Reviews - to dis or not to dis

[Kyla]

I've seen some pretty disrespectful reviews on GR. If I don't like a book, I'll rate it, but I don't write a review. Some reviewers go out of their way to write bad reviews, including gifs and snarky comments. What's your thought?

[Varied Books]

I am not a snarky kind of girl but some reviewers love the snark. I avoid reading the ones w/ it.

I would hate to see a GR where the only high rated books have comments. Negative comments are needed b/c ratings are subjective. At least when there are comments I can weed through the personal reasons for not liking a book.

I am lazy so I don't write a lot of reviews. Also it's hard for me to write a neg review for a book w/ a nicely behaving author. B/c I can't or don't want to I'm glad others will.

[Sarah :)]

I understand what you are saying but i like to read why people don't like the book which you can't work out from a rating alone. Sometimes it's because of cheating, love triangle or cliff hanger which those things don't bother me in a book. What I can't stand is when a person rates a book 1 star before its even out yet. If you haven't read it how can you rate/hate it. Sometimes the blurb isnt even written yet and they have done this. Completely rude to bring a authors overall rating down without any cause at all...

[Kim]

I will leave a bad review. I think other readers have the right to know why I think it's bad. However people being way overboard with the nasty gifs I ignore as they tend to be childish. But be it good or bad I'll leave a review especially if it's something really good or something really bad~ I just try to give my opinion hoping to enlighten others either way. I like reading reviews good and bad the key is whether tactfully done!

[Kallie]

Why is called a bad review. Was it written poorly, the content, storyline. very unbelievable plot. A review is subjective and a GOOD review can be liking or not liking BUT it has to state reasons and maybe possibly comparisons. It should not denigrate the writer's work JUST your opinion as to why you enjoyed or did not enjoy.

I always read reviews that are like those positive or negative.

[Kim]

Kallie wrote: "Why is called a bad review. Was it written poorly, the content, storyline. very unbelievable plot. A review is subjective and a GOOD review can be liking or not liking BUT it has to state reasons a..."

Exactly

[Paganalexandria]

I write glowing reviews, and bad reviews. I feel my book buddies trust my glowing ones more because of my reluctance to squee over everything. The same way I lay out what made a particular book worthy of my rare 5 stars (without spoiling of course), the same detail must be paid to why another only got 1. Especially, when there are just as many writers that complain about the 1 star ratings without reviews, as those complaining about "mean" ones. I actually got a request from a writer to beta read their book because of my low review of another book. They actually liked the observations concerning missing research, and wanted that laser eyed focus on their own work; since, I obviously was passionate about the sub-genre.

[Pamela]

Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "I write glowing reviews, and bad reviews. I feel my book buddies trust my glowing ones more because of my reluctance to squee over everything. The same way I lay out what made a particular book wor..."

I totally agree. I wrote a negative review and was attacked for what I wrote. You know who came to my defence? The author. Smart authors want to know why their readers liked, loved, or hated their novels. Another author advanced me book 2, telling me that she addressed some of the points I mentioned in book 1. I didn't even ask her for it.

Also, when it comes to negative reviews (scathing or not), I like to know what the reader disliked as it could be the same things that bother me; thereby not wasting my time and money on it.

One last thing, and this is to all those who criticize readers regarding their reviews, scathing or not. It's none of your business! It's the reader's opinion. An opinion that should be respected regardless if you agree or not. To criticize someone because they didn't love it like you did is childish and immature; telling the world how narrow-minded you really are.

[Ivy]

I agree with giving bad reviews, as long as you state why. It's hard for the author to take criticism seriously if they don't know why someone didn't enjoy their work.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but it really is all in the way it's delivered. For the author who pours their heart and soul into their work, even if it isn't my cup of tea, I try to at least be honest about why it didn't work for me so they can decide whether to take it to heart or not.

I also depend on this from other readers - if you liked it, I'd like to know why, so I can decide if it's worth my time and money to get/read it.

