Review Group discussion
Advice
>
New amazon guidelines
message 51:
by
Leo
(new)
Oct 18, 2016 11:17AM
I'll just chip in my two penn'orth to say that I've found this group to be the most effective by far in generating honest and thoughtful reviews from its membership, and it's been great for the books I've put forward for consideration. I think part of that has been the commitment by reviewers to ensure they finish their commitments. The time schedule isn't exactly over-demanding so there's little reason for people not to do what they've agreed to, and softening that commitment may just encourage people to flake out. I think the moderators do a fine job - not least weathering some of the storms and tempests that come with the occasional writer's ego! - and I'm more than happy with whatever they decide works best for the group on an ongoing basis. Sure, an occasional crisis might come up that prevents someone meeting their review deadline, but I think most folks would understand that as long as it's been communicated.
reply
|
flag
Due to the new amazon rules, we can no longer require group members to review a book on amazon in return for a free book.However, I, and the rest of the mods will still be keeping a close eye on who reviews on amazon and who doesn't. The requirement to review on goodreads still stands.
However, if an author doesn't review on amazon, when it comes to sorting out subsequent rounds, the chances of a non-reviewer being accepted into another group are... slim.
Forgive me if this is a stupid question. I'm very new to all this and I don't quite know how things work. I'm happy to leave reviews for people, but I am trying very hard to write anonymously and not connect my writing to my name. I'd be glad to leave reviews for other peoples books, but my amazon account is connected to my name, and I'd prefer people not be able to connect my book to my real indentity. Is there a way I could just review on the honor system? Is it against Amazon TOS to make a new account that only they would know (through payment) is connected to my name? Is there another way to do this anonymously? Thanks
Jonathan wrote: " Is there another way to do this anonymously? "You can change the name you use to leave reviews on Amazon. I use the name 'Alara' for example. I can't recall why I chose that, but I did a few years back now and have not bothered to change it. The key point is that the name you leave reviews under is not linked with your real identity to anyone viewing it, so your anonymity is protected.
E.M. wrote: "Jonathan wrote: " Is there another way to do this anonymously? "You can change the name you use to leave reviews on Amazon. I use the name 'Alara' for example. I can't recall why I chose that, bu..."
Thanks for answering. Could you help me understand some related things? First off, that changes the name on all my previous reviews, right? So if I was previously reviewing under my real name, and I changed my name to "Alaric" all my previous reviews would be written by Alaric, right? And if, in the future, I went back to reviewing under my real name, all my goodreads reviews would switch to my real name, right?
If so, this leaves holes in my identity protection, but if that's the best I can do . . . .
Jonathan wrote: " So if I was previously reviewing under my real name, and I changed my name to "Alaric" all my previous reviews would be written by Alaric, right? And if, in the future, I went back to reviewing under my real name, all my goodreads reviews would switch to my real name, right?"That is my understanding of it. Yes.
E.M. wrote: "Jonathan wrote: " So if I was previously reviewing under my real name, and I changed my name to "Alaric" all my previous reviews would be written by Alaric, right? And if, in the future, I went bac..."Thanks.
I had a reviewer that received a free copy of my book try to leave a review yesterday and amazon said it wasn't authorized and wouldn't allow the review to post to the page. I have a call in to speak to a real person at amazon about this, but in the mean time, does anyone know why her review attempt wasn't allowed? I have review copies out and this practice has been new author standard for quite some time, as long as the reviewer is honest. What i'm wondering now if amazon is requiring that the account holder leaving the review has purchased the book? Thereby blocking customer reviews that they can see hadn't purchased the book?
The reviewer should have called amazon. By you calling, you established that you have a relationship with the reviewer, and amazon probably considered it biased. That person will probably be blocked permanently from reviewing your work.I don't know why the review was blocked in the first place, maybe amazon saw a connection between the reviewer and yourself.
Reviewers can still review books they received from sources other than amazon. The new guidelines only specify that a book cannot be supplied IN RETURN for a review. It must be the reviewers choice to review, with no expectation by the author supplying the book.
I have had this problem before. The people who received copies of my book directly from me haven't been able to leave a review. Testing this, I tried to leave a review for a book I didn't purchase from them, and couldn't. I've been under the impression that if you didn't buy the book from Amazon, they wouldn't let you review it.
