THE Group for Authors! discussion
Writer's Circle
>
How would you improve the rating system?
I'd love to see a rating system out of 10 or even 20. The current five-star system is a bit of a blunt instrument.
I wouldn't mind a 10 star system. I've mentioned in several reviews that the book was really a 4 1/2 because only minor issues failed to make me give a 5 star.
Hi, I try and leave comments when I give a review for a book I read if I can. But I don't look at the small stuff I look at the big picture, I know some authors, so I know you put a lot of time and effort in the books you write. So when I read a book if I like the book then and if the story line makes since I will give the book a good review. A friend wrote a short story that he is revision into a book and a screen play, I did not like the way the story ended, but it could really ended any other way and I gave it a good reviewBecause I liked the story. I did not give it much thought before about letting authors know what I thought of their book until I became friends with some of them. Now I always go and look for the author on good reads and amazon and give a review. I think more people should do that. I hope everyone has a nice day.
This is what I wrote on another thread about reviews:Here's a thought, has anyone considered letter grades, and then letting the system allocate the points? We all know what a letter grade indicates, so if you rate the book an A, the system could automatically record a 5. B=4, C=3, D=2 and F=1. That could also give you more wiggle room in your review. If you say A+ or A-, the system won't change the five point rating, but the reader will get the message. "This is at the top of the five stars." or "This is borderline four stars." I think that will take care of the ambiguity and get the message across.
That is a good idea, they will still know how the reader feels about their book. The author I mention earlier he was also a teacher,so when I told him what I thought, he said he like his book. I let him know I did also it just the ended I wish turn out different. But in a way that was the only way it could end. I have read other books and felt the same way about them as well. But I not sure if that would have to do with how you would rate their book or not. Other than that I loved his book. He is a really good author.
I wish more readers would take the time to offer a written review or critique (that's more than a few words long) to complement their rating. It help me as a writer/author understand where they are coming from and if my piece is being understood the way I intended it to be. It works for both good and badly rated pieces. It stinks to get a one star rating on a piece with no feedback and see that the reader obviouly (from their reading history) didn't like a story/essay not because it was written bad but because they did not like the story (thought it was a romance when it was really a fantasy piece and they don't like fantasy for example) or getting a five star rating and an I loved it review because I'd like to know why they liked it ( and if it was just a friend/ relative posting something ananomysly therefor making the rating not mean so much). I also have to admit I'm guilty of relying on the star system for the books I read when using the Goodreads system because I'm relativly new to using its functionality and in the process of adding a lot of books to my profile in a short period of time. When inputting my data it's easier and faster to just rate books with stars at this time but I intend to make more of an effort in the future to include a thoughtful review with my ratings.
Just to play Devil's Advocate - ratings and reviews are for other readers not authors.Authors should seek feedback before they publish from critique partners and beta readers, not afterwards from the paying audience.
Tom wrote: "I wish more readers would take the time to offer a written review or critique (that's more than a few words long) to complement their rating. It help me as a writer/author understand where they ar..."NOTE: This subject has been beaten to death in various discussions by new authors who want to have reviews done to their specifications. One more time I will repeat the same things, I and many other readers, have said over and over. Reviews are for readers - NOT authors.
I wish authors would realize that they need reviewers and the more they demand, the more they upset readers and as a result fewer reviews get posted. Given that many writers complain that they need more reviews - this seems very counterproductive.
Reviews are written by readers for other readers. They are NOT written for authors. The reviewer has no responsibility to provide the author with feedback - that should have been done by professional editors long before the book was published.
The author has no right to demand how a reviewer rates or reviews. It is a subjective review or rating and the reviewer can do whatever he chooses.
Whether the rating system works for authors or not is of no relevance. It needs to work for readers - NOT authors. It needs to help readers decide if they want to read a specific book. If authors don't like the way the reviews are done maybe they should stop reading them. They have no right to criticize, demand specifics, or even comment on the review process. It has nothing to do with them.
Christine, I think you are wrong, I think an author has a right to know what readers think of their book, along with letting other readers know what you thought of their book. I have at least three friends who are authors who wanted to know what I thought about their book, but then they also want me to let others know what I thought, so it works both ways. Maybe authors could get some of this information from professional editors but then it is up to the editors if they like the book or not. So is that fair to the author as well. I like to let the author know what I thought of their book, I think they have a right to know that. The friends I mention that are authors wanted to know what I thought. They are a really nice and they have help me improve on my writing as well, I am working on a short story myself, which is the first time I have tried to write. So feed back is very important to a writer. Thanks.
