Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion
Bulletin Board
>
Is it time to stop "being nice?"
I don't write that many negative views, because I am more fussy now about what I buy than I was 18 months or so ago. I always download the sample first, then I check out reviews of other books by the same author both here and on Amazon, then I click to buy. Sounds like a lot of palaver, but I have been stung before, so I try not to take any chances. If I post a review on Amazon which is anything less than 4 stars, then I know it will get negged, probably within hours. I posted one there yesterday - a three star review, which was very positive for the most part, but then pointed out that the final chapter really let the book down (info dumping and rushing etc). Two hours later, two negatives! Tough though, the review stays.
I am one of the first to whine about bad spelling etc., so I will point it out in a review. It is my bug bear, and I have a utopian vision in my head, that is totally unrealistic, that if we readers and reviewers refuse to ignore it, then one day all the poorly punctuated books with awful spelling and grammatical mistakes will disappear into the ether.
Christine wrote: "J.D. wrote: "I'm not finding that the ratio of crappy to good books is significantly different between indie authors and traditionally published authors. The great myth of "quality control" by the ..."
I agree with Christine. There are always exceptions, but the indie books I have picked up tend to have more grammatical errors and mistakes. Although unlike several others who have posted here, it doesn't bother me as much. I find I am more critical of a wandering plot or dull characters or poor dialog.
I think the key is how many sets of good eyes you have had reviewing your story. My first book had a lot of mistakes. So many that I decided to do a complete review and revision before I self-publish it. Traditionally published books should have the benefit of many good eyes reviewing it, but this is not always the case.
I gave more time for beta-readers and established a stronger review procedure for my first self-published book, but some things still were not caught. So I am upping the ante for my 2nd self-published book. It would be wonderful if we all had a good editor as a friend to help look out for us.
I agree with Christine. There are always exceptions, but the indie books I have picked up tend to have more grammatical errors and mistakes. Although unlike several others who have posted here, it doesn't bother me as much. I find I am more critical of a wandering plot or dull characters or poor dialog.
I think the key is how many sets of good eyes you have had reviewing your story. My first book had a lot of mistakes. So many that I decided to do a complete review and revision before I self-publish it. Traditionally published books should have the benefit of many good eyes reviewing it, but this is not always the case.
I gave more time for beta-readers and established a stronger review procedure for my first self-published book, but some things still were not caught. So I am upping the ante for my 2nd self-published book. It would be wonderful if we all had a good editor as a friend to help look out for us.
S. wrote: "Christine wrote: "J.D. wrote: "I'm not finding that the ratio of crappy to good books is significantly different between indie authors and traditionally published authors. The great myth of "qualit..."Yes exactly my sentiment. But extra pair of eyes mean extra mouth to feed too and thats going to drive up cost. Unless it is expected that things come for free.
I care about what I write and what readers have to say. I read each and every review, good or bad and I try to honestly evaluate what's said. In them, I find my strengths and my weaknesses and I use reviews to improve my craft.That being said, reviews shouldn't be written for me, the author. Reviews should be reader to reader. They should be honest and thoughtful opinions and yes, if grammar and spelling detracted from their enjoyment of a book, it should be noted.
I would never argue with a reviewer's opinion and I've been fortunate in (most of) the reviews I've received, but I have read some for other books that have shocked me with their cruelty. And yes, I have heard of bullying from both sides.
Say the characters were one dimensional. Call the dialogue stilted. Tell me the plot was unrealistic. As a reader and an author, I value your opinions, but please be civil in your criticism. Remember, there's a human being at the other end of your words.
Linda wrote: "They rarely admit their poor writing skills are preventing the readers from seeing the story. It's as if writing doesn't matter. Nine times out of ten, however, there isn't a gem of a story hiding behind the fractured syntax and misused words. Because those of us who read, and read a lot, know that the devil is in the details. There are few original story ideas, so it's up to the writer to haul out one of those old tired plots and dress it up with new finery. Eloquent, evocative language and memorable characters and all that other good stuff we as readers have learned to love..."To me, it's like telling a joke.
A good joke can fall flat on delivery. A mediocre joke can be lifted up by exquisite timing. Even a bad joke can be saved by a surprise twist.
That's why stand-up comedians work hard at their craft. It's not just the joke, but how the joke is delivered.
