Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion
Bulletin Board
>
Where Did I Go Wrong???
Sent you a message. Look forward to hearing from you.
Don't think you went wrong...maybe you just didn't advertise the site far enough?
Linda,Good point. I have a personal shelf for "declined" titles, but that gives me something to think about. I wonder if I was too ambitious with my goals. I get tired of wading through the slush pile myself, but many MANY sites that recommend self-published titles advertise a lot of crap...and that's so frustrating! I was looking to streamline the process, and find a way to promote what deserved promoting.
It takes time to build up a reputation. Just keep reading and reviewing and posting links on Twitter, Facebook, and Goodreads. After a while, if you're good and stay honest, you will develop a reputation for good reviews and honesty.Rome wasn't built in a day.
Nenia wrote: "It takes time to build up a reputation. Just keep reading and reviewing and posting links on Twitter, Facebook, and Goodreads. After a while, if you're good and stay honest, you will develop a repu..."true that :)
Give it some time. It's true there are a ton of groups on here and sometimes when people are browsing and they see a small group they may be more likely to join. I'm sure people will come around.
Thanks, guys! I've just struggled a lot trying to find other readers to help, and I wasn't sure what I was doing that might be putting them off.
Jen, you're not doing anything to put anyone off. (that should be sufficiently awkward). Like several folks have said, it takes time. People have to wade through the slush pile of groups/sites too.
Its important to learn And learn all the time...even from rejection.
Henry wrote: "#2 - Also pointed out by Linda. The reject pile. I, for one, would love to see a list of books that did not make the cut. It would add credibility to the group, and show that we do not approve everything that is pitched."Perhaps just post a list of rejected titles without qualifiers. Just that the books didn't make the grade.
And maybe--since screeners have given reasons in PM to Jen for their reasons of rejecting some books--an option for authors to ask Jen to receive a list of reasons why the books were rejected.
You haven't done anything wrong. It's a worthy goal, too. Now that said, I am guilty of not having turned up recently, and it is partly because I got a little gun-shy about giving an honest opinion.
So, I'm going to need to disclose which books I've declined, and find a better method of sheltering readers from harassment. I'm not sure everyone is aware that they can screen and review anonymously. I'm going to have to make that more clear...This is good. I can't improve anything without objectives. Thanks, everyone! Any further suggestions are welcome!
Linda wrote: "People are going to find reviewers they trust, follow them, and rely on their reviews. In other words, they're going to create their own, unique, customized "group.""Do people really do that? I don't. I've never bought or read a book based on someone's review. I know how different my tastes are to even my closest friends'. So I'm certainly not going to trust a stranger's review.
The only thing reviews do for me is to point me in the direction of books I might want to investigate. But my decision to buy/read them is based only on previewing a sample of the writing.
I've only ever bought one book that was unreadable using that method. True, I've read many others that I ended up not liking, but even those I wasn't sorry I'd read them.
After looking at people's reviews and ratings here for a while, I've found that even people who rate some books the same as me, rate other books radically different.
Am I that different from others in this regard?
Linda,No, no, no. Being nice doesn't help anyone...
Okay, let me ask you this: when I list books I've declined, how much information should I include. Is it sufficient to just say that they didn't pass, or should I (even nonspecifically) leave a reason?
Like: Sneaky Sneakers suffered from "lack of an editor" or "sloppy writing" or "unprofessional?"
I want a 'like' button because what you said, Micah, is exactly what I think. I don't (and won't) let others tell me what I may or may not like.
I read reviews for fun. There are some readers so talented at reviewing that their evaluation of a novel is entertainment all by itself. It's from these people that I find new books - not to try to mirror their opinion, but to experience the things they've either enjoyed (or really, really NOT enjoyed).I'm just saying...
A checklist or template is not a bad idea.And since what we have all pretty much agreed on that it's entirely subjective...you make a decision and say why and move on. We all like different authors, genres etc for different reasons.
But if you do want a way to winnow out the dross I say a checklist is not bad because it will be consistent.
Bad formatting IS bad formatting..that's not subjective.