Christine, why is it unreasonable for an author/writer to seek constructive feedback from their audience/readers? Asking a peer to critique a piece while editing it, before publication, is not the same as getting a review with details from an anonymous reader. The peers I share my writing with before publication know me personally, are avid readers and have some experience with critiqing/proofreading. Their feedback ( good and bad) is biased because they know me and in many cases are interested in similar subjects/topics. My readers/audience only know the pieces I write and the impressions they leave. Constructive reviews from my audience help me as a writer know if what I create works or not (especially experimental pieces). If it didn't then it might be best for me to scrap the effort and try something else. If it did work then I could try expanding the idea further. As a writer, knowing why my audience likes, hates or is indifferent towards a story/essay helps me just as much if not more than the feedback I receive from peers during the editing process.
Tom, I am just a reader, but I agree with you. I only known one of the author personally before I read any of his books, but the other two I did not know. And I gave them all feed back. I didn't use to do that, but now I can see that helps the authors out. So from now on anything I read, I will go to Good reads or Amazon and give feed back on the authors book.
Carolyn wrote: "Christine, I think you are wrong, I think an author has a right to know what readers think of their book, along with letting other readers know what you thought of their book. I have at least thre..."I did NOT say an author doesn't have rights or can't read reviews. I said reviews are written for readers - not authors.
Authors have no right to:
1. Tell readers how to rate or review their books.
2. They cannot expect reviewers to provide feedback for writers.
Read my post again - I was very clear about those issues and I'm not sure how I could explain it any better.
Writers can and do help each other. They also use professional editors to make sure their writing is the best it can be. But Ratings and Reviews are for READERS not writers. They help readers decide if they wish to read a book. If they provide insight for a writer - wonderful, but he has no right to expect that to happen.
I am sorry for that, the friend I was talking about, he said he like my comments, but had no way to let me know what he thought about them. WE email each other sometimes that is the only way I found out about this. He also said Amazon works the same way. But that being said, he made it sound that it does helps the writes out, but it is also for other readers as well. You may be right about the author not to expect that from a reader, but if the reader really likes the book and would like to see more of that type of books from their favorite author then they should let the author know that as well, or at least that is what I think.
Tom wrote: "...As a writer, knowing why my audience likes, hates or is indifferent towards a story/essay helps me just as much if not more than the feedback I receive from peers during the editing process. ..."Reviewers write reviews for other readers. They are not professionals and their opinions are subjective. What makes you think you are so special and so important that these readers should go out of their way to provide you with useful feedback regarding your writing skills. If you didn't use professional editors before you published - that's your problem. Reviewers do not get paid to either stroke your ego or correct your writing?
If you want to know whether your audience likes, hates or is indifferent to your work - check your sales numbers.
I think to say readers review for other readers is overall a fair perspective. Nevertheless, they are still useful to authors. Neither do I see anything wrong with authors requesting (not demanding or directing how) reviews. We need to bear in mind, though we as self-published authors together with the advent of digital books, are accustomed to the reviewing system many readers are not. The fact digital still only accounts for about a third of books sold is also relevant. Prior to self-publishing I was only accustomed to seeing reviews in newspapers and magazines written by 'professional' journalists. It would never have crossed my mind to write one; I would have felt I was being rather arrogant to have done so. Consequently, as the vast percentage of readers still fall within this bracket we must accept that without our encouragement they would never consider writing a review.
There is also the issue of differing definitions for star markings. Something that has frustrated me for a while. In fact I wrote about this in my last weeks blog post (Tuesday 6 January 2015). Here is a link if you wish to have a look: http://trbooks7.blogspot.comThe suggestion made by Mike above re having a 10 or 20 star rating could be another solution. However, I suspect 20 would present further problems. Kyion's letter together with '-' or '+' suggestion would work for those accustomed to such matters but could prove confusing for the less experienced.
Also, again as mentioned above, reading is a subjective exercise. Each of us is different and unique (something we should value)and therefore 'what is one man's meat is another man's poison'. We must accept, in fact I think we must require, the reviewer does give THEIR opinion. We are never past learning and if we wish to improve our writing should take note of what is said in all reviews whether positive, negative or average.
But in the end we must allow a reader to chose whether to write a review or not. I hope all of us who are authors have the courtesy to write reviews of the books we read. If you do not how can you expect to be given the same courtesy?
A.W. wrote: "Just to play Devil's Advocate - ratings and reviews are for other readers not authors.Authors should seek feedback before they publish from critique partners and beta readers, not afterwards from..."
The feedback is useful - more than useful - isn't it?
T. wrote: "I think to say readers review for other readers is overall a fair perspective. Nevertheless, they are still useful to authors..."Obviously you, like many self-published authors, are quite naive. You joined this site in August while publishing your books.. You are unaware of the various discussions that have gone on and the issues plaguing reviewers. I am repeating a post I did in another discussion very recently:
I do not presume to speak for everyone. Every situation is different, but I do want new authors to understand why things are the way they are. Making demands of reviewers, just means they stop reviewing. After the violence and stalking that has occurred, contact from a writer can be unnerving and again can stop the reviews. I don't think writers want that to happen. We all know how important reviews are and yet many new writers still poke at reviewers apparently thinking they can control the process.