[Paganalexandria]

Ivy wrote: "I agree with giving bad reviews, as long as you state why. It's hard for the author to take criticism seriously if they don't know why someone didn't enjoy their work.

Everyone's entitled to the..."

But see that's so subjective too because everyone's sensitivity levels vary. I have personally seen some of the biggest Goodreads' meltdowns over the blandest reviews. I've seen a few author's up in arms over a 3, or even 4 star review that trip over one line, in a review others would kill for. I've also seen an author "like" even the bad reviews for his book, and left "Thank You", comments for ALL that participated in the read-to-review exchange (immediately sent a friend request because that really impressed me).
My philosophy is, "I'm not trying to be anyone's dream killer, but will end delusion when necessary." Which for me boils down to a few key things. As the reigning Queen of Run On Sentences, I'm not the grammar/punctuation police. Yet, If you put a book out without even spell checking it, I'm mentioning. If you built your whole plot line on something, that even my under-educated butt recognizes as illogical or improbable. I'm mentioning it. If you decided to set a story in Japan, but you're referencing Chinese landmarks. I'm calling the research fails out. In all honesty, I'm more concerned about the next person spending their money, versus the author's feelings. The same way other readers cringe at secret babies, cheating, but their rants actually move a book higher up my to-read list. My book pet peeves, might not matter to the next reader. Sometimes those mean, snarky gif-ed reviews are responsible for selling books. I can't count how many times I've gotten people to read Shayla Black's because of that epic Smart Bitches blog review. In the end, it's all a wash.

[Becka]

I'm for the good or bad. That's the whole point of a review. Personally, I feel like if you are going to give a book only 1 or 2 stars you should give a reason. Was it poorly written, was the story bad, was it edited badly, was it just not your cup of tea?

I personally don't review a lot, unless I absolutely hated or loved it. I don't need to read 100+ reviews of someone describing the plot. I want to know what are the fundamental reasons you loved or hated something.

If I'm giving a 3 or 4 star "liked" rating and there are already plenty of reviews I don't feel like I need to give one, because my thoughts have probably already been conveyed.

[Paganalexandria]

Rebecka wrote: "I'm for the good or bad. That's the whole point of a review. Personally, I feel like if you are going to give a book only 1 or 2 stars you should give a reason. Was it poorly written, was the story..."

Rebecka it's amazing how different we all are with our ratings scale. For me my average rating of books I just liked is a 3, a 4 is a book I loved, and 5 stars are usually reserved for books that changed my reading life in some way (opened me up to a new genre, gave me new outlook on something, or just left me dazed). My favorite authors routinely get 4 from me. I know my 4 are a lot of my book buddies' 5. This rule seems to be adhered to strictly here, but I tend to be more generous with my stars on Amazon. Especially because both sites official rating definitions are very different themselves. I didn't learn until recently that Amazon considered 3 stars a negative rating.

[Ivy]

Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "My philosophy is, "I'm not trying to be anyone's dream killer, but will end delusion when necessary." "

I think that's fair - what I say is, try to be constructive in your criticism and express yourself as to why you dislike something, instead of just ranting. If someone wants to get upset about the truth, then that's on them.

The bottom line is, if you're an author, you're going to have to learn to deal with negative reviews. Not everyone is going to love your book, no matter what. I just think you don't have to be cruel in expressing your opinion and they should take it in a professional manner.

[Ivy]

Rebecka wrote: "I want to know what are the fundamental reasons you loved or hated something.

If I'm giving a 3 or 4 star "liked" rating and there are already plenty of reviews I don't feel like I need to give one, because my thoughts have probably already been conveyed. "

I agree about review style - honestly, my reviews are more reminders for myself about a book. I read so many that sometimes I just don't remember alot about it (especially the bad ones - I try to repress those memories). I list my likes/dislikes, instead of recap of plotline.

[Suzanne]

I also believe reviews should be respectful but I do want to know why someone didn't like it. Case in point, "Consequences", which I thought was phenomenal, was rated horribly by a few because of its content of rape and violence against a woman. Of course I don't advocate rape and violence but it was an important piece of this powerful storyline and wouldn't stop me from reading it.