Bad editing remains bad editing is also not subjective
Bad story construction it's just..bad
Etc.
Actually, bad formatting is sometimes individual. For example: when the text is not justified, I don't think it looks professional, and I'd consider the formatting to be lacking. It's a pet peeve of mine, though I've found others that don't care.
Also (not that you asked):I don't like double spacing, bold text, or fonts that look like handwriting (which I've seen). When I read a book - even an ebook, I expect an appearance similar to any paperback on my shelves.
I'm just saying. If we have different tastes, if we don't tend to see everything that's been done wrong when we enjoy a story, what good would we do to Jen's project? To be honest, I disagreed with many of the books that have been initially refused. I didn't care to check the ones approved much because, hey they've been approved already, but I'm pretty sure I would have disagree with some.Aside from tastes, I have no super duper education to tell someone that they did wrong because they are or aren't using the oxford comma, or using a style rather than another. I don't care if the ellipsis are made with an insert or if they are made with spaces between dots. I'm just ME.
Since my tastes and criteria might differ so drastically from others, I wouldn't be of much help. So what I'm saying is that maybe, just maybe, seeing how it's done, some people, like me, don't feel adequate to decide if a book passes or not. So MAYBE that is why finding readers to do that job is hard if not impossible.
G.G., that's why I rely on the collective. I'm not an editor, and will probably miss a lot of things. That being said, if an average reader (me) finds issues, they're probably serious enough to warrant exclusion.
It looks like a good group. I think pure readers are an endangered species on sites like this. Maybe extinct?
I'm tired of D+ books. If I want to "recommend" those types of works, I feel I should add a disclaimer:"This book is just barely readable. Enjoy at your own risk."
I don't think you've gone wrong at all. You've taken on a challenging project, maybe an idealistic one, but your intentions have been good. I do agree with Linda that the most reliable reviewers are going to be the ones people have grown to trust. I think that's true on Goodreads especially, since it's set up to be social in that way. I still think, though, that there is value in exploring other ways to find good books. Seeing explanations for rejections would be educational for screeners, reviewers, and authors, but doing that diplomatically is tricky. It would add value to the group, though, if you can find a way to pull it off (without giving S. his "cat fight").
I apologize for slacking off on screening. It seems like a lot of the books up there now are fantasy and horror, and those aren't really genres I read much of. I've been sort of waiting for other things, but maybe we're just stuck since the activity on the group has dwindled lately.
Henry,That was the goal, yes, but I think many of us became subjective there, too. (Votes like: "I saw a lot of typos, but the story isn't bad. Approved.)
I'm taking a step back to review our mission, as I've begun to wonder if the reason we don't have volunteers for reviewing is because our standards weren't higher during the screening process.
Sarah (Warning: Potentially Off-Topic) wrote: "I don't think you've gone wrong at all. You've taken on a challenging project, maybe an idealistic one, but your intentions have been good. I do agree with Linda that the most reliable reviewers ar..."Sarah,
Don't apologize. You're fine. I never wanted anyone to feel obligated to do anything they didn't enjoy.
Within the next few weeks, I'll be cleaning house, so to speak. There will be titles discarded and new titles up for evaluation. I've yet to tally votes sent privately to me, and there are still some I haven't checked personally.
Jen, I agree with Linda. I think it would be a good idea to list the books that didn't pass and a brief explanation of why. And, yeah, I think the reason/s should be included. Then people can decide if those reasons are something they agree with. For me personally, I only read negative reviews when checking out new books. Not b/c I'm a hater or any other ridiculousness but b/c, for me, every book is potentially five-star worthy. I want to know why people thought it wasn't and if I'm likely to agree with their reasons why.
It's certainly beneficial to be able to see the books that passed, but as Linda said, what about the ones that didn't?
As for where you went wrong? You didn't. Like many others have said, things take time. Keep being honest and you'll gain the reviewers and followers. :)
Etc: phone typos
TinaNicole - Thank you. I'm not giving up, just wondering how I could better serve other readers with this project.Henry - If you paid much attention to the screening comments, though, I think you'll agree that we all weren't always on the same page.
