You're right! Unfortunately, nowadays, we live in a society that cannot take criticism (which is good in certain cases) and hand out a diploma or a medal for everyone who's participating. I, usually, do not give less than 3 stars because if the book is so bad (in my opinion) I will not finish it. Therefore, 3 stars is the lowest point of start for me, kind of 3 stars = acceptable, 4 stars = good and 5 stars = exceptional. Thank you for your work!

This is a difficult question for me every time I review a book, but I know how important reviews are to independently published authors and to readers.

I have issues with the reviewing process as well. I dislike that the Goodreads algorithm will act punitively towards an author that gets a 3 star review when that is (ostensibly) "I liked it!" I read so many books, and most of them I like and if I know somebody enjoys that genre I will recommend it to them, but to me, it's an "I liked it!" not an "I COULDN'T PUT IT DOWN!!!!" or "My life will never be the same, I am a wholly changed person"... but I don't want to do any kind of damage to any author, especially not a new author.

R. wrote: "This is a difficult question for me every time I review a book, but I know how important reviews are to independently published authors and to readers."

This is very true, but it can be important to any writer. I suspect that a lukewarm review can be worse than no review at all.

I'm the same way. Used to be critical, giving constructive criticism and thinking my reviews would help people get better. Then I became an author and was exposed to all those not so fun algorithms. 5 star or nothing for me now too.

Laura wrote: "I have issues with the reviewing process as well. I dislike that the Goodreads algorithm will act punitively towards an author that gets a 3 star review when that is (ostensibly) "I liked it!" I re..."
This is exactly it. There are books that I enjoy,and I admire the writing but will probably not keep on my shelves. There are books that I will treasure and demand that others read. Both of those may rate a 5 stars, but for different reasons.

What speaks to me may not even whisper to you.

Robin

I gave an author-friend a 5 star review on one of her books. The poor soul wanted more details than I put in my review, over a chat, and I asked her if she truly wanted my honesty. I tore the book apart. It was a very frustrating work, and it saddened me because her other works were pretty darned good.

She accepted my criticism, and has never asked for my honest opinion again. However, when I do post reviews, I let her know on the side that the review is not false, not created to help her build her business/audience, but genuine. She is a dear person who means a lot to me.

I full-heartedly agree with you! I love this philosophy, and even so I have still yet to read anything you've written that was less than 5 stars! You're the best! :) <3

Honestly, it sucks to hear that the algorithm punishes books with 3 stars or less, because my reviews are there to say what I thought of the book, not whether or not the book is worth reading. And I will frequently recommend books I’ve given 3 stars to to folk I think will enjoy them, because they are good books that I enjoyed reading.

I've been struggling with this myself lately. Should I review a book for my friends, or for the algorithm? I feel a bit disingenuous slapping 5 stars on a book just "to play the algorithm game," while on the other hand I realize there's not a lot else I can do and authors get penalized when I don't. Saying "I liked it" shouldn't be taken as a bad score.

Yet, that's how this game works now. Me not playing by the rules will not change them. Unfortunately. I'm not sure how I feel about that.

Thank you, Robin, for making me think more about this.

I've been thinking how strange it is how non-finnish people seem to been less critical than finnish people, or least people based on English speaking countries. Here book reviews in goodreads are lot more harsh, no flood of five starts in (what feels like) every book. I'm not only one who has noticed this, finnish authors and readers sometimes talk about this on twitter and facebook.

Well, as I mentioned before, if I can't give a book 5 stars, I don't review it. Not every book is for me. And I really see no point to reviewing a book I didn't like, or one that was too slow or one where the ending seemed forced. Why give my time to writing negative things, when I can go on to find a book that I want to always have on my shelf? If
There are many books I don't finish. As I've gotten older, I no longer force myself to read a book just because I started it. If it doesn't capture me, I don't finish it. But I'd feel seriously uncomfortable reviewing a book that I didn't finish.

So, those are my reasons for 5 stars only in my reviews.

