Goodreads Feedback discussion

69 views
Suggestions & Questions > Can Book Reviews of a certain book be sorted by date posted?

Comments Showing 1-30 of 30 (30 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Joy H. (new)

Joy H. (JoyofGlensFalls) | 438 comments Can book reviews under a book's icon be viewed by the date the review was posted?

I see that they can be sorted according to the number of stars, but that's all.

How are the books sorted when ALL of the reviews are showing? They seem to be randomly sorted.


message 2: by Lisa (last edited Jan 14, 2009 09:59AM) (new)

Lisa Vegan (LisaVegan) | 8939 comments Joy,

It's not random. Re books/reviews: Longest to shortest reviews then star ratings/to-read, etc. only. Yes votes on reviews knock the books up on the list. I don't know the exact formula.

No, we can search by date reviewed. That would be interesting to be able to do that.

Edit: Oh, and re each book, first your review shows, then your friends' reviews, then general Goodreads members. That doesn't change.





message 3: by Joy H. (last edited Jan 14, 2009 01:00PM) (new)

Joy H. (JoyofGlensFalls) | 438 comments I'd like to be able to sort all the reviews by the date they were posted.

I don't see the point of putting the longest reviews before the shortest reviews. What's the point?

The reviews with no text should be listed separately. So should the to-read reviews.

When I go to reviews, I want to read text. I prefer to see the latest first. So sorting by date would be valuable to me.

Where can I suggest this to Otis?

PS-Thanks, Lisa! :)


message 4: by Cait (new)

Cait (tigercait) | 1928 comments Joy H. (of Glens Falls) wrote: "Where can I suggest this to Otis?"

Right here -- you just did, or you will the next time this group gets checked. :)

I wouldn't want it to be the default sort, but I think a sort-by-date could be an interesting way to look at reviews.


message 5: by Joy H. (new)

Joy H. (JoyofGlensFalls) | 438 comments I think the default should be by date. Everyone understands simple chronology.

Here's why:
When I first looked at the list of reviews of all the posters, I couldn't figure out how the reviews were arranged until you folks explained it. I had spent quite a bit of time by myself trying to figure it out... and it's not because I'm a newbie. I've already had some experience navigating online.

What is obvious to computer literate people is not obvious to newbies, and Goodreads is getting a lot of newbies who aren't accustomed to posting online. The books are drawing them in.

As a moderator, I've gotten email from posters who can't deal with the complexities. One gal told me she was joining the Barnes & Noble book groups because Goodreads was hard to navigate.

Seems to me the most understandable default would be by date. Everyone understands chronology. It could be toggled back and forth between oldest and newest. Newbies would figure out the other sort options later. Give them a break!


message 6: by Beth A. (new)

Beth A. (BethALM) I like the reviews sorted by the longer ones first. (And the ones with Yes votes of course.) It seems to me that these are usually the more thought out and informative reviews.

I'm not fond of reading a review that says "Read in Sept 08." That may be useful to the reviewer, but it doesn't help me decide if I want to read a book or not.

I agree that having the option to sort them by date would be interesting.


message 7: by Joy H. (new)

Joy H. (JoyofGlensFalls) | 438 comments You have a point there, Beth. :)


message 8: by jenjn79 (new)

jenjn79 | 521 comments I, too, like the way they are sorted now (as a default). Most reviews I come across on a book are really short..."Good book. Picked it up at the airport waiting for a flight. I'll probably read this author again". Which doesn't tell me anything at all. I'd rather have the longer reviews, with a consideration to Yes votes, presented to me first since they tell me the most about the book.

But I do agree that having an option to sort by date would be nice.


message 9: by Joy H. (new)

Joy H. (JoyofGlensFalls) | 438 comments Yes, I see your point, Isis, and Beth too.

However, I didn't realize that the longest posts were listed first by default. How is anyone to know that?

There should at least be a notation explaining that at the top of the list.


message 10: by Lisa (new)

Lisa Vegan (LisaVegan) | 8939 comments I do think length and yes votes is the best way for default, even though I've read some great very short reviews. I like that we're also now able to sort by star rating. I do like choice so date order would be another nice addition for a sort, if it's possible to do. Especially for older books, it's interesting to see how opinions differ over time.


message 11: by mlady_rebecca (new)

mlady_rebecca | 2048 comments However, I didn't realize that the longest posts were listed first by default. How is anyone to know that?

It's been brought up multiple times in the Feedback group. I'm not sure if it's been written down anywhere else.


message 12: by Dottie (new)

Dottie  (oxymoronid) | 337 comments mlady_rebecca wrote: "However, I didn't realize that the longest posts were listed first by default. How is anyone to know that?

It's been brought up multiple times in the Feedback group. I'm not sure if it's been writ..."


Joy has a point and your response points up the fact that much of what we learn by hanging out here -- most of the thousands of other members only learn by chance or instinct of some sort -- which goes back to something many ask for frequently -- a well-located "guide" for using all the wonderful features here.

Oh, and I would enjoy an option for sorting reviews by date but think the present arrangement should remain the default ordering.




message 13: by Joy H. (new)

Joy H. (JoyofGlensFalls) | 438 comments Rebecca, the fact that it's been brought up multiple times in this Feedback group shows the need for readers to see an explanation at the beginning of the listing.

The explanation would simply state that the default-sort places the longest reviews first.

Not everyone has time or motivation to wade through the posts at the Feedback Group to find that out.


message 14: by mlady_rebecca (new)

mlady_rebecca | 2048 comments I guess I'm odd. I'll read feedback and librarian posts before anything else.

