Fake Reviews - Interesting Solution?

[J.S.]

An interesting solution to the 'fake reviews' problem:

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles...

Nickel summary: it picks people at random to rate the game.

[Kath]

That assumes those picked are prepared to give a rating. Not all readers are prepared to rate a book.

Good idea though. Maybe app users are more interractive?

[Elle]

I am all for free speech so I hate the idea of this!

[J.S.]

Maybe we need to separate reviews and ratings? You can REVIEW anything, but RATINGS are from people picked at random? (Something needs to be done about the ratings system, because it is clearly falling into distrust.)

[Elle]

Distrust or not, I think the way to fix it is make sure people take ratings and reviews with a pinch of salt.

I don't think any type of censorship (cause it is) is right in this case.

And Ignite, for me I don't review apps at all. I would say they are less interactive.

[Jud]

Maybe they should only use ratings that are backed up by a review? Rather than just using the ratings which have no explanation as to why they were given.

[Elle]

I kinda like the idea of that. (the apple store refuses to let you rate something, you need to write something too which is why i never review things)

[Stuart]

Jud (Disney Diva) wrote: "Maybe they should only use ratings that are backed up by a review? Rather than just using the ratings which have no explanation as to why they were given."

As an author I like this suggestion although I also feel that people should be allowed to do whatever they want!

[Harrison]

Louise-Lesley (Elle) wrote: "I kinda like the idea of that. (the apple store refuses to let you rate something, you need to write something too which is why i never review things)"

That's not true for iBooks. I received a one star and no review by some annoying little troll.

[Elle]

I was referring to apps.


And just because they gave you one star, doesn't mean they are an 'annoying little troll'
Rather offensive.

[Kath]

The rating system is flawed because annoying and annonymous trolls as mentioned above can trash an author's standing with no reason given. I really feel that star ratings must be backed up with reason. Even if you feel someone's reason is flawed, s/he is entitled to it. Just to say one star, or even 5 stars, without explanation, does the author no good but does the potential reader no good either. I coldn't select books simply on the basis of stars. I want to know why the reviewer has given or withheld them

[Elle]

I would of thought that before someone like my Mother started rating books.

The idea of reviewing to her is so foreign but she still wants to give an opinion.

her review might consist off about 5 words 'did not like it'

I think it's a persons own prerogative to review a book how they want. After all, a lot of people (I include myself in this group) review for themselves, not to promote the author, not to recommend the book and definitely not to get noticed.

[Gingerlily - The Full Wild]

In that case there should be an option to keep your ratings private. If people are only rating books for their own information there is no reason why it should be counted in the overall rating for the book surely?

[D.M. Andrews (author)]

Authors may get as few as 1 review per 1000 purchases, so the random idea for ratings wouldn't work anyway ;)

Something has to be done about the mean 1-star reviews that competitors (or those they pay) dish out to vote rivals' books down. Some of them are just plain dishonest (as, indeed, are some 5-star reviews clearly written by the author!!!).

I did write to Amazon and ask them to require reviewers to tick a box saying something like "I have read this book in its entirety and promise to give an honest review". It would stop some of the abuse, though not all.

[Elle]

But why should they be forced to keep their ratings private?


After all their opinion still counts, even if they don't rate for a specific reason to make it count (if that makes sense?)



(my theory has always been to just don't take your ratings that seriously.)

[Gingerlily - The Full Wild]

I didn't say anything about being forced to make the rating private. All I was suggesting is that if someone wants to rate a book purely for their own information there could be an option to make it private.

[Michael Cargill]

I often can't be bothered to write a review when I rate the books I have read.

[Elle]

In terms of GR they have already stated they would never ever do that as they believe everyone's opinion should count.

But what I mean is that even though people don't rate for other people, doesn't mean they don't want their opinion to count.

I don't rate with the author or another reader in mind but that doesn't mean I don't want my review or rating to be linked with that book.

[D.M. Andrews (author)]

You can write as few as 20 words on Amazon (and none on GR) ;)

[Elle]

Michael wrote: "I often can't be bothered to write a review when I rate the books I have read."


This is pretty common in a lot of groups I am a member off. Either they read too much and it takes too much time or they'd rather spend their time doing something else.

[Elle]

I went and found one of my Mothers review.

She gave the book 3 stars and she wrote

'the book was ok a bit to deep for me'


I know plenty of people will say that is not good enough or whatever but she tried (mainly because I told her you had too *coughs*)

[Gingerlily - The Full Wild]

But what if you don't want your opinion to count is all I'm saying...

[Elle]

I never said people didn't want their opinion to count though.

What I said was people didn't do it to improve the status of an author or recommend a book so why would they care enough to write a review, they only want to rate it

[Gingerlily - The Full Wild]

Well some people don't. I have read a couple of people in other forums who have said they use Goodreads ratings purely for their own information, thats what I had in mind. I could see a situation where I would want a record of what my own opinion of a book was, but I wouldn't necessarily want the author to know, or anyone else.

[Elle]

Oh yeah I definitely understand that.

But like I said above it's been suggested many times and GR finally put their foot down and said no way.

In a way I'd like it (if I had more shame) for some of the more risque books I read. Since I have a few people on GR that I would rather not tell them about those.

[Harrison]

Michael wrote: "I often can't be bothered to write a review when I rate the books I have read."

It's nice to know you care :P

[Harrison]

Reviewing/rating without purchasing is bad.

[Kath]

You can't always tell Harrison. I used to share an account so my books never showed as Amazon Verified Purchase. It would be easy to assume I hadn't bought (or even read) the books.

[Elle]

Plus there are SO many sources to get books from!

[Michael Cargill]

Yeah, most of my reviews on Amazon are from people using a Smashwords code that I bribed gave them.

[Patti (baconater)]

When I first encountered Goodreads (can't believe it's almost a year ago!) I went through and found loads of books I've read over the years and rated them. It was purely for my own amusement, just to see how many books I could remember I'd read. Then I got bored. ;)

Since then, I've rated a couple of books without reviewing them but that was because I hadnt the time to review them immediately. I think I've since gone back and reviewed.

Anyway, it's a moot point. We can't dictate how others will use the system on Goodreads, so there is no point fussing, I reckon.

There. Patti had a zen moment. ;)

Om mani padmi ommmm

[Elle]

I do agree. That my point in a nutshell. Everyone uses GR differently!