[Paganalexandria]

Ivy wrote: "I agree about review style - honestly, my reviews are more reminders for myself about a book. I read so many that sometimes I just don't remember alot about it (especially the bad ones - I try to repress those memories). I list my likes/dislikes, instead of recap of plotline.
"

Ivy that's why I joined Goodreads to begin with. I used to maintain a spreadsheet of all the books I read, and owned. It began as a way to avoid buying duplicates of the same book, and as a reminder of which one to buy next. I kept a physical copy of it with me, while book shopping. I was so excited when someone turned me on to website. It then became a tool to journal my reading experiences. It wasn't until much later, after joining a group, that the social aspects played any part of my experience. After you've read tons of books, especially of the same theme, storylines can blend from time to time. You can also forget what it was exactly that made you find "meh".love, or hate about a particular book in the first place. Revisiting your previous reviews, are excellent for that purpose.

[Suzanne]

Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "Ivy wrote: "I agree about review style - honestly, my reviews are more reminders for myself about a book. I read so many that sometimes I just don't remember alot about it (especially the bad ones ..."

When the next book in a series is published, sometimes I can't even remember if I've read the prior ones, or if I liked them. It helps a lot to use this system.

[Ivy]

Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "Ivy wrote: "I agree about review style - honestly, my reviews are more reminders for myself about a book. I read so many that sometimes I just don't remember alot about it (especially the bad ones ..."

Love that! I can't tell you how many times I found myself (back in the day) in the store, holding a book, liking the cover but not able to tell you if I'd read it already or not. The blurb would be kind of familiar, and then I'd get home and have to scour my shelves to see if I already had it.

Goodreads was a godsend. And I agree about the social aspect - now I like adding friends who have interests in similar books and getting their thoughts. Sometimes we feel the same, and sometimes not, but I like the discussion they can generate.

[Paganalexandria]

Do any of you guys review your re-reads too? I started that this year, and it's been a trip. Seeing how your tastes have changed, or rediscovering exactly why you loved a hero/heroine. Especially the old school bodice rippers.

[Maddy]

I think a negative review can be an excellent thing. I don't mean the ones that suggest the author is stupid (or worse). That's just rude. But every person who reads any book is likely to have an opinion about it. Maybe they loved the sex scenes but didn't believe the hero/heroine were really in love by the end of the book. Maybe they hated the hero. Every opinion is perfectly valid and every reader has a right to leave a review. They spent their time and maybe their money on the book, so why shouldn't they tell people what they thought about it?

My best friend and I might read the same book. I loved it while she loathed it. When we talk about it, it turns out the thing I adored is the very thing that turned her off. Is one of us wrong? Nope. We had two very different opinions about the same book. It makes for great discussions. That's why I like to see a variety of reviews. It helps me decide whether or not I'll like the book.

Sadly, sometimes authors don't react well to a critical review. That's their problem. It's so easy these days to be published that a lot of authors aren't prepared for reality of not everyone loving their baby. I've seen an honest review turn into some ridiculous flap because the author seems to think they have the right to tell readers what to say in a review. The truth is, they don't. End of story.

[Ivy]

I just did a re-read/review of The Gift by Julie Garwood - I was a teenager when I first read it, my first ever Garwood book and I loved it so much I went and bought as many books of her that I could find.

Flash to a few years later (or more than a few lol) and my tastes have changed so drastically. I mean, Sara was seriously TSTL (even if she had a bit of redemption by the end) and it really was played for laughs. But there were alot of moments there that, had I read it now, I'd have had a whole different Garwood experience.

Proof that tastes change - that and time and frame of mind are very important factors when you read a book.

[Paganalexandria]

Ivy wrote: "I just did a re-read/review of The Gift by Julie Garwood - I was a teenager when I first read it, my first ever Garwood book and I loved it so much I went and bought as many books of her that I cou..."