Robin

I really like this approach to reviewing!
I always struggle with books that I havent enjoyed because I am conscious that their is a Human at the other end of my keyboard potentially reading my review and my words could effect them. I do try to find something positive even if I have disliked a book.

This is an interesting policy. I won't review if I'd give it under 3 stars, because 3 is more than half, which means I liked it more than I didn't, or I liked it but wasn't in love. I recently found out a friend thought 3 stars was a bad review, so I may have to rethink this for future. I would hate for would-be readers to take 3 stars as a bad sign, since everyone has different tastes.

Laura wrote: "I dislike that the Goodreads algorithm will act punitively towards an author that gets a 3 star review when that is (ostensibly) 'I liked it!'"

I had no idea this was the case. Thanks for the heads up!

neither did I knew this...so in the future I will still give my 2-3-4 stars...but only in my review, and not on the book itself.
And the review can just be the stars...therefore it doesn't mean I write a whole text review as I rarely do that.
This because I rarely give a 5* from my point of view. 5* books are for me books that I could read over 10 times.
Also thanks for this information..I don't want to dislike books because everyone is different as a person and as a reader.

Thanks for posting this. I was considering trying to transfer over a review of my first book (3 stars) but seeing that it might negatively affect my work I will have to look into other things.

That is my preference for reviewing also. The internet can be a harsh critical place so It's nice to leave some positivity.

Also as a famous author I think your review has a lot of power, so this is a thoughtful way of still being involved in the community.

This has been a very useful thread.
I tried to be honest in my reviews because, surely, that is the point, to allow readers to judge if they will like the book.
Then, i realised i didnt want to rubbish another authors work, but if i cant be honest, what is the point?
The 5 star, only, route is a good one, which i will follow from now.

Whoa. I respect your choice. What I'm hearing you say is that you've boiled it down to an all-or-nothing kind of review decision on Goodreads. I can see that as a public persona. But it does mean that it's not a particularly nuanced evaluation, except to say 'recommended by Robin Hobbs.'

I choose to use all the stars. The thing about long-term interaction on GR is that it is community-building, and your friends and followers learn what kind of books are in your wheelhouse. Some of my friends have specifically said that my 2 and 3 star reviews are helpful and that my comments work as recommendations for them. So I think it all comes down to the work one puts into the review. However, I'll note that I have almost no tolerance for trolling and the time to moderate my comments.

Well, that wild idea only ensured I'll never trust an endorsement or review of Hobb.

I’ve noticed that some authors seem to give 5 points to everything, but it makes their ratings worthless and to be disregarded.

I’m not an author, and feel free to give honest ratings: 5 points only to my top favourite books, 4 points to books that I really like and reread periodically, 3 points to books that I quite like and may reread occasionally, 2 points to books that I can tolerate reading once but wouldn’t bother to read again, and 1 point to books that I thoroughly dislike and normally get rid of.

I'd feel it was a waste of my time to not only finish reading a book I disliked, but then to move away from other activities to review it.

I'm old enough and have enough books that come my way to discard any that don't grab me in the first one hundred pages. Yes, there are books I finish, but still don't feel they merit 5 stars. It's like a tv series with a promising premise that then drags itself on and on and on. Sometimes I've kept watching or reading hoping it will come back to its full promise.

So, that's where it is for me. I'm only going to write a review if I think others are going to really enjoy the book.

Robin

Robin wrote: “I’m old enough and have enough books that come my way to discard any that don’t grab me in the first one hundred pages.”

I’m 69 and I do that too; which is why I rarely give 1 star to a book. But I feel that 5 stars should be reserved for top favourites, and unfortunately I can’t spend all my time rereading my top favourites: there aren’t enough of them, and the stories would become overfamiliar from too-frequent rereading.

There are plenty of books that I find worth reading and rereading, without reaching top-favourite status.

“I’m only going to write a review if I think others are going to really enjoy the book.”

Taste in fiction is very subjective and personal. You can say how much you enjoyed a book, but other people’s reactions to it are going to vary all over the spectrum. You can see that from looking at reactions to any book here on Goodreads. Almost any book seems to be loved by some and hated by others. However, I find it helps somewhat to read reviews and see what people liked and didn’t like about the book.