Cphe wrote: "Jen wrote: "I think it's fair to say that both authors and readers are growing weary of the sheer number of less than professional titles out there.As a reader, I count on reviews to help me make..."
I think that is an important thing to remember. Sometimes I think we can forget who the audience of a review is. :)
Linda wrote: "S. wrote: "I think the key is how many sets of good eyes you have had reviewing your story. My first book had a lot of mistakes. So many that I decided to do a complete review and revision before I..."Linda wrote: "S. wrote: "I think the key is how many sets of good eyes you have had reviewing your story. My first book had a lot of mistakes. So many that I decided to do a complete review and revision before I..."
Yes ma'am.
Linda wrote: "S. wrote: "Yes exactly my sentiment. But extra pair of eyes mean extra mouth to feed too and thats going to drive up cost. Unless it is expected that things come for free. ..."Then for the love o..."
I believe in sharing my work. I am not Mr. Know-it-all.
Cindy wrote: "Swhen I uploaded my epub to Nook it sticks the line space back in. A Nook thing maybe? "Yes this is a Nook known issue. Ironically the only solution to not having Nook insert its one line is to tell it to insert a very small break. So if you can edit your epub put into the Style-sheet a after paragraph space of 0.1em. If you do not have anything there or set it to 0 then Nook gives you a space of 1em.
Cphe wrote: "I spend my time and my money and give my opinion- my reviews are not for authors."
YES.
I review a product, an inanimate object. There is no human being at the end of my review.
I completely understand authors feeling badly if they read negative reviews of their books. It's common to not like criticism, particularly when we think it unfair.
But the fact remains, reviews are not for authors, they are for readers. And they are opinions on a product.
S. wrote: "I agree with Christine. There are always exceptions, but the indie books I have picked up tend to have more grammatical errors and mistakes. Although unlike several others who have posted here, it doesn't bother me as much. I find I am more critical of a wandering plot or dull characters or poor dialog."If that is the cases, I suspect that you might benefit from doing a little more due diligence before you pick up any old Indy Volume. I'm the first to admit that there are definitely some stinkers out there and they certainly outnumber quality works, but if you check out the author's social media and web page, skim a few of reviews both positive and negative, and then check out the sample, the worst Indy offenders can be avoided.
Jen wrote: "I think it's fair to say that both authors and readers are growing weary of the sheer number of less than professional titles out there.
As a reader, I count on reviews to help me make a decision ..."
There is sense in what you say. On the other hand a reviewer can be both honest yet not insensitive. For instance. "This book sucks! The author has no business even holding a pen! Don't read this worthless piece of garbage." VS. "This book could've been better. I found it to be low quality. Wouldn't recommend it. Maybe others feel different."
When I review I try to be honest, but not in a nasty, tear down way.
As a reader, I count on reviews to help me make a decision ..."
There is sense in what you say. On the other hand a reviewer can be both honest yet not insensitive. For instance. "This book sucks! The author has no business even holding a pen! Don't read this worthless piece of garbage." VS. "This book could've been better. I found it to be low quality. Wouldn't recommend it. Maybe others feel different."
When I review I try to be honest, but not in a nasty, tear down way.
Rhoda wrote: "However, by the time the front matter is flipped through, you might only have a paragraph to determine its worth :( I think they should not count the front matter in the previews. That is my opinion."
That's why, with eBooks, the smart way to format is to put some of the traditional front matter (e.g., list of other titles) at the end of the book.
S. wrote: "Yes exactly my sentiment. But extra pair of eyes mean extra mouth to feed too and thats going to drive up cost. Unless it is expected that things come for free."I don't pay any of my Beta readers. They are all writers like me and we exchange each other's work or they are fans of my previous work. The thing is, it is actually a myth that you have to spend a ton of money to produce a quality book. That's what the plethora of literary marketing firms and vanity publishers want you to believe. However I have found it infinitely more advantageous to spend time on my work rather than money.
That means marketing time, editing time, writing time, and probably most importantly, writing community building time. When you have lots of friends and allies in the writing community you would be really amazed at how little you actually have to pay for.
In my novel The Reflections of Queen Snow White I got my cover design for free (I have a frind who is a graphic designer), my Beta Reading for free (mentioned above), my editing for free (I did an editing exchange with another author and I myself am an English teacher), and nearly 100% of my promotion for free (many hundreds of hours in front of a computer screen writing review, feature and interview queries to book review blogs). In fact, the only thing I actually paid for was the cover art and I got that at a discount because I purchased the rights to an existing piece I found on Elfwood from Matt Hughs (a great Atlanta area artist) rather than commisioning an original piece.