Ivy, I started with my Brenda Joyce collection. You're making me want to try my Julie Garwood historicals next because it's been a while for me too.

[Ivy]

Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "Ivy wrote: "I just did a re-read/review of The Gift by Julie Garwood - I was a teenager when I first read it, my first ever Garwood book and I loved it so much I went and bought as many books of he..."

To be fair, I think the Gift was always screwball comedy-like, I just never realized how idiotic Sara could be lol.

Haven't read Brenda Joyce, that I remember. I'm so out of practice with historicals now that it was a nice change of pace to read instead of the usual contemporary.

[Judy]

Ivy wrote: "Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "Ivy wrote: "I just did a re-read/review of The Gift by Julie Garwood - I was a teenager when I first read it, my first ever Garwood book and ..."

Brenda Joyce's historicals can't be beat. I still have all of them in paperback. Two of the best historicals with super alpha males and my top of the list favorities is and . I have read those books so many times.

[Ivy]

JudyB wrote: "Ivy wrote: "Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "Ivy wrote: "I just did a re-read/review of The Gift by Julie Garwood - I was a teenager when I first read it, my first ever Garwo..."

I just downloaded The Conqueror from my local library - thanks for the rec! :D

I'm now on a historical kick - had an ARC of . Very sweet, and I actually do want to read the earlier books in the series, but it's lacking any urgency or real conflict. I'm ready for an alpha hero again.

[Judy]

Ivy wrote: "JudyB wrote: "Ivy wrote: "Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "Ivy wrote: "I just did a re-read/review of The Gift by Julie Garwood - I was a teenager when I first read it, my fi..."

I hope you enjoy The Conqueror. It's not funny or light. It's a true, deep love story with an alpha dominant Norman knight who comes to conquer but the h brings him to his knees. The love story stays with you. If you like it please read The Promise of the Rose.

[Ivy]

JudyB wrote: "Ivy wrote: "JudyB wrote: "Ivy wrote: "Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "Ivy wrote: "I just did a re-read/review of The Gift by Julie Garwood - I was a teenager when I first re..."

Sounds like it's just what I'm looking for - I'll definitely post a review about it.

[Mz]

I do not like to rate bad things on a book. Of course if I don't like it, it's my personal review but then again someone else may love the book. Most people who know or follow me know that if I write I love it and if I don't then it was okay. Creativity is within

[Judy]

I like to do an objective evaluation of the author's writing. I don't think it's really fair to the author if you really just didn't like the characters or the story. I understand that some readers have triggers like cheating and rape but a review to me personally is to evaluate if the author really wrote a story that sucked me in and made me want to finish it. If the writing, format and grammar are so bad I can't follow the story I'm going to give it a lower score. I always rate cliff hangers low if the author didn't warn the reader in the description that it is a cliff hanger and not a full story.

[Varied Books]

JudyB wrote: "I like to do an objective evaluation of the author's writing. I don't think it's really fair to the author if you really just didn't like the characters or the story. I understand that some reade..."

I see reviews differently. It's not about being fair it's about what my feelings are on the book. If I didn't like the story b/c of my triggers I can't rate the book high. In my review I will lay out why I didn't like the book.

[Ivy]

JudyB wrote: "I like to do an objective evaluation of the author's writing. I don't think it's really fair to the author if you really just didn't like the characters or the story. I understand that some reade..."

I think it's hard to be completely objective in a review, honestly. And authors should always take that into consideration when reading a review of their work.

So many things can affect your enjoyment of the story - for ex, you and I both loathe cliffhangers and rating the story lower because of it is a bias we have, not necessarily a knock on the story itself.

If I'm in a particular mood, I may not connect with a story or its characters and rate it lower, but someone else will see those same things and think it's fantastic, again because of their own biases.

These feelings will color your perception of their writing. About the only thing that isn't colored by bias, is simple grammar/punctuation/spelling issues. Those are pretty straightforward.

[Suzanne]

JudyB wrote: "I like to do an objective evaluation of the author's writing. I don't think it's really fair to the author if you really just didn't like the characters or the story. I understand that some reade..."