As a bit of an aside, but maybe pertinent: I review a bunch of different products on Amazon, including TV shows, items I've purchased, and items I've received as gifts. Anyone perusing my reviews from Amazon would see that I'm a 'reviewing type' and wouldn't be surprised to see book reviews sprinkled in there. It may help to review other products so your book reviews don't 'stand out' as something unusual, although I can't guarantee that it works that way.
Susan-Alia wrote: "I have had this problem before. The people who received copies of my book directly from me haven't been able to leave a review. Testing this, I tried to leave a review for a book I didn't purchase ..."Is this very recent? I have not had a problem with this in the past, but I have not done such a thing since the changes in the terms and conditions.
This is probably April/May of this year. So not that recent, but I haven't tried since then.
S.A. wrote: "I had a reviewer that received a free copy of my book try to leave a review yesterday and amazon said it wasn't authorized …"
Could this be because of the new $50 (if I've got the amount right) spending requirement?
Could this be because of the new $50 (if I've got the amount right) spending requirement?
Susan-Alia wrote: "This is probably April/May of this year. So not that recent, but I haven't tried since then."I have certainly done so since that time, on many occasions, so I am uncertain what the issue may have been. A'zon is very good at finding people they think 'know' you, perhaps that is what has been the issue for you. If not, I am very puzzled...
When I heard about it, I was wondering if they had quietly implemented it or was in the process of rolling it out. Although it shouldn't apply to me - I spent way more than 50 bucks there, that's for sure! LOL
E.M. wrote: "Susan-Alia wrote: "This is probably April/May of this year. So not that recent, but I haven't tried since then."I have certainly done so since that time, on many occasions, so I am uncertain what..."
I had wondered about that - a possible Facebook connection or something similar? This group exists and you guys apparently haven't had a problem, so I'm considering it a fluke. Hopefully, there will be no more problems :-).
The confusion arises because affected individuals and organizations stop reading after the following two paragraphs of the policy update.“Our community guidelines have always prohibited compensation for reviews, with an exception – reviewers could post a review in exchange for a free or discounted product as long as they disclosed that fact.
“Today, we updated the community guidelines to prohibit incentivized reviews unless they are facilitated through the Amazon Vine program."
The following paragraph occurs later in the policy update so it is entirely possible they didn't read this far.
“The above changes will apply to product categories other than books. We will continue to allow the age-old practice of providing advance review copies of books.”
Despite the anecdotal cases arising in contradiction and because I am in no position to determine the surrounding facts, I think the phrase, "other than books", attains. Especially since Amazon took deliberate pains to specify it and acknowledge a time-tested tradition.
Hi everyoneI saw this post on Facebook the other day, and also noticed another member here had mentioned it in a different thread. Don't know whether it makes anything clearer or muddies the water even more!
http://annerallen.com/amazons-new-rev...
Laurette wrote: "Hi everyoneI saw this post on Facebook the other day, and also noticed another member here had mentioned it in a different thread.."
There is nothing new in that to what we have discussed here - thank goodness - but it is a reasonable review of the whole situation for someone unsure about it, IMO.
Emma wrote: "Any suggestion about what to do if a member doesn't leave a review, if we can't 'require' them to do so?"Hi, One ancillary point. I think something should be included about people who ask for and get a review copy and then leave the author hanging in the air. If they feel for whatever reason they don't want to review, no problem. But they should have the decency to tell the author why. Even a negative response can be construed positively. But silence is downright impolite.
David
Hi David, we do our best to minimise that happening in the group.In the review rounds, people who don't fulfil their obligations, don't get accepted for other groups.
People that miss out on reviews in a round get to put their book on the one for one list, and it is recommended that people that have placed reviews for the non-participant, remove their reviews so that person doesn't profit from the experience.
However, we clearly can't enforce such a suggestion.
Either don't add a disclaimer, or say 'I received a free copy from the author and decided to review'.
I've reviewed several books lately that weren't verified purchases and have also had some reviews posted that weren't verified purchases without any issue. I think it's the appearance of a partial review that's the problem. For example - I have a lot of old books sitting around the house, and sometimes I decide to review them. I didn't get them from Amazon. Also, I sometimes review library books on Amazon. I don't think the ability to do so is going to go away.