After much research and discussion, the following list covers my understanding of the rights of both readers/reviewers and writers.
1. Reviews are for readers, not authors.
2. Reviewer must always disclose their relationship if any with the writer, and/or if any compensation has been received, including a free copy of the book. (FTC Regulations) If the reviewer did not read the entire book (DNF) it should be noted in the review. Reviewers should review honestly and all comments should be about the book - not the author.
3. Reviewers can rate and review in any manner they feel expresses their honest opinion. Unmarked spoilers are inconsiderate, but happen - readers beware. Some do full synopsis - again readers beware.
4. Writers can read reviews like any other reader, but must understand any criticism is subjective and not a personal attack.
5. Writers cannot tell reviewers how to review or impose rules on a reviewer's methods. They cannot criticize or contradict a review - its an opinion and subjective by nature.
6. Writers cannot contact reviewers to demand ratings or reviews be changed. Writers cannot threaten or stalk reviewers (criminal charges can apply). Contact between writers and reviewers is never recommended and extreme caution is advised.
7. Reviewers have control of their review and have the right and ability to delete any comments they feel are inappropriate.
I don't know what else I can say to get authors to understand. Readers pay for your book. They can if they choose to - review their book. You have no right to tell them what to do with it - they own it now. They can use it to hold up a shelf if they want. If they read it and do other readers the favor of providing an honest opinion that is up to them. They already paid you - they don't owe you anything.
Alp wrote: "The feedback is useful - more than useful - isn't it? "Critique partner feedback is a vital part of the process of making a manuscript ready for publication.
I cannot get my head around people publishing and then expecting paying readers to provide editorial and critique services.
I have made a comment before, I am a reader and before I had the chance to get to know a author personally, I had never thought about or even knew I could give their book a review. I think that every reader should do this. It will help the writer out. It lets them know what you like about their book and also what you might not of liked about their book as well. It might even give the write encouragement, and who don't need some encouragement now and then. Where a reader is not required to give each book they read a review, I think they should. That is what I am doing form now on, I had just read my first Charles Martin book, then I came here to see if he was part of your group and gave his book a review. It is all because of the friendship I made with an author, who was also a teacher I had at Shawnee College. I have also met some really nice authors here as well and became friends with some of them as well.
I wish there could be half-stars. Some books are more 3.5 or 4.5 than a solid 3, 4, or 5. It would be nice to be able to show that instead of a blunt 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 approach. I try to note it in my review but I can't always.
I would add to the 1-5 with a DNF rating and also make it clearer what each level stands for. Especially as Amazon and other sites have different meanings for their ratings i.e. GR 2 star is OK but on other sites it means less than this. Consequently a 2 star here is the equivalent of 3 on Amazon - the review could be the same but do reviewers change the rating?Personally I now only review; however briefly on GR, this still leads to some discussions.
I would like to be able to use half-stars. But, I also can't overstate how much I agree with Christine's post above.Authors need to remove from their minds forever more the belief that the purpose of a review is to provide critical feedback to the author about how to improve his or her writing.
A review may do this, but if it does, that is a collateral consequence.
Carolyn, you are entitled to your opinion, but I disagree completely with it. I don't write reviews to "help the writer out," and the idea that a reader should give every book that they read a review out of some sense of obligation to the author is not only completely misplaced, it is actively unhelpful. You begin your review from a position of bias - you are seeking to help the author, which places you in an immediate conflict of interest with other readers (as well as, at times, with the truth).
What will you do if the review that you should write is one that is negative? Really negative? As in, the book is legitimately terrible? Would you give the book the review that it deserves, or will you be concerned with "helping the writer out?" You've divided your loyalties from the moment you decided that your goal as a reviewer is to help out authors.
Moonlight Reader wrote: "Authors need to remove from their minds forever more the belief that the purpose of a review is to provide critical feedback to the author about how to improve his or her writing..."Well said! Can you hear me applauding?
That is not really what I meant, I think writes/authors should really know what a reader thinks of their book. I would be honest about their book. If I really did not like the book I would tell them and also why I did not like the book. I am sorry if it sound as if it was something else. It is not just the authors but for other readers as well. The friend I was talking about earlier, I told him that I did not like the way his book ended but I really did not think it could ended any other way. The story it self I really did like, he is a great writer/ author. Just like I did not like Where the Red Fern Grows and the way it ended, with the boy losing both of his dogs, but I have read that book more than once. Would you want someone to give your book a good review when it does not deserve it. I am not paid to give an author a review, so what does it matter what I say whether it might help the author or just let other readers know what I think of the author book.