I agree. Occasionally, I buy a book without realizing the story and characters are based in the UK and I have a lot of difficulty with the terminology (knickers vs. panties etc), locations and landmarks I can't envision and other cultural nuances. However, I don't feel like I can down grade my review of the authors work for it any more than I could if I read a WW II spy novel and gave it one star because I hate that genre of story.

[Paganalexandria]

JudyB wrote: "Ivy wrote: "Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "Ivy wrote: "I just did a re-read/review of The Gift by Julie Garwood - I was a teenager when I first read it, my first ever Garwo..."

Judy have you Read ? That's my favorite Brenda Joyce. Before there were Russian mobsters, my favorite trope was Russian aristocracy. This book began that for me.

[Judy]

Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "JudyB wrote: "Ivy wrote: "Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "Ivy wrote: "I just did a re-read/review of The Gift by Julie Garwood - I was a teenager when I first read it, my fi..."

Yes I read it back in 2008 and rated it very good on the excel chart I was keeping at that time. I think I'm going to have to go back and re-read her books. The only series of hers I didn't read was the Francesca Cahill series.

[Ivy]

JudyB wrote: "Ivy wrote: "JudyB wrote: "Ivy wrote: "Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "Ivy wrote: "I just did a re-read/review of The Gift by Julie Garwood - I was a teenager when I first re..."

Just finished it - it's a very intense obsessive love story between Rolfe and Ceidre. I like the historical bits though (view spoiler)[the rape turned into love in one night was not my cuppa. (hide spoiler)] I will say it's an interesting story that I'm not going to forget. I did pick up the second one, so I'll be reading that as well.

[Judy]

Ivy wrote: "JudyB wrote: "Ivy wrote: "JudyB wrote: "Ivy wrote: "Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "Ivy wrote: "I just did a re-read/review of The Gift by Julie Garwood - I was a teenager w..."

Yes it was intense and the rape would be a trigger to some but to me it was an epic love story and there was no doubt that Rolfe loved her deeply. In historical romance novels, especially during that period and Viking periods, rape was a given. Not saying I condone it but it was a part of that period of time. Ceidre was a strong h IMO. That book is the first of the DeWarrene dynasty and I ended up reading them all. Hope you enjoy the second one.

[Ivy]

JudyB wrote: "Ivy wrote: "JudyB wrote: "Ivy wrote: "JudyB wrote: "Ivy wrote: "Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "Ivy wrote: "I just did a re-read/review of The Gift by Julie Garwood - I was ..."

I've read books with rape as part of the story, and that doesn't necessarily stop me from enjoying it, depending on the way it's used. I agree about the historical context - it is necessary to read it with that in mind and it was a part of the story. I think, had I read it when published, I would have had a different reaction to it. As it was, it was the cumulative effect - (view spoiler)[the rape attempts, the rape itself, the rapid transition from rape to love, the sex with others, including batshit crazy Alice, that I wasn't a big fan of and made me more observer than really being swept up in the love story. Had it only been the rape attempt at first, but willingness on the wedding night sex with obvious conflict, I could have bought into that a bit more (hide spoiler)]. Ceidre dealt with alot and was sympathetic throughout.

[Mary]

I want to see all kinds of reviews. Authors probably realize that not everyone will love their books. I don't think there is anything wrong with snark, criticism or downright expression of hate for a book. I think readers are passionate people and oftentimes, a bad review by someone makes me add it to my TBR list because they didn't like things I know I would like. I have read good reviews and known after reading the stellar review that a book isn't for me. I would hate to see review censorship or people holding back.

[Paganalexandria]

JudyB wrote: "Yes I read it back in 2008 and rated it very good on the excel chart I was keeping at that time. I think I'm going to have to go back and re-read her books. The only series of hers I didn't read was the Francesca Cahill series. "

Judy I recently did Francesca Cahill reread to see if it held up. I still liked it, but noticed new things good and bad. There are two heroes, one came off extremely selfish this time around, and the other was still as awesome as remembered. I remembered loving the heroine, but this time found her logic lapses really irritating for a blue stocking detective.