If you just spend time building up and participating in your own writing community, it is amazing how quickly your monetary costs drop.
Annie wrote: "I think that anyone should be able to put an honest review of a book online. If they loved it, they should say so. If they hated it, they should say so. If they were somewhere in the middle, they s..."I'm sorry, but it just might be the worst book THAT REVIEWER actually read, which is absolutely honest opinion, and doesn't insult another reader in any way.
Linda wrote: "E.J. wrote: "When I review I try to be honest, but not in a nasty, tear down way. ..."The problem stems more, E.J., from authors (or their fans) taking any criticism as nasty. And even what you'..."
What she said.
Period.
Linda wrote: "E.J. wrote: "When I review I try to be honest, but not in a nasty, tear down way. ..."The problem stems more, E.J., from authors (or their fans) taking any criticism as nasty. And even what you'..."
first off I get what you are saying. I wrote a review where in the nicest way possible I tried to explain as a female reader I was not into the complete and unadulterated misogyny of the hoo-rah book. The author then publically argued with my review on Amazon.
It made me laugh. As an author the only response to a review should be "thank you" and that is only in a private forum setting. Or if the reader asks a specific question. Readers have the right to their opinion. That said, I am still a nice person. I tend to address most things with a softer touch. Whether I was an author or not I see no need to try and be as snarky as possible. If you read my reviews you can tell when there is an issue without hateful zingers.
Every person is different. There will always be the argumentative author. Blow them off. There will also be the grumpy reader. Authors and other readers will form their own opinions. As a reader if a review is overtly spiteful I tend to dismiss that review. Soft touch or super nasty doesn't matter. I believe honesty does.
I haven't read any of the comments past the original post so I'm not sure where this post has gone to at this point.A "bad" review can be honest and say that you didn't like it without being rude and nasty. I think as long as you don't cross over into being just down right mean then you can leave a "bad" review. A review is your opinion of the book and if you didn't like it you can say so, if it had a lot of errors then you can say so, just don't say things like "this author is such an idiot, he can't spell". There is a line between giving an honest opinion and trashing an author. Readers/reviewers need to stick with the honest opinion and stay away from trashing.
Melissa wrote: "There is a line between giving an honest opinion and trashing an author. Readers/reviewers need to stick with the honest opinion and stay away from trashing"There is something to be said for honesty certainly and if a book is REALLY bad then the reviewer should say that it is really bad. However, as much as reviewers complain about the lack of professionalism on the part of certain ignominious Indy authors, I would think that they would be especially sensitive to professionalism on the part of the reviewer as well.
SighAll the qualifiers are getting tiresome.
You may as well just say 'negative reviews are fine, so long as they adhere to my standards'
smdh
Davidm wrote: "Melissa wrote: "There is a line between giving an honest opinion and trashing an author. Readers/reviewers need to stick with the honest opinion and stay away from trashing"There is something to..."
Except that they're not professional reviewers so....
TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "Except that they're not professional reviewers so.... "
So you have a convenient excuse whereby mean spirited, shrill people get a pass? Sounds like a double standard to me. If you want to be treated professionally you should act professionaly. Then when someone else critisizes you unfairly or hurls rediculous ad hominem epithets against your comment page, at least you still have the moral high ground.
I just thought of a perfect example of this, not sure if it's been said but review for review. A lot of times authors will ask one another if they would like to trade books and review each others books however I believe many believe they are going to get this great review because they are trading. It definitely fallls under the whole 'being nice' deal since the person is probably thinking oh well since they were nice enough to read my book I must be getting a 5 star and good review...ehh not always the case and not even really a rule. Thank the author for agreeing to the review maybe but if you didn't like the book don't hold back simply because you did a trade and they are reading your review and your afraid of them doing the same to your book in spite. Your review was honest and thats what counts. I rarely do trades not because I'm afraid of people not liking my book and not because I feel the need to come of as nice but I don't find trades all that useful and it feels more of a chore then a I like this book I want to read it sort of deal. I just thought I'd bring up trading books and reviews as I felt is was a perfect example of the whole being nice ordeal.