I would like to see it mandatory to provide a short review if you are giving a star review; then you would know that the person had actually read it.
Rita wrote: "I would like to see it mandatory to provide a short review if you are giving a star review; then you would know that the person had actually read it."One more time: Writers cannot tell reviewers how to review or impose rules on a reviewer's methods.
Although I consider most star only ratings on SP books to be family, friends, and the purchased, author circle jerk and sock-puppet ratings and generally ignore them.
There are reviewers who for whatever reason may prefer to give a particular book a star only rating and they have every right to do so without someone telling them they can't.
Moonlight Reader wrote: "I would like to be able to use half-stars. But, I also can't overstate how much I agree with Christine's post above.Authors need to remove from their minds forever more the belief that the purpos..."
I agree.
If I write a review (which I rarely due anymore due to GR not allowing me to set them to private and the degree of problems caused by jerks when they don't like a review), I do so firstly for myself and secondly for the benefit of my fellow readers and book consumers.
Reader reviews are NOT professional reviews. They are NOT ad copy. They are not writer feedback. They are product reviews. Their value comes, in part, from the fact that we are NOT under any form of obligation or coercion or bias for the producer of the product.
Readers deserve to be able to read reviews from other readers and benefit from them without authors stepping in and trying to co-opt them for their own agenda and benefit.
When I read reviews I want to read what readers sincerely and honestly thought, period. Anything else is of no value to other readers.
Carolyn wrote: ". If I really did not like the book I would tell them and also why I did not like the book. "You're certainly able to tell authors what you really thought about their book if that is what you want to do. But that is something quite different than a consumer review for the benefit of other consumers.
And if you're writing reviews on GR in order to speak to the author about your opinions, rather than other readers I personally won't pay attention to those reviews.
I'm here to hear what readers thought speaking to other readers. Some of those readers are also authors. I'm not really interested in whatever feedback someone wants to give the author.
Rita wrote: "I would like to see it mandatory to provide a short review if you are giving a star review; then you would know that the person had actually read it."GR does not require anyone to read a book in order to give a star rating.
Look at all those five star reviews for books not yet published where people say in the review space things like, "YAY! I can't WAIT to read this!". That would meet your criteria.
Authors need to get over the average rating thing, it's meaningless and I don't know anyone who buys or reads a book based on some overall star rating alone.
Alp wrote: "I just wondered if you had any ideas about how you would improve the rating system to give authors (like what we is) more helpful feedback.But is to know how much a reader liked a book enough? Gr..."
Your question here presumes the rating here is to provide feedback to authors. It isn't.
There are various ways for an author to receive feedback.
The ratings and reviews on GR is for readers to share with other readers about books.
Now, if you want to discuss how the rating system could be improved to provide better information to READERS and BOOK CONSUMERS that might be a worthwhile discussion to have.
I see the suggestion of 1/2 stars has come up here, and I've seen many say they'd like that option.
Rita wrote: "I would like to see it mandatory to provide a short review if you are giving a star review; then you would know that the person had actually read it."I wouldn't. As a reader I hate that idea. I rate books on my shelf without reviewing solely so I can use GR recommendations to find other similar books. I don't rate for the author's benefit but for mine, so I can find my next book to read.
Tom wrote: "Christine, why is it unreasonable for an author/writer to seek constructive feedback from their audience/readers?..."Because readers are book consumers, AND WE deserve to have consumer reviews to help US know if we may enjoy a book prior to purchase written to help OTHER READERS NOT written to benefit the author.
WHERE do you want CONSUMERS to go to get honest CONSUMER reviews if authors co-opt reader reviews for THEIR purposes?
WE book consumers purchase a book, turning over our money for a product. And then, rather than be able to talk to other readers about our thoughts and experiences with the book you want us to give YOU "constructive criticism". There are many things wrong with that. Firstly you are completely ignoring the very real need and benefit for CONSUMERS.
I truly do understand an author wanting constructive criticism and feedback from those who have read their book. I truly do. But attempting to try to coerce, cause to feel obligated, make to feel self-conscious, readers who want to share with other readers is NOT the way to go.
Readers, book consumers, are NOT professional reviewers. For the most part we're NOT going to give an author "constructive criticism", it's not our job and speaking for myself I don't have the time or probably the qualifications to do so.
Beyond all the ways pre-publication to get critique and feedback, if you want to hear what readers really think, read the reviews sure, but don't complain if they aren't up to YOUR qualifications, they weren't written for YOU as the intended audience.
Other than that, perhaps put something up on a webpage letting readers know you'd like "constructive criticism" and giving them a way to contact you.