Linda - It is encouraging, though, because the more feedback I get, the better I'm likely to be in this endeavor. The truth doesn't ALWAYS hurt...
One problem with posting reasons for passing or failing per book is that the authors often feel defensive about reading their book has flat characters or no plot to speak off or...So I think it's better to list what you expect from a book and just say the book failed to live up to the expectations.
How many publisher rejection slips contain the (real) reasons for rejecting a manuscript? What is the author going to do when they receive a form rejection letter? Write the publisher to ask for clarification? Because they want to improve? That's not the job of the publisher, that's why there are critique circles and writer groups.
So maybe just take that stance...
Like I posted in another thread, I was looking for Romantic Suspense when an SPA recommended her own book. I checked out the Amazon sample and it didn't live up to my expectations, so I told her that. She was so pleased that I gave her my honest opinion (apparently I was the first person to do so), that she offered me the whole book and was 'very interested in my feedback'.
I referred her to critique circles. It's not that I don't want to help, but I'm not interested in becoming a mentor or a book doctor or just spend my time on books that were published prematurely.
I want to spend my time on books that have been carefully crafted to give me maximum enjoyment.
Jen wrote: "Linda - It is encouraging, though, because the more feedback I get, the better I'm likely to be in this endeavor. The truth doesn't ALWAYS hurt..."Very true. The truth can often be a stepping off point for improvement, correction, reconciliation, raising the bar... These are all good things in the end which will benefit readers whether from the author or the reviewer perspective.
Martyn (a.k.a. M'sieur Sang Froid) wrote: "One problem with posting reasons for passing or failing per book is that the authors often feel defensive about reading their book has flat characters or no plot to speak off or...So I think it's..."
Some good points, but at the same time, this is supposed to be a screening group. Why does it matter what the authors want or don't want to hear?
I'm working under the impression that this group is to help weed out the bad books for readers. Unless I'm mistaken, is what the author thinks or wants even factoring in? And if it is, why?
Jen, just another thought, and I think someone mentioned something about it above, I would take into consideration how many authors you have doing the screening/reviewing of the books.
Not to say that authors shouldn't be allowed, but for me, and a lot of other readers, if the screening is being done by mainly authors it could come off like just another review circle jerk or an Awesome Indies type group.
Also, if the authors or readers you have screening are people that only leave positive reviews it could cause the same assumptions.
I know a lot of people don't like to leave negative reviews and that's their choice, but I think not leaving any negative feedback makes it harder to gage the positive feedback, IMO. How do readers know if they'd agree with what you consider a great book when they don't know what you consider a bad book? If that makes sense.
I wouldn't say you need to go into detail about why the book failed but as Linda said, some kind of checklist would likely work. I imagine readers are going to want some explanation of why the book failed instead of just taking a random strangers word for it. It's not about informing the authors why the book failed. It's about informing readers and that seems to be the main point of the group, yeah? To help readers sort through the dreck and find the gems?
And if you're concerned about authors attacking/questioning reviews or rejections, I'd make it very clear throughout the group rules that any comments like that aren't allowed and will be deleted. Make the screeners/reviewers aware of possible situations, what to do when they happen and have a good group of moderators to intercede when/if necessary.
Martyn (a.k.a. M'sieur Sang Froid) wrote: "One problem with posting reasons for passing or failing per book is that the authors often feel defensive about reading their book has flat characters or no plot to speak off or..."I'd agree with that. If you list fails along with a proclamation of why a book failed, you are essentially rating the book without allowing it to be discussed by others.
It reminds me of an incident from when I was in art school. A sculpture prof came into our elements of design class and without any introduction or reason, just started walking down the line of projects pointing and saying, "That is crap. That is crap. That is crap. That is crap. THAT is Art! You all should look at this because it's Art. All the rest of this is CRAP." And then he walked out.
It didn't do anyone any good and looked really unprofessional. I think you have to be careful of how you appear to others if you're group is to be of any service.
Henry wrote: "Tina, Any book on the screening thread has a ratio of yes/no visible until the book either moves to the next round, or disappears.
I think the current ratio is more authors than readers, and I ..."