Davidm wrote: "TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "Except that they're not professional reviewers so.... "
So you have a convenient excuse whereby mean spirited, shrill people get a pass? Sounds like a double..."
Who said anything about reviewers wanting to be treated professionally? We're NOT professionals. I beg you to find me a single professional reviewer on this site. No, really. Find them and link so I can report them b/c GRs does not allow professional reviews or reviewers.
Sorry, but we're just readers. Just customers. You (authors) are the professionals here and should behave as such. Not your customers.
Mahala wrote: "TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "SighAll the qualifiers are getting tiresome.
You may as well just say 'negative reviews are fine, so long as they adhere to my standards'
smdh"
Okay, al..."
Thank you. ;)
Justin wrote: "I just thought of a perfect example of this, not sure if it's been said but review for review..."I've only done a couple of these, but I'm pretty sure I HATE them. First, I feel compelled to be less pointed with my critisism than I would be otherwise for fear the other author might trash my book out of spite and secondly, many of the people who ask for these are struggling to get reviews because they either A. don't have a good product or B. haven't done enough footwork on their own in shopping their title around to open book reviewers. In the end, they don't typically produce a very satisfactory outcome and are always suspect in terms of honesty. I actively avoid them now.
Sometimes that has just occurred to me:Reviews are easier to see nowadays because of the web. People who are simply readers (I mean, not professional reviewers) can also post theirs, and in turn, they're just as easy to find.
But years ago, when reviews were mainly in magazines, weren't there some professional critics who actually built their audience, their style, on sarcasm, on being slightly on the pushover side? Because I do remember quite a few of those, at least in the French magazines I read when some 15-20 years ago. They were never shy when it came to saying stuff like "this book was a waste of paper", and other comments that would get BBAs' pants in a twist nowadays. The reviews were professional, in that they were honest, accounted for pros and cons, and so on—but they were always, always written for readers. Never for authors.
So where the hell did that sense of entitlement, of "you must put kid gloves on because Writing Is Hard", come from? I don't really feel that it came from traditional medias, not all of them, at least. (Or is it that French medias tend to lean more on the snarky side?)
Davidm wrote: "So you have a convenient excuse whereby mean spirited, shrill people get a pass? Sounds like a double standard to me. If you want to be treated professionally you should act professionaly. Then when someone else critisizes you unfairly or hurls rediculous ad hominem epithets against your comment page, at least you still have the moral high ground."Actually, authors have a public image to protect. Readers don't. Authors are placing themselves in a professional capacity. Readers are not.
I don't consider this a double standard, but just the way it is. If I say McDonald's food sucks, that's my right. I paid for it. The CEO of the company will NEVER be able to take me to task for it.
If he/she does, they look bad and will lose customer loyalty.
TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "Who said anything about reviewers wanting to be treated professionally? We're NOT professionals."I think you are quibbling over semantics. I'll change my terminology then, since you seem to find it problematic. This whole discussion stems from the fact that reviewers (I think rightly) are upset when they are not treated with courtesy by unprofessional Authors who attack them for posting negative reviews. Therefore, those who wish to be treated courteously should act courteously then, to reiterate my reprise from earlier, in the event someone plasters a scathing rant to your blog you will still at least have the moral high ground.
I'm hearing about authors vs reviewers. What about reviewer vs reviewer? Have any of you had problems with other reviewers taking issue with your take on a book - or do you simply assume it's a sock puppet attack?
Davidm wrote: "TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "Who said anything about reviewers wanting to be treated professionally? We're NOT professionals."I think you are quibbling over semantics. I'll change my ter..."
No. We're not. And, no. See Linda's post.
Mahala wrote: "Davidm wrote: "TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "Except that they're not professional reviewers so.... "
So you have a convenient excuse whereby mean spirited, shrill people get a pass? Sound..."
Doesn't it though?
Jacqueline wrote: "I'm hearing about authors vs reviewers. What about reviewer vs reviewer? Have any of you had problems with other reviewers taking issue with your take on a book - or do you simply assume it's a soc..."I assume it's sock puppets. Always. This might not be fair, but it often IS either the author or someone close to them. After all, doesn't that make more sense? Readers can get bitchy with one another, but our stake in the game is limited.