I would also suggest rather than coming to a book site where readers have blissfully been discussing and sharing about books with other readers for YEARS and trying to change how readers do that to benefit authors, try engaging with readers here and simply asking nicely for feedback. Spend time in Groups. Offer review copies. Chat with readers and find out what they like and don't like, particularly in your genre. Some readers here are often more than happy to read a book and provide the author with feedback. Just don't expect them to pay for the privilege.
A.W. wrote: "Rita wrote: "I would like to see it mandatory to provide a short review if you are giving a star review; then you would know that the person had actually read it."I wouldn't. As a reader I hate t..."
I also often rate books I don't feel like writing anything about in the "review" space. Do it all the time. The rating is for me alone. If others on my friends list find it helpful to see what I think then that's good too.
I rarely write reviews anymore, because GR makes them all public and I don't like that.
If I had to write a short review (and GR isn't going to make that requirement) I'd just write "blah, blah, blah" or something.
I WOULD opt in if I had the option to set my ratings to FRIENDS ONLY, which would take my ratings out of public view. GR isn't going to change to allow that, but I would do it if I could. IF that were possible that would at least remove my ratings with no review from the mix. And be MUCH better than griping about how I rate or review.
Feel free to suggest it. But, it won't happen.
But I will say if you don't like how I rate or review blame GR, cuz if it were up to me it wouldn't display to anyone but myself and my friends.
Rita wrote: "I would like to see it mandatory to provide a short review if you are giving a star review; then you would know that the person had actually read it."One simply wonders how many times we are going to have to have this conversation.
If you are looking for some sort of a test before someone is allowed to review, then I suggest you start your own website.
Even if someone was "required" to provide a short review, what does that really tell you?
"I didn't like this book at all. I thought that the main character behaved in ways that were really weird, and didn't ring true. The writing was mediocre, and the ending was dumb."
I could literally write that about any book and no one would be able to prove that I hadn't read the book in question. Those are all opinions, and opinions are uncontrovertible. All you are asking is to make people lie more persuasively, if they are bent upon providing an untruthful star rating.
In addition, and repeat after me, GR allows readers to provide star ratings for any reason at all, regardless of whether they have read the books.
Maybe I've read three Michael Connelly Harry Bosch mysteries and hated them. Nothing stops me from one-starring every last one of them for the purpose of ensuring that the recommendations algorithm understands that I hate Michael Connelly's books. There is nothing nefarious about this.
There more I read this thread, the more it seems as if something is lost in translation. It's like two different languages are being spoken, so I will throw my two cents in, and then leave it at that.First, I'll say, I'm a writer. I DO read a review, if it is published for my work. What I don't do, however, is tell someone how they should do it, or go after them if I don't like what they have to say. I also do not expect them to point out typos, run-ons, etc.
I read reviews to one, see if the thoughts in my head were properly conveyed to the readers. If I see ten reviews where a certain piece of information went over everyone's head, I say, "Hmm, maybe I should flesh something like this out in the future." Two, I want to see exactly what attracted the readers to the story. It won't change my opinion, but it is still good to know. Ultimately, I want the readers opinion, not have them act as my editors.
Now, I posted onto this thread, because I feel that arming readers with a more elaborate review system will help them convey their thoughts better, if they decide to review. Is the review for me, most likely not, unless the person knows me. However, regardless as to who it is for, writers can get some benefit for it.
But, one more time, I am in no form saying authors should demand reviews, say how they should be written, etc. What I am saying is that a better review system will directly benefit readers and indirectly give information to the author. The important thing is that we don't overstep in trying to get that information.
Kyion wrote: "What I am saying is that a better review system will directly benefit readers and indirectly give information to the author...."There are many different ways to rate a book; 5 star, 10 star, alpha grading, percentage, etc. Different sites use different methods and sometimes the 5 star (most common) has different interpretations. Are there better systems? So far I've only heard people explain their preferences, and each system has merit.
Looking at the big picture, GR has numerous readers who review books. That is the point - we want readers to do reviews. Without reviews, readers have a problem - no guidance about a potential read, and writers have a different problem - nothing to help their sales.
If we change the system could we loose reviewers because they are now confused or refuse to change? - maybe. Do we want to take that chance? - No.
A wise adage: "If it ain't broke - don't fix it." I have to go with this. It just makes sense. The system may not be everyone's preference but it works.
Christine wrote: "Kyion wrote: "What I am saying is that a better review system will directly benefit readers and indirectly give information to the author...."There are many different ways to rate a book; 5 star,..."
Honestly, I'm not complaining about the system. For the most part, people are going to rate and review the way they want regardless as to what guidelines are laid out. However, if I see a thread like this one asking for opinions, then sure, I'm going to add in my two cents, because long before I ever thought about writing anything, I was and still am an avid reader.
