Why do you suppose Goodreads reviewers are harsher than Amazon reviewers?

[G.G.]

I think it's more that the * system is different here than it is on Amazon. At least for me, that's my difference, since I post same exact review on both sites.

[David]

Unfortunately, as an author, if you comment on a review, there are many things that can go wrong, starting with the possibility that people might misunderstand and start a flame war (which you absolutely don't want to engage with, even as a referee)or the web host might interpret your friendly comments as evidence that you have a personal relationship with the reviewer and remove it for violating its TOS.

[Yzabel]

Vardan wrote: "
I always comment on a review - thanking the reader for their time to not only read the novel but also leave their opinion on it. I do it because I, as a reader would appreciate the author responding to my review."

To be honest, I'd probably do the same, or at least be tempted to do so. Especially when you're a "young" author (I mean, as in "recently published and not swamped yet under reviews"), it's easy to find time to do so, just like it's easy nowadays to be able to connect with readers.

On the other hand, as David mentioned, it's unfortunately just as easy to get on a slippery slope. When a review is good, saying "thank you" feels good; but when it's bad, can we really say we're able to remain 100% objective and polite, that we'll never write a wrongly-worded answer, or a post that could be misinterpreted? I know I refrain myself from posting about topics that annoy me when I'm tired or in a bad mood, precisely to avoid accidentally writing the wrong thing. And this is on random forums/blogs/FB etc, not even as a published author (and thus a "public persona"). So I also understand why directly answering reviewers can be seen as a no-no.

[Yzabel]

Oh yes, as for GR reviews feeling harsher than Amazon's: I've been wondering about that in the past few days, too, because of another thread in another group. I'd be tempted to say that the rating system plays a role here. After all, "it's OK" on Amazon = 3 stars, but only 2 stars on GR. So a mostly "OK" book on Amazon would still get an average grade (3 stars), but would look like less than average (2 stars or so) on GR. I find myself regularly annoyed at this specific point when taking part in Read & Review programs: more than once, I felt like 2 stars was too little, but I didn't want to give the book 3 stars either. So I end up going at length in my reviews about how I'd give 2.5 if possible, about how such side of the book is really good, but such other side made it less than stellar for me, etc.

In the end, I suppose it makes for "good" reviews, since I really try to remain objective and list both good and bad points. But it still makes the overall grade go down...