I'm sure there are many librarians who'd be willing to contribute to documentation if there was an easy way to do so. But that's not something we can "fix" without the assistance of the GR staff.


message 15: by Joy H. (new)

Joy H. (JoyofGlensFalls) | 438 comments You're not odd, Rebecca. Your interests are different, but that doesn't make you odd. (g)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Quotations for you:
"Always be a first-rate version of yourself, instead of a second-rate version of somebody else." -Judy Garland

"If I try to be like him, who will be like me?" -Yiddish Proverb
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Follow your nature.
Follow your bliss.


message 16: by Molly (last edited Jan 15, 2009 07:51AM) (new)

Molly | 48 comments I agree with Joy that I did not understand how these things were sorted - I thought maybe it was by the amount of comments on a review - which doesn't always mean that a review I would like is one with a lot of comments.

If I could sort by most recent reviews then it would lead me to other people who just finished reading the same thing I did and I could go talk to them about it - that is one way I like to use reviews.

The other is to get an idea of what others think to decide if I want to read it to begin with, in which case sorting by date would not matter.

So therefore, I say the more sort options the better.


message 17: by Joy H. (new)

Joy H. (JoyofGlensFalls) | 438 comments Molly, thanks for articulating all of that so well. Good thinking. I agree wholeheartedly!

I had been trying to articulate my feeling that the "most recent reviews" would be valuable to me. You said what I found difficult to say, even to myself. My intuition told me that the chronological-sort would be valuable, but I couldn't think of why. (lol)


message 18: by Beth A. (new)

Beth A. (BethALM) Joy and Molly,

I enjoy looking at recent reviews of my books too.

There is a page that shows you "recent reviews of your books". I have it bookmarked so it's easier to get to. It's fun to read because it changes each time I'm on goodreads, and gives me random glimpses of who's reading my books.

Here's how you get there...

Click "Explore" at the top of the page.
Click on "Books."
Go clear to the bottom of that page and click "more recent Books..."
At the right near the top it says...
"recent reviews of my books" click that and bookmark the page so you can find it again!



message 19: by Molly (new)

Molly | 48 comments Hey, thanks Beth. That is an incredibly convoluted way to get the information - and within that listing there isn't a way to sort that list by book so you could see all recent reviews together for the one book. But it is closer to what I was looking for. Seems if that mechanism exists in that form then perhaps it could be used as a sort option over on the main list of reviews when you click on a book title. Easy for me to say!


message 20: by Joy H. (last edited Jan 15, 2009 01:15PM) (new)

Joy H. (JoyofGlensFalls) | 438 comments Yes, thank you, Beth. I followed your directions and found some good recent reviews. It's nice that we don't have to hop around to find recent reviews of books we've read. They're all in one place. If we want more, we can start hopping. (g) Actually, hopping around isn't too difficult online, as long as we don't become confused.

Too bad the route to those recent reviews is so convoluted, as Molly says. It's OK once we get there. I've not only bookmarked my page of recent reviews, but I've put it on my desktop. My desktop is running out of space. (g)


message 21: by rivka, librarian moderator (new)

rivka | 12269 comments Mod
mlady_rebecca wrote: "I guess I'm odd. I'll read feedback and librarian posts before anything else."

Me too!


message 22: by Joy H. (new)

Joy H. (JoyofGlensFalls) | 438 comments I'm beginning to appreciate the default-sort for book reviews... especially now that I know that the longest reviews are placed first. It makes sense to me now.

I still think that there should be a note at the top of the list explaining that the longest reviews are placed first.


message 23: by Luann (new)

Luann (AZbookgal) | 422 comments Don't forget about the "yes" vote factor. Look at the top review for this book:

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/24...

Even though it is very short, it received 8 yes votes and is now at the top of the list. I'm still trying to figure out why 8 people liked that particular review, though.


message 24: by Joy H. (last edited Jan 17, 2009 09:35PM) (new)

Joy H. (JoyofGlensFalls) | 438 comments Luann wrote: "Don't forget about the "yes" vote factor. Look at the top review for this book:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/24...
Even though it is very short, it received 8 yes votes and..."


I see the review you're talking about, Luann.
There are 1,297 comments! Something isn't right. It's not much of a review either.

The review is by "Josh". His profile is at: http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/82...
It's set to private and there is no data. There are no books on his bookshelf either.

PS-Looks as if they're using the comment feature as a private message board. (g)


message 25: by Lisa (new)

Lisa Vegan (LisaVegan) | 8939 comments Oh Joy, You must be correct. Too bad they didn't want to start a group.

Well, there's no flawless way to do the reviews order, but in general I think that it works very well. It's great that we can now sort by star rating too, but I like the long to short and yes reviews. it usually works pretty well, even though some short reviews are great and even though members with many friends/many votes tend to get more & more. Since I've found uncountable great reviews the way it's set up now, I have no complaints.


message 26: by Luann (new)

Luann (AZbookgal) | 422 comments I wasn't complaining. I think the system as it is currently set up works quite well most of the time. I think that's one reason I noticed that particular review - it's such an unusual example of a review at the top of the list.


message 27: by Otis, Chief Goodreader (new)

Otis Chandler | 4184 comments Mod
Date sort has been on the list for a long time, but has been technically hard. It might be easier now - let me look into it a bit.


message 28: by Joy H. (last edited Jan 19, 2009 05:40PM) (new)

Joy H. (JoyofGlensFalls) | 438 comments Otis, I've been thinking about this. If I had seen a short note at the top of the book reviews telling me that the longest reviews were first, I wouldn't have been so puzzled about how the reviews were arranged. I was simply looking for the pattern of organization.


message 29: by Otis, Chief Goodreader (new)

Otis Chandler | 4184 comments Mod
It's a little more complicated than just length - I'll see if we can't add an explanation though.


message 30: by Joy H. (new)

Joy H. (JoyofGlensFalls) | 438 comments Thank you, Otis. That's nice of you.


back to top