I think I figured it out!The more threads I see like this one, the more clearly I see why this feels like two languages. I'm willing to bet good money that many new indie writers come from the fanfiction world.
In that world, there is no money involved, so in order to entice the writer to produce more product, you review. In those cases, the reviews are 100% for the writer. You see reviews like, "I loved it. Please keep going. Update soon,' all the time.
After E.L. James turned her twilight fanfiction into a best-selling novel series, people started trying their hand at writing for money in droves. If a person wrote fanfiction first, got popular, then decided to try their hand at writing for money, I can see why they are confused about the review process.
There are some people that read nothing but fanfiction. I read some fandoms, if the TRUE author is okay with it, but most of my reading comes from published work. I've tried to recommend some of the published books to some of my friends, and they had no interest. They want fanfiction.
With many of those writers crossing into the publishing realm, I can see this problem going on for a while.
FYI to the half star or more than 5 units suggestions — the official FAQs say that will never happen. And if importing your data from sites that do use half stars, please be aware goodreads rounds those half stars up so you may wish to first edit your data file. Carolyn wrote: "Christine, I think you are wrong, I think an author has a right to know what readers think of their book, along with letting other readers know what you thought of their book. I have at least thre..."
"...right to know..." -- don't publish publicly if you want that right. Just sell or offer free the book from your own or other websites where you can put that review-required condition in the download/purchase agreement.
All authors (traditionally, self and indie publishing) who publish a book to the public, particularly on bookseller sites such as Amazon are creating a commercial product available to the general public. Even to readers in the general public that never post book reviews or even talk about books to their real life friends.
I don't foresee booksellers like Amazon ever selling products only to reviewers. Bookseller sites and stores just care that customer pays agreed upon price for your book. Many readers are busy enough or overloaded enough they would bypass individual books requiring review—particularly within a deadline or with specifications on how to review. There are reviewers that won't review unless exceptionally moved by a book or who don't want the negativity (or the boost to a bad book's discoverability) of posting a perceived as bad (even if honest) review so only review books they really loved Author shenanigans and reactions to reviews on goodreads are why, personally, goodreads is one site I don't personally review on. Takes just a few authors irate over star ratings saying reviewer liked the book or commenting on that rating/review what sort of feedback authors feel they have a "right to" to discourage reviews.
Rita wrote: "I would like to see it mandatory to provide a short review if you are giving a star review; then you would know that the person had actually read"
Honestly, when I did review here I was completely unable to do that event ifI wanted to. I had thousands of already read books I vaguely knew how much I liked to star rate much less review them much less have the time to review every book I read. I barely had time to catalog some of them here much less star or review.
"Mandatory" review requirements turn reviewers away even if agreeable ones. Joining a site comes with a service agreement we know to adhere to and expect to include guidelines for reviews and legalese like being subject to U.S./FTC laws and not attacking other members. Other requirements, how to review, review formats, requiring a review to rate, justifiying a review, making reviews be helpful feedback for author ... all turn offs to most readers who might review. Even polite, reasonable author comments (particularly attempts to "require" anything) are likely to cause some reviewers to never review that author in order to avoid the drama.
Christine wrote: "...2. Reviewer must always disclose their relationship if any with the writer, and/or if any compensation has been received, including a free copy of the book. (FTC Regulations) ..."
+1. To "...any compensation..." I'd like to also point out that a review swap/exchange/assignment is also a form of compensation that needs to be disclosed on any consumer review sites subject to FTC Regs (like goodreads and Amazon are).
I think star ratings could be improved by displaying what goodreads suggested scale means next to the stars (e.g., instead of just "★★★☆☆" display "★★★☆☆ I liked it") because too many here seem to think the Amazon rating scale is the same as goodreads (on Amazon ★★★☆☆ is an average/ok book and shows in the column of critical reviews although by goodreads suggested scale it is a positive rating equivalent to 4 stars on amazon ).Not as part of rating/review system: I wouldn't mind something to click to tell an author of typos, storyline and proofreading types of issues for those who want to give that feedback. Just not in any way as a requirement of a review nor (one of my least favorite things for an author to demand) as justification for a review—even when a review notes there were too many typos.
Kyion wrote: "I think I figured it out!The more threads I see like this one, the more clearly I see why this feels like two languages. I'm willing to bet good money that many new indie writers come from the fa..."
I disagree. I published my first indie books last year, and I'd never heard of fan fiction--nor (do I think) have most of the newbie indie writers I've encountered during the run-up process. I think the basic fact is that a lot more people want to write a book than are capable of doing so, and indie publishing enables them to do it. Which means that more of us who can (or so I flatter myself) have a thicker forest to make our way through.