Not something I've come across, and I've reviewed whole series. It might me that your account has been flagged for some reason.Non-verified reviews still show up in the statistics, you just have to search for them a little harder, on .com anyway.
The default is set to display verified reviews first.
There is also a limit to the number of non-amazon verified purchase reviews an account holder can post which is currently set at 5 per week and that might also trip up a book blogger/reviewerhttps://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/help/cust...
But it says that policy doesn't apply to digital or physical books, so that shouldn't be it.
Faith wrote: "...Amazon deleted all my reviews after a few days because I hadn't bought the books...Faith, are you assuming the deletions were because you "hadn't bought the books", or did you get a message to that effect?
Did you try contacting Amazon for confirmation and/or clarification?
If you did contact Amazon, could describe their response and how it reconciles to their published policies (see Amazon Community Guidelines) which state:
Book authors and publishers may continue to provide free or discounted copies of their books to readers, as long as the author or publisher does not require a review in exchange or attempt to influence the review.
I point out that this guideline does not require disclosure of having received a free copy.
(The only other applicable book review qualifications I could find (see Amazon: About Promotional Content) provide the following example, which Amazon does not allow: An author posts a positive review about a peer's book in exchange for receiving a positive review from the peer. However, the same guidelines provide the following example, which Amazon does allow: An author answers a question about their own product and discloses their financial interest (e.g., "I'm the author of this book.") I'm assuming neither to apply to you?)
If you haven't contacted Amazon, would you consider doing so on our behalf? Or, if you prefer, I could contact them on my own behalf, as a Goodreads member (which I remind you is owned and operated by Amazon), unless the Review Group Administrator/Moderators have some sort of inside connection and a better chance of receiving a response.
Thanks,
bk
I'm afraid that the mods and myself have no more influence than anyone else. we're normal goodreads members who just happen to to help run a group.
Faith: On behalf of the entire Apache nation, I offer you this olive branch of thanks.Emma: No connections whatsoever? So all my sucking up to you guys has been a waste of time? I think I'm going to be sick.
But 'Buck Faith' would be a great name for a character - maybe a cynic!
We don't have connections with the goodreads/amazon administration. but we know plenty of authors all over the world.
I really doubt anyone is scanning Goodreads for your comments, I wouldn't worry about it. And I personally think that, while it's a pain for us, some of those rules are a good idea. Otherwise it would be much easier to create dummy accounts and revenge-post.
Faith wrote: "Should I delete my comments? Just wondering, seeing as this site is owned by Amazon."Not at all, you are just passing on useful information received from Amazon itself.
I was just being flippant.
And you have cleared up the issue that was puzzling us as to why your reviews were removed.
It sounds like you should be writing sci-fi novels, Faith!
Faith wrote: "Answer: The Amazon review cull was officially..."Thanks for the follow up, Faith. It's good to know you were censored because of Amazon's $50 minimum purchase policy, and not some arbitrary, hidden targeting policy (which would not be a first for Amazon.)
Regarding your 'more than 1 review in a day' (unofficial advice) comment, I have had a different experience. For Reading Rounds, I have been posting all four reviews at the same time, and I have never had a problem with culling. On the other hand, my reviews are verified purchases, so I'm wondering if non-verified purchases are treated differently. Does anyone have a definitive answer?
Faith wrote: "It's just when your reviews are all at least a thousand words long..."I would be pissed, too. But this is all temporary, right? Once you pay Amazon their $50 shake-down fee (I think Amazon terms it "minimum purchases") you can re-post the reviews and they will stick, right?
Faith wrote: "I just read sci-fi but would probably write something else. The History of Sandpaper. Genre: Historical Friction."Humour would work!
Mod
Mod
Pardon my french, but Amazon has decided to be @$$holes and remove *all* of my reviews. I sent the following email, but if anyone has any experience and advice dealing with this, it would be appreciated. They deleted reviews for books purchased via Amazon too. No explanation at all.{I feel quite irritated to discover that *all* of the reviews I have posted have been removed. This count was well over 100. I do reviewing professionally, and am always upfront about who I am reviewing for. Books reviewed via Netgalley, via Seattle, San Francisco, and Manhattan Book Reviews, books purchased *for my own enjoyment* and clearly labelled as such, everything has been removed for "possible affiliation".