[Judy]

Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "JudyB wrote: "Yes I read it back in 2008 and rated it very good on the excel chart I was keeping at that time. I think I'm going to have to go back and re-read her books. The only series of hers I ..."
I think I'm going to try one of them again. I remember actually starting one and then stopping. Smiling about the h's lapses in judgement this time around. Since I moved out of the historical into contemporary I raised my standards a lot for my heroines.

[Paganalexandria]

JudyB wrote: "...Since I moved out of the historical into contemporary I raised my standards a lot for my heroines. "

I think that was my problem too. I will say my annoying historical heroines were easier to take than my recent contemporary ones, because most were written in third person narrative. Now everything is in first person, and it's hard being inside the head of someone you can't stand through the length of a whole book. What do you think?

[Judy]

Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "JudyB wrote: "...Since I moved out of the historical into contemporary I raised my standards a lot for my heroines. "

I think that was my problem too. I will say my annoying historical heroines we..."
Exactly. I can read third person about a character that I hate and still enjoy the story (if it's good) but being inside the head of a character I dislike makes me scream stop it, stop it.Very frustrating.

[Holly]

Do you ever rate an author down because of something not related to the book content directly? For example, I know Tiffany Reisz was snarky about some readers and got backlash here and on her webpage, has something like that ever affected your review? Or what about a series that later has other volumes added in, (1.5, 2.5), that you feel obligated to read?

Do prices affect your ratings? So... if a book was inexpensive and surprised you with the quality or content, do you believe you tend to rate it higher? Conversely, if you have a favourite author and he/she published what you consider a dud, might you rate it higher or lower depending on your disappointment level or contentment with other books?

[Ivy]

Holly wrote: "Do you ever rate an author down because of something not related to the book content directly? For example, I know Tiffany Reisz was snarky about some readers and got backlash here and on her webpa..."

I can't think of a time when I've downgraded a rating because of an author's actions outside of their work, but then again there are few authors that I know much of besides their writing. It's probably better that way - kind of like actors, when you know too much it can color your perception of their performance.

Prices will affect my rating if I think that it's a bargain and I'll note it in my review. I'm more likely *not* to buy a book if it's expensive, but that's about it.

As for favorite authors, I may be kinder in my review than I would be to an author that I've never read, simply because of first impressions - if you've entertained me over the years and given me good stories, I may be more willing to give you the benefit of the doubt when purchasing. But I will note in my review if I don't feel it's as good as their earlier work.

[Paganalexandria]

Holly wrote: "Do you ever rate an author down because of something not related to the book content directly? For example, I know Tiffany Reisz was snarky about some readers and got backlash here and on her webpa..."

Holly, these are some good questions.

Do you ever rate an author down because of something not related to the book content directly?
I don't rate books for those kind of things, but will throw shade, sans ratings sometimes. Like when I first saw Backdoor Teen Mom, Farrah Abraham's book, might have typed the first thing that came to mind. The book hasn't come out yet, so my thoughts weren't about the content. I do the same for anticipated books (snarkfree of course) because I don't rate even positively in advance of a reading attempt.

Do prices affect your ratings?
I know sometimes certain themes or subgenres (biker and Interracial romance) of my freebies can earn an extra star just for being over a hundred pages, so yes. The only book I ever rated negatively because of the price was Laurell K. Hamilton's . It was a supposed novella, but really one scene. It taught me to check page counts before purchasing. I still say that should have been offered as part an anthology, or free on her fan site. Hot again, just thinking about it. lol

Conversely, if you have a favorite author and he/she published what you consider a dud, might you rate it higher or lower depending on your disappointment level or contentment with other books?
I know sometimes my ratings for favorites are lower than if an unknown wrote it because of higher expectations. I've been trying to stop judging them against themselves. At the same time, find it hard to give book B five stars, when I know it didn't have near the same impact as book A.

