's fine. But if the author behaves badly to the reader, he'll behave the same way toward me for commenting on his behavior, and nothing happens. Your complaint for a bad book and subsequent bad behavior is not with competing authors; it's with the store that sold you a bad product and featured the author. Amazon does no screening of its authors. That lack of screening, their policy, is to blame, not the guy down the street who's trying to scribble his own words down so they make sense and has no idea either of you existed. Again I'll say: a self-published author has NO power, either with readers, sellers, or other authors. I'm also a consumer and a reader, and I have to work just as hard as anyone else to get something decent to read. I'm now reading a book that is labeled a NY Times Best Seller, and yet some of the writing is amateurish and the character interaction less than believable. Who do I blame for that? The readers made it a best seller, who am I to argue, or to criticize another author?--especially one doing better dollar-wise than I am. For the reader, the consumer, and for me, it's "let the buyer beware." To think that there is anything I can do about that, no matter how hard I try, is both naive and childish. (okay, take your best shot)
Paul wrote: "Yzabel wrote: "Gregor wrote: "Lily wrote: "I'm amazed to see the level of maturity and professionalism on this thread. All of you aren't arguing. You're debating and it's a beautiful thing to watch..."Nobody is saying that anyone needs to be anyone's keeper, Paul.
I can't figure out if your unintentionally missing the point or if you really just can't understand what's been written.
This entire thread came about b/c authors are constantly asking 'Why aren't people reading SPA's?' and this is a response to that.
When readers and reviewers are consistently being attacked by SPA's over ratings and reviews, it leaves a bad taste in readers mouths and a lack of willingness to trust that others won't do it, too. Why should they trust that another SPA isn't going to do the very same thing? ESP, when those SPA's are witness to these incidents but do and say nothing.
And, yes, you're right. People should just completely ignore it when some fucktwat starts calling readers cunts. 'Cause it's not their responsibility or their job. I guess its a good thing certain civil rights leaders didn't agree with your viewpoints on personal responsibility, huh?
But, you're right, they don't have to. I also don't have to read any of their books or do anything but assume their silence is agreement.
And to answer your question, I haven't boycotted anyone b/c of anything other than their own actions. Self or trad pubbed.
I'll pass on being a dick about your typo, too. Since I actually have a point.
Wow. Are you guys still talking about this...?
A thread that degenerates into personal insults and name calling never dies...
Paul wrote: "Maybe it would help your sales if you didn't have a private profile?"lol. The only advice any author should take from you is what NOT to do.
Goodreads Authors/Readers
Books mentioned in this topic
Simple Jess (other topics)Infinite Jest (other topics)
A Prayer for Owen Meany (other topics)
The Star Of Jolanest: Tales From Tamara (other topics)
Pogo (other topics)
-I didn't intend to say more, but really, this opening statement sounds exactly like what you're saying it isn't. Maybe you didn't mean for it to sound the way it does, but it's no wonder why people here think you're being antagonistic. The question 'where are you' repeated absolutely leads me to believe you expect me to be there and say what aught to be said.
-Suggesting police involvement is not dismissive, it's serious.
-I would have liked if the reason for this discussion had been posted right at the beginning so I could have known where all this came from--now that I know you saw some sort of thing with Hugh Howey that offended you, I at least have some idea of why I feel like the good people of this group are being bashed for not 'being there' seemingly out of nowhere.
-I absolutely believe that writers should be more mature than their reviewers, they're supposed to be the professionals, after all, but I think you dropped into the wrong place to rant about it. I really haven't seen that here at all. I will not be held responsible for the childish actions of people that I don't know and have never even heard of. I know you're now saying that isn't what you want, but that's what your opening statement said to me.
-I have never grumbled about not being given a chance, and I never will. People who do must not have ever tried traditional publishing! I know that most of the SP stuff out there is nonsense, and I understand why it gives us a bad name. No one had to point that out to me. I figured it out on my own the day after I published my first book. But that just means I have to prove the world wrong by doing right and sticking with it. And if it never works for me, well, maybe I'm just not good enough to make it to the top. Not everyone can be there.
-I'm surprised this thread is still here. Lately these types get deleted before they get this involved.