Okay, thanks. I still think it would be beneficial to have some explanation of why books would fail, though. Yes or no is just yes or no.
And I agree with Jen and what she's trying to do. I am also a member of the group but unfortunately, due to family issues, I haven't been able to devote any time to it. I barely have time to read any books of my own. :(
I don't mean to say that authors shouldn't be or can't participate in the screening. Only that with all review swapping, paid reviews, authors refusing to leave other authors negative reviews (often for good reason) readers are getting extremely wary and a group like this, consisting of mainly authors, could potentially turn a lot of readers off or not really do what it's supposed to do.
My comments are not judgments or criticisms. I'm trying to help b/c I think something like this is needed and could be beneficial to a lot of readers, myself included. I do read ebooks, primarily, and maybe half are sp's, so this is an idea that I fully support, appreciate and would benefit greatly from.
Micah wrote: "It reminds me of an incident from when I was in art school. A sculpture prof came into our elements of design class and without any introduction or reason, just started walking down the line of projects pointing and saying, "That is crap. That is crap. That is crap. That is crap. THAT is Art! You all should look at this because it's Art. All the rest of this is CRAP." And then he walked out."
Isn't that really what they're doing now? Saying 'no, yes, no, no' but not explaining why. So you don't think they should explain why or give any reasoning, but then you're saying they look unprofessional for not giving any explanation or reasoning?
Just b/c the group makes a decision doesn't mean people have the right to comment. This is a group for screening books and even on individual users reviews they have the option to delete comments or disallow them completely. People can choose to ignore whatever they disagree with.
Without getting into the nitty gritty, there was some drama when the comments were detailed.
D.C. wrote: "Without getting into the nitty gritty, there was some drama when the comments were detailed."Was it the authors of the books or screeners?
It was authors, for the most part, anyway. I think some people were surprised by their assessments.
TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "Isn't that really what they're doing now? Saying 'no, yes, no, no' but not explaining why?"My understanding is that there is a pre-screening process going on behind the scenes, the "first cut". And that currently there's no disclosure of what or why those were cut.
The second cut is the screening thread where it seems that some, or most, ARE giving their reasons why. Some are just saying "Accepted" or "Rejected".
My point is that if you list books that didn't meet the pre-screening process along with why, it kind of becomes a hit list, a blanket declaration of unworthiness and can look arbitrary.
And though the point is supposed to be "for the readers, not the authors" an author knowing they could end up on a wall of shame isn't exactly going to endear them to your cause. And since you're far more likely to get pitches for books to screen from authors, is that the best way to court them?
Pre-screening is done strictly by me. Any author who wishes to know my reasons is (and always has been) welcome to message me for details.When titles are "voted down" on the screening list, I remove all public references made about those titles. They are removed from the group, and we don't speak of them again.
My goal was never to embarrass anyone, but to simply find good books and spread the word about them. With this discussion, however, I am contemplating a simple checklist I could use to non-specifically state why certain titles didn't make the cut.
Again, thank you, everyone! All this discussion has been invaluable. I appreciate your honest opinions and suggestions... and I'm open to more!!!
Micha wrote: "And though the point is supposed to be "for the readers, not the authors" an author knowing they could end up on a wall of shame isn't exactly going to endear them to your cause. And since you're far more likely to get pitches for books to screen from authors, is that the best way to court them? "I'm not suggesting there should be a 'hit list' to bash the books or authors, but if the books that are rejected are just swept under the rug, how's anyone supposed to know to avoid them or why. A big problem readers are having with sp's is just that. Not knowing which ones are garbage until it's too late.
And for this group to succeed and do what Jen's trying to do, you need readers. Not authors. A large part of gaining those readers is to build trust with them or the screening becomes meaningless.
Frankly, if this group is about 'courting authors' and 'endearing them to your cause', I'm not interested. And most readers won't be either.
Endearing the group to authors and courting them suggests that this group is just free promotion and likely false praise so the authors stick around. We've got plenty of that. An overload in fact. Those things do not foster honest opinions and that's what's truly needed.