Beppie wrote: "Kyion wrote: "I think I figured it out!The more threads I see like this one, the more clearly I see why this feels like two languages. I'm willing to bet good money that many new indie writers co..."
I disagree, as well. The vast majority of the population over the age of 25 has little to no idea about fandoms or fanfiction. And what little they do know can often be summed up with the words "Isn't Fifty Shades of Grey Twilight fan fiction?"
It is common for young people to assume that they are the only ones on the cutting edge of a trend, but many, many self-published writers are parents in their thirties, mid-career individuals in the forties and fifties, and people who are retired from their primary occupation. They aren't publishing because they came to it through fan fiction.
I've made a decorative pillow for y'all, which represents the perspective of most reviewers:
You can find my thoughts, which are echoed by many, many reviewers, here.
Beppie wrote: "...I'd never heard of fan fiction..."First I even heard of it (although back in the sixties and pre-Internet there were unauthorized stories in some indie "fanzines" and bulletin boards there weren't really standard terminology for) was when a nasty author got goodreads to threaten to delete my account for having a "P2P" shelf.
I thought I was using P2P to shelve my peer-2-peer computer networking nonfiction certification study guides I was currently using.
Author felt anyone having a P2P shelf was attacking them. Apparently it meant something different to authors of fanfiction from the peer-2-peer counseling pre-med students were used to or the peer-to-peer computing us IT geeks were used to.
I resolved the issue by temporarily just using nunbers for shelf names until my data was safely backed up. Then deleted all my books and reviews (except in groups) from goodreads.
After that, staff did say my P2P shelf was okay in context (I swear it only had nonfiction traditionally published computer books and was in no way attacking anyone nor had any books by the complaining author). Other members explained in fanfiction world that P2P meant "pulled to publish.". After a few sulky months, I reimported my data hoping maybe it was all overreaction during all that Sept.2013 and Amazon buyout activity—only to see my shelves continually destroyed by various site bugs ... I got really sick of the random books and random 2-star ratings that seemed to crop up, more nasty interactions on my reviews or group posts (one even from an author whose book I rated as loved and thought I reviewed positively who was furious I wasn't following their format -- who later apologized because they had confused me with another Debbie they had paid to post a specific review here of all things!)...uncle. Not worth the need to continually monitor my book catalog for bugs or the drama of the badly behaved few; I may, once the bugs are resolved, just sporadically import default shelves like "read" and star ratings only (no reviews) so friends here know how I felt and to look on my review sites for a fuller review if wanted and so book compares and recommendations work. Without the friendships and groups here, I'm not sure I'd still be here. And I very rarely reviewed here if I did not likes a book (more likely I ditched before I felt I had read far enough that I felt I could write the type of review I liked to write) so kept an average review rating between 3.5-4.5.
ETA: Typos. And to add that I later got a warning about account being in jeopardy because of a comment that "she's offline now" I made in a heated group discussion (my other comments being site How To's in response to questions on the "My Shelf" section and review options)—I'm pretty sure the one must have just gone out to any commenters on the thread and no further actions were taken but it doesn't make me trust goodreads to not be an as-author-directed, err on the side of book promotion type of site. I'm not the only discouraged reader. Being told how I should feel about, rate or review a book by anyone doesn't help (exception: on sites I do review I don't mind adding "My review was of an earlier edition" when politely pointed out).
Moonlight Reader wrote: I disagree, as well. The vast majority of the population over the age of 25 has little to no idea about fandoms or fanfiction. And what little they do know can often be summed up with the words "Isn't Fifty Shades of Grey Twilight fan fiction?"..."Beppie wrote: I disagree. I published my first indie books last year, and I'd never heard of fan fiction--nor (do I think) have most of the newbie indie writers I've encountered during the run-up process...."
Okay, I never said that all indie writers come from fanfiction. I said I was willing to bet a good bit of them do. Also, who said anything about young people thinking they are cutting edge? I am 30 years old, and I teach biology college courses.
Just because people don't talk about it don't mean they aren't there. I can't tell you how many times I've seen fanfics with 100 words, yet thousands of reviews. Of course, I'm interested in seeing what 100 words can be that interesting, so I click it, and it's just a note from the fanfic writer that they've pulled the story to publish it as an original work. i've never agreed with that practice, but who I am to tell them they can't do that?
Anyway, I'm not sure how this turned into a debate instead of a thread about how to improve the reviewing system. As i stated above, if there are changes, I would be on board with the 1/2 stars or letter grades.
Kyion wrote: "Moonlight Reader wrote: I disagree, as well. The vast majority of the population over the age of 25 has little to no idea about fandoms or fanfiction. And what little they do know can often be sum..."It became a debate because authors are continually demanding that the review system be modified to benefit them, when that is really not the purpose.