I agree with Jen. You can usually tell, too. As Jen said, readers/fans have a limited stake in these situations. Usually only socks or F&F will go after reviews/reviewers beyond more than a comment or two.
Jen wrote: "Actually, authors have a public image to protect. Readers don't. Authors are placing themselves in a professional capacity. Readers are not.I don't consider this a double standard, but just the way it is. "
I am drawing an important distinction between being honest, even being harsh (which is often appropriate) with being purposefully incendiary. If that's your schtick fine (I mean Perez Hilton has made a very lucrative career out of being harsh and snarky) but it shouldn't surprise you that you get a larger volume of irascible reactions as a consequence. (I'm sure ol'Perez gets his fair share of hate mail.) You are right that authors should be more professional. I never react in the way you describe, but if snarky and sarcastic is your approach, I think to a certain degree, strong vociferous reactions are just going to be an unfortunate occupational hazard.
TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "I agree with Jen. You can usually tell, too. As Jen said, readers/fans have a limited stake in these situations. Usually only socks or F&F will go after reviews/reviewers beyond more than a comment..."What's F&F?
Jen wrote: "TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "I agree with Jen. You can usually tell, too. As Jen said, readers/fans have a limited stake in these situations. Usually only socks or F&F will go after review..."Sorry. Friends and family. I was being lazy. :)
Linda wrote: "Authors should stay out of the review discussions of their own books -- they have other arenas for that -- because readers should not feel intimidated about sharing their honest opinions. The constant admonition to "be nice" can be stifling of honesty. If it's said often enough, the person will begin wondering, "Is this nice enough? Am I going over the line? Will the Nice Patrol come after me?" And next thing you know, she's not saying anything at all!"This begs repeating. :)
Davidm wrote: "I am drawing an important distinction between being honest, even being harsh (which is often appropriate) with being purposefully incendiary. If that's your schtick fine (I mean Perez Hilton has made a very lucrative career out of being harsh and snarky) but it shouldn't surprise you that you get a larger volume of irascible reactions as a consequence. (I'm sure ol'Pereze gets his fair share of hate mail.) You are right that authors should be more professional. I never react in the way you describe, but if snarky and sarcastic is your approach, I think to a certain degree, strong vociferous reactions are just going to be an occupational hazard."Yeah, when reviewers say the author is a putz who should have his keyboard taken away, that's harsh. I wouldn't make an effort to defend this person, as I believe the review says more about the reader than the work.
But that's the thing - ridiculous reviews don't hurt the author. Believe this or not, it is true. Some could argue it would actually INCREASE visibility and interest in the book. When the author (a professional with a product to sell and an audience to court) takes them to task for it THAT DOES HURT THE AUTHOR.
Like it or not, authors are the ones who have to behave. With the exception of a very few (like Ann Rice), trad pubbed writers have already learned this. They profit from it, too. When indies decide to take the high road, many of the preconceived notions about this industry will finally be put to rest. Not before.
Jacqueline wrote: "I'm hearing about authors vs reviewers. What about reviewer vs reviewer? Have any of you had problems with other reviewers taking issue with your take on a book - or do you simply assume it's a soc..."I actually have had that happen, a small group of author friendly bloggers took issue with my reviews of their BFF authors, and some swipes were made at me here and there. They even took issue with me getting a bit overly chatty with some friends in the comment section (how dare we talk about the weather!). There was a swipe at me made on an author's FB page about me being overly chatty in a critical review of her book, but funny thing was I hadn't commented on that thread in over a year.
My answer to both the reviews and the comments (unless they are deemed by Amazon as being against their guidelines) is to just not read them. Easy peasy.
There are several reviewers I come across quite often on Amazon, who always give four and five stars, and are associated with professional reviews sites (even though they don't disclose it). Always have reviews up on Amazon on release day. Never disclose their association with the review site(s), nor that they received the book for free. If, on the odd occasion these reviewers have issues with a book, it is so carefully worded in the review that one would have to have experience with that person's style of reviewing to even pick up on it.
So, I just don't read reviews by these people because they don't help me. Just like I don't read the this book sux kind of reviews. Or the reviews with lots! of! exclamation! points! that clearly come from friends and family.
Some reviewers do tend to snark (been known to do that on occasion). As much as I love the Outlander books, I also love to read the critical reviews of them, some are very well done. If snarky reviews are not your style, and they fall within the site's TOS, your answer is simple: just don't read them.