Authors are not needed to put books up for consideration and there are significantly more readers on this site than authors. The books should be screened regardless of the authors. Not because of them.
Jen wrote: "TinaNicole,Very well said."
Thanks, Jen. I wish you the best of luck with this. I can only imagine how difficult it is and will continue to be, but it has the potential to be really great and I hope you succeed with it. :)
One thing: I took a brief look over the group threads again and it's a little difficult to navigate. I only mention it b/c I know a lot of people are short on time, like me, and I had trouble finding any clear cut pass/fail options to look over.
Authors may not like lists, but they can extremely helpful. A kind of quick reference area could go a long way. If readers can cross check a book they're interested in to see if it's been screened/reviewed/rejected quickly it would be a huge draw. FWIW.
TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "I'm not suggesting there should be a 'hit list' to bash the books or authors, but if the books that are rejected are just swept under the rug, how's anyone supposed to know to avoid them or why. A big problem readers are having with sp's is just that. Not knowing which ones are garbage until it's too late. "I think that's absolutely a big problem, but the way I understood Jen's project from the beginning was less about pointing out what was bad and more about finding what was really good.
I know that's splitting hairs, and to find the good you can't completely avoid discussing the bad. But I saw this as looking for books that were, to be as diplomatic as possible, professional. For example, part of the screening involved looking at covers and blurbs, not just the writing itself.
There are lots of issues to think about with all of this, but one problem is that the really good self-published books get lost in the mess. Jen, correct me if I'm wrong, but I saw this project as helping people find really excellent self-published books. Ideally, if I am reading and reviewing a self-published book, I don't want to talk about punctuation problems and incoherent sentence structure. A basic level of competence should be assumed, just as it is with most trade/traditionally published books. We should then be free to review the books that passed the screening just like any other book.
(Edited to fix my own incoherent sentence structure)
TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "I'm not suggesting there should be a 'hit list' to bash the books or authors, but if the books that are rejected are just swept under the rug, how's anyone supposed to know to avoid them or why.."];D Forgive me for laughing (I did just chuckle reading the above), but the way I read that was "I'm not suggesting there should be a hit list...but we need a hit list."
Look, I'm not trying to be contrary. I think Jen's trying to do something worthwhile. I'm just telling you how a list of FAIL will look, especially if you list the errors they are accused of.
It's one thing to not actively court authors. It's quite another thing to seem actively contemptuous of them. And I think a wall of shame with details is toeing a fine line.
Linda wrote: "Micah wrote: " It's quite another thing to seem actively contemptuous of them. And I think a wall of shame with details is toeing a fine line...."I'm gonna be real grumpy here. ;-)
There's no "..."
Couldn't have said it better myself.
No, you were right, Sarah. I wanted to promote great indie titles - and great indie titles are those that don't have glaring errors in punctuation, formatting, etc.I'm thinking about the lists, the navigation of the group, and the idea of a basic "pass/fail" system. There are benefits, certainly. It would be one hell of a lot easier, for one, and volunteers might not be so scarce...
Good stuff, guys!
I admit, I did not read every post here, so forgive me if I repeat a comment....But Jen, what if in the group rates the book in various categories such as: Formatting, Basic Writing Skills, Proof/editing, Story line, Characters. Then an overall. Perhaps one folder for each title, and then each group member could give their own rating? It would be varied, because as you pointed out, different people enjoy different things.
That way readers/authors can see what needs improvement and what is appreciated. There are some people who do not care about typos as long as the story is good. Others appreciate good characters, but may not demand an "OMG" moment. Authors might take it a little easier if they see that some things in their work are appreciated... and they may be able to learn from the critique--- although I do understand that is not your point.
Rhoda,Most of the "screening" comments are, I think, along these lines. Recently a book came through in which almost everyone loved the cover and blurb, but we just couldn't stomach the sample. The author did not comment, but I like to think that person learned something...
I know there are still readers out there with an open mind and a willingness to review. I'm just not sure where they are all hiding, and what - if anything - I'm doing wrong to interest them in joining my project. Any thoughts are welcome.
You can check out my group here:
https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/...
Thank you!