I feel equally frustrated that I was not informed in any way of this decision and had to stumble upon it myself. For a professional reviewer, this is disgraceful. Not only that, but it's made a liar of me to tell publishers, publicists, authors themselves, or the various Book Review coordinators that these reviews are on Amazon, when they are not and I was never informed of the unwarranted removal.
I feel frustrated for being penalised as a professional reviewer. Publicists work with professional reviewers for just such reasons- garnering articulate and useful reviews. Yes, I do receive ARCs and e-galleys for review. No, I am not "paid" to provide vanity reviews. If your concern is a dearth of low star reviews, that is because it is my private policy not to do so. To shame an author, especially a fledgling one, serves no good purpose. In these cases, I make every possible effort to get constructive criticism to the author in question.
I request that all of my deleted reviews be restored immediately.
Thank you for your prompt attention in this matter.
~Dr J A d'Merricksson }
J Aislynn wrote: "Pardon my french, but Amazon has decided to be @$$holes and remove *all* of my reviews. I sent the following email, but if anyone has any experience and advice dealing with this, it would be apprec..."It should also be noted I spend a lot on Amazon each month for books...
Hi J, If you are hoping to reach amazon, this is not the place. You'll have to contact them. This is a private group. You post will only be seen by the other members, who are all fellow authors.I do feel your pain. It must be incredibly frustrating. However. authors can include your reviews in the editorial section of their book page. They can add it via their author central account on amazon.
If you are going to forward that message to amazon, I suggest you remove the 'professional' reviewer. It could indicate that you consider reviewing a job which in turn suggests your receive payment. I KNOW this is not the case, but the wording you've could be construed that way.
Please let us know what happens, we are all reviewers here.
Emma wrote: "Hi J, If you are hoping to reach amazon, this is not the place. You'll have to contact them. This is a private group. You post will only be seen by the other members, who are all fellow authors.I..."
I was posting here to get advice from fellow reviewers. The above is the email I sent Amazon. Despite the autoresponse saying to expect a response within 12-24 hrs, I have yet to hear anything. I'll be sure to post here once I do though!
I don't think there is a lot you can do. ZON is a world unto itself, and they are customer focused not author focused.
Emma wrote: "I don't think there is a lot you can do. ZON is a world unto itself, and they are customer focused not author focused."I did also make the case that removing reviews posted by professional reviewers which tend to be more articulate, and leaving fluff reviews or simple one line 'it was great!' reviews hurts both authors and customers. If I am on the fence about a book and those are the only reviews, then I usually won't go for it.
I might be wrong, but I'm not sure the use of the word 'professional' is helping your case. It means you're not a normal customer. So your reviews should be in the editorial section.
Perhaps because I am new to this particular group, but I'm not clear on what the kerfuffle is about on this topic. I've been I reviewer for...*eek*...twenty-five years and things like this Amazon rule have always really been enforced, just unspoken. It has come up now because of the countless YouTube channels where people get expensive products in the mail in exchange for reviewing them. If you received an ARC or a book with an ounce of Beluga, you would need to worry, especially if the book reeked and you gave it a stellar review. When I was writing for several sites and magazines I got dozens of ARCS, PBs, and HCs every week. They weren't bribes because TOR knew I couldn't possibly read and review four of their books every week, but they will put in front of you as many as possible on the chance you will review one.
These days, I prefer e-copies, actually. (Save a tree.)
I write reviews for Amazon for books I have not purchased there quite often with never a problem. Maybe it is because I have been submitting reviews there so long.
Keebe
Http://www.Hikeeba.com/MEviews
Few people encounter problems putting reviews on amazon, but it does happen. Whatever flags a particular account, whether valid or not, the person sanctioned has little recourse.Amazon are concerned about bias and providing legitimate reviews, so any mention of being paid, or 'sock puppet' accounts are frowned upon.
It also seems to be more of a case of 'guilty until proven innocent' if, they take a reviewers perspective into account at all.
But its their site and for ZON, the rights of the customer far outweigh those of the seller or reviewer.