It's that simple.
I'm honestly confused with people expecting the internet to be a nice place to visit. If it were 1999, maybe it would make sense, but any regular browser in 2014 knows it can happen, but it's not a given. The people complaining on Goodreads about the "mean people", must never go to Youtube comment section. They make this place seem like Disney in comparison. I mean how often does it go to the racially insensitive, homophobic, and sexist bottom feeding lower lands in here? That's my idea of making a review too personal, not commenting on plot holes, and editing issues with gifs.
TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "Sorry. Friends and family. I was being lazy. :)"Thanks! I know most of the shorthand around here, but not all of it.
Linda wrote: "not even "nice" reviews are enough to prevent that, so why all the insistence on "nice" if it doesn't do any good?... The point is, has been, remains: Reviews are not for authors!"I don't disagree with the second point. Although as to the first maybe it's just a difference in personal philosophy. I suppose my perspective is that when you are attacked by someone you can respond in kind and escalate the situation, you can allow yourself to be baited into a vitriolic exchange, or you can be the bigger person and let those hurtful comments roll off you like the nonsense they most assuredly are. If your reviews are for your readers, if you are writing for your blog subscribers who love what you do, why do you care what a couple of imbittered individuals think? Why allow them to manipulate your feelings and incite you into an unpleasant emotional reaction? I think the vitriolic come off looking much worse when you respond to their venom with courtesy rather than answering with paralleled wrath.
Misfit wrote: "Jacqueline wrote: "I'm hearing about authors vs reviewers. What about reviewer vs reviewer? Have any of you had problems with other reviewers taking issue with your take on a book - or do you simpl..."I can't tell you how many times I've said this. It just seems so logical, and what most people do, that it baffles my mind when people won't just do it.
There are so many reviews and reviewers on this site. Literally, millions and millions. Find what's helpful or entertaining for you and just ignore the ones that aren't.
Jen wrote: "ridiculous reviews don't hurt the author."You are correct. Reviews really are only meaningful in agragate, especially in a literary environment where there are so many reviewers. A caveat might be a reviewer from a major media outlet like NYT or NPR, but yes overall authors (especially new authors) are only doing themselves a disservice by bloviating all over the Amazon Comments Section. You can't control awful people saying awful things. You can only control how you react to them.
I've never had a problem as a reviewer. My reviews are always honest. People can take from them what they like. It's only my opinion.As an author, I'll let you know when I get a bad review. Struggling to get reviews at all at the moment, so would just be grateful for anything, I think. Obviously, I only want people to enjoy my work, that being said.
Davidm wrote: "Jen wrote: "ridiculous reviews don't hurt the author."You are correct. Reviews really are only meaningful in agragate, especially in a literary environment where there are so many reviewers. A ca..."
I think you meant caveat?
Well you certainly stirred things up Jen. Well done!
In my opinion if an author/writer (that is another debate) is unable to accept or learn from ALL reviews then it is poor show. How did we learn at school if it was not from being corrected at times? None of us are ever too old to learn. Anyone who stoops to reprisals should be complained about and the site administrators should remove them.
Being fair to other readers is also an important point. I like, many others who have commented in various sites, now have a tendency to ignore 4 and 5 star reviews of new unknown books. These have so often been very obviously given by friends and relatives. All of us want to be treated with respect and fairness and therefore it is only right we treat others similarly.
One IMPORTANT matter: There is never any excuse for rude, profane or personal comments by anyone.
In my opinion if an author/writer (that is another debate) is unable to accept or learn from ALL reviews then it is poor show. How did we learn at school if it was not from being corrected at times? None of us are ever too old to learn. Anyone who stoops to reprisals should be complained about and the site administrators should remove them.
Being fair to other readers is also an important point. I like, many others who have commented in various sites, now have a tendency to ignore 4 and 5 star reviews of new unknown books. These have so often been very obviously given by friends and relatives. All of us want to be treated with respect and fairness and therefore it is only right we treat others similarly.
One IMPORTANT matter: There is never any excuse for rude, profane or personal comments by anyone.
Goodreads Authors/Readers
Books mentioned in this topic
The Reflections of Queen Snow White (other topics)The Reflections of Queen Snow White (other topics)
Chances (other topics)
Lucky (other topics)
The Little Black Fish (other topics)
Those are really terrible statistics...