Honestly, this debate crops up weekly. It's not just this thread - there are constant efforts by authors to shame/co-opt readers into becoming unpaid editors/marketing professionals because they only ever think of how a review of their book can either benefit or harm them instead of acknowledging that the purpose of reviews is to provide information and/or a forum for discussion to other readers.
Kyion wrote: "Anyway, I'm not sure how this turned into a debate instead of a thread about how to improve the reviewing system. ..."Sorry for my part in derailing. It's just that until recently I never heard all the fanfiction terms (the same fiction has been around since before the internet just not the terminology) but 90%+ of my review issues here have come from indie authors or their agents and much of that from what turned out to be fanfiction authors — particularly if specifying how we have to rate/review.
The system would be greatly improved if flagging something for calling a book fanfiction or pulled to publish just got a response from support that that is allowed versus readers getting nasty interactions.
I would love to see, half stars or not, any rating system not a multiple of five; maybe something different than ★ or ☆ at all (any other symbol not common to other review sites, particulalry the bookseller sites like amazon). Just so ratings on goodreads weren't treated exactly as ratings on Amazon type of sites (no offense to amazon intended). I think that would decrease some of the nastiness and do-it-my-way crap that offends potential reviewers if at least when the reader chose to use the goodreads suggested scale the potential drama wouldn't happen because someone used to bookseller site rating scales assumed goodreads scale was the same. Half stars here would likely still get converted to Amazon style star ratings by the drama makers.
It would help if goodreads would let us choose to not use our star ratings in the book average rating. Some readers already note on their profile what scale they use for star ratings (some even consider 1-star best and 5-star he worst or use the stars from their cell phone to mean something else)—but, even if not using the goodreads scale their star ratings impact the average rating.
Better yet, let us have lots of privacy options including only showing ratng/review to goodreads members, friends, group participants, and/or followers. If not publicly viewable, reviews and ratings would attract way less attention from the book industry, authors, drama makers, trolls, etc. and require less maintenance to delete the nasty comments. Which would put reviews and ratings more in the hands of readers. That would be an improvement to me. I could always block/unfriend/unfollow any problem members. Reviews I expect would be much more detailed if reader felt less censored, less threatened, and had less drama in the comments. Bloggers and other readers wanting to stay public still could.
I really wish goodreads would clarify how the star ratings from the goodreads integrstion with kindle work. Near as I can make out the same stars go to Amazon and goodreads despite differing scales (I also haven't activated goodreads on my kindle so don't know that for fact).
(and I do like half stars--it would be hard for me to return to reviewing whole-star-only if I ever review again on goodreads; I've gotten surprisingly fond of half stars on my other review sites. It's just a dead end to discuss half stars on goodreads because staff have utterly ruled it out officially at http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/6... .)
The rating, shelving, reviewing, listopia'ing and all other book feature/dis-cussion rules, in my opinion need to apply to all books in the database, fanfiction or not. If review and/or star rating rules change, terms of service likely need to be updated (at the very least the Review Guidelnes need to reflect any changes). No reader should be threatened with account deletion or have shelves reviewed for context if they shelve a book as or mention in their review that book is fanfiction or P2P fanfiction — regardless of the facts; if reader thought it was they can categorize it that way because reviews/ratings/cataloging are subjective reader opinions. Plus there are many fans of fanfiction, even pulled to publish, on goodreads so it's ridiculous to assume reader used the terms intending offense. Regardless of how the author felt it impacted their sales by having their book reviewed as fanfiction. Shelving/reviewing a book as fanfiction when it isn't is no worse than people shelving fiction books as nonfiction, cookbooks as detective novels or any other to-me goofy review, rating or book cataloging on booksites. Readers don't know everything or even agree on every classifcation; when dealing with customer reviews no one should expect the same level of accuracy paid professional reviewers provide. All that can be hoped is that they are attempting to relay their reading experience, misconceptions and all.
Moonlight Reader wrote: It became a debate because authors are continually demanding that the review system be modified to benefit them, when that is really not the purpose.I can't speak for no one else besides myself; therefore, please address those particular authors that are making those demands/threats/assumptions. No where in any of my posts did I say I wanted a reviewer to act as my editor, marketing associate, etc. I officially joined this site earlier this month, instead of just lurking for recommended reads, so I have no clue how often this question comes up. I saw the thread, felt that I could contribute as a reader and writer, and there you have it. It is absolutely baffling to a new comer how quickly this thread turned hostile on both sides.
But is to know how much a reader liked a book enough? Granted many readers also leave reviews which can be very illuminating, though not always.
Are there other system which you have seen that potentially provide better and more consistent feedback?
Alp Mortal