[Judy]

Holly wrote: "Do you ever rate an author down because of something not related to the book content directly? For example, I know Tiffany Reisz was snarky about some readers and got backlash here and on her webpa..."

Usually I won't even buy a book by a new author if the price of the book is above what established authors charge for a book with a comparable page count. I might be a little more lenient in my rating if it is a new indie author if I think it is a good story. The biggest downgrade for me is a book that has horrible grammar/formatting, etc. even for new authors. I have always said that if you want to call yourself an author and write a book, you should have a good command of the English language, grammar and composition. I never let negative personal comments about an author that I read on blogs, threads affect my rating. My rating is based on my expectations of the book I am reading.

[Paganalexandria]

JudyB wrote: "...I never let negative personal comments about an author that I read on blogs, threads affect my rating. My rating is based on my expectations of the book I am reading. "


I will say, though it might not effect my rating, it does effect me even reading the book in the first place. If a public person does or says something objectionable to me, it can totally put them forever on my "doesn't exist" list. The same way I can't listen to R. Kelly,Chris Brown, Kanye new music with an open mind, or support Mel Gibson movies when they come out. If an author crosses an undefined a line in real life, I'll most likely never read one of their books.

[Judy]

Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "JudyB wrote: "...I never let negative personal comments about an author that I read on blogs, threads affect my rating. My rating is based on my expectations of the book I am reading. "


I will sa..."

I agree with your assessment in that context and agree with it. There's quite a few celebrities I have kicked to the curb because of objectionable behavior or actions. An author has to do something really bad for me to put them on my black list.

[Diana]

Wow, this is a great discussion on a subject I've thought about a lot.
Personally, I almost never rate a book or review it if I would give it a one or two. Even three's are a seldom thing for me. I just leave it blank.
I don't consider editing or proofreading in a book, because it usually doesn't bother me. If it is too bad, I just drop the book, and I would not review a book I didn't finish, ever.
I would never rate/review a book on anything outside that book or series. What an author does in real life could definitely effect whether I read it (I won't buy a book where a criminal is trying to justify themselves, for example). It also doesn't effect my rating if I liked another book by the same author more. Price also doesn't affect my rating.

When I'm looking at which book to read next, I always start with the lowest reviews. If the review has some of these, I totally disregard it, and probably won't read the reviewer again:
1. If the only thing they mention is editing/proofreading, not helpful to me.
2. If they graded a book down because the actual story wasn't what they expected, not helpful to me.
3. Anything about the author's personal life, opinions, not helpful to me.
4. If all they mention is a comparison to another book/author, not helpful to me.
5. Too many one-size-fits-all gifs (like "shocked"), I don't finish it, it is annoying.
6. If they are mainly talking about the price, not helpful to me.

What I try to put in my reviews and enjoy in reviews by others is their subjective feelings and why they felt that. Not too many specifics required, but I need a reason if I am going to follow your advice. We don't all react to the same things the same way, and that gives me a better idea if I will agree with you.

I appreciate when people point out things like poor research or possible triggers, like non-consensual sex, violence. I like explicit sex scenes, but some people don't, so that is a good thing to mention for others.

As far as rating scale, I rate high, because I almost always love the books I bother to review.

[Julie]

Kyla wrote: "I've seen some pretty disrespectful reviews on GR. If I don't like a book, I'll rate it, but I don't write a review. Some reviewers go out of their way to write bad reviews, including gifs and sn..."


I've only done it twice and I don't feel it was wrong, I'm not trying to turn it down for someone else, but I do see a lot of times that someone will ask, why did you give it a 1 star? I personally have never given a 1 star that I can remember and I read ALOT, but I hardly ever come across one that doesn't please me, now to get down and be absolutely nasty, never. I think if given such a low star then there should be an explanation why because it may be something so small that another wouldn't care. Example...errors, I don't care as long as I understand it, lol but that's what a review is, an author just has to accept an opinion and it's up to you if you want to read it but to be nasty about it...no.