Lovely approach to your reviews Robin. We only get the cream of the crop from your perspective - thank you :)

Robin wrote: "I'd feel it was a waste of my time to not only finish reading a book I disliked, but then to move away from other activities to review it.

I'm old enough and have enough books that come my way to..."

Ooo exactly this! I've "shelved" a few books over the years for that exact reason! It hasn't grabbed me well enough, soon enough and although in the context of TV, some shows are "Brilliant from season 2 or 3 onwards" I'm really not going to spend 20 to 40 hours or whatever to get by the "not so great" - I simply don't have the time or inclination.

Reading should be enjoyable.

Occasionally, I'm forced to read something I hate. Recently, I read a book where the craft was severely lacking. I read it anyway because it answered a burning question I had so well that I was satisfied with the experience despite the dragging in the middle, the utterly horrifying grammatical errors, and the present tense narration which I don't prefer.

I finished that book and am looking forward to more by the author. I secretly hope he improves his writing skills, but it won't matter to me as long as he explores an issue that's really important to me in a way that's really helpful. I gave him five stars for the book because I want to see more from him.

I don't review books I don't finish. I don't finish books that I can't give 4 or 5 stars, but I occasionally get fooled right up to the end and give 3 stars when it's warranted.

In the digital age, I'm gravitating back to the experience of browsing the shelves of a brick and mortar book store. It's always a bonus if there's a comfortable chair to sit in while I sample the first fifty pages to see if it's worth the 15+ bucks I'm going to have to shell out to take it home and finish it.

The thrill of discovering a book like that is priceless. A book like that deserves a rave review with plenty of stars sprinkled on top.

S.V. wrote: "Reading should be enjoyable. [...] I gave him five stars for the book because I want to see more from him."

And you're doing the rest of us a severe disservice by doing that: You review a book, you don't secure the author's future. That "burning question" might be burning to you but might not be to the rest of us. We might take offence at "utterly horrifying grammatical errors" and might find our enjoyment of reading massively reduced.

If you review a book, you do that first and foremost for your fellow readers. Awarding five stars to a book that has such severe issues is actively harmful to others. And the author might never know how you "secretly hope" he improves and never even strive to. Thus, you're potentially doing him a disservice as well.

That's an interesting approach. I suppose you have to be more circumspect than most of us because of your strong reputation and history as an author. A 2-star review from you can carry some weight, and I wouldn't blame you for not wanting that burden.
Myself, I rate between 2 and 5 stars. I figure if a book is heading to a 1 star review, I'll almost certainly DNF it. And I don't review books I haven't finished. 2-stars are pretty rare for me though. (BTW, I just finished Royal Assassain last night and am feeling grateful that I have such a long journey ahead.)

Eric wrote: "That's an interesting approach. I suppose you have to be more circumspect than most of us because of your strong reputation and history as an author."

The opinion of an author carries no more weight with me than that of you or anyone else. Potentially even less (Birds of a feather flock together.) or - as in this case - no weight at all due to the "interesting approach".

There's a certain dichotomy that exists between the voting system GR intends people to use, and the way its understood and/or utilized by parts of its user-base. In most things, if you were asked to rate something 1-5, there's an understanding that 1 is the worst, 5 is the best, and there's an even distribution between 2-3-4. 3 would mean mediocre. However on GR, this is not the case. On GR, 2 is meant to be 'I Liked It', whereas normally 2 out of a 5 is not a good thing.

Even despite knowing the GR system, I still vote on an even 1-5 scale because that's what I'm used to, and it makes the most sense to me (I use GR more for my own logging purposes than any algorithm). There are many people on here who vote this way, and will often confuse (or forget) their interpretation of the voting system isn't universal. This is why Stans will go after some reviewers for 2 star reviews, they don't realize a 2 is meant to be a good thing on here. The current voting system is non-standard, and as a result, it's interpreted differently by different people.

Cody wrote: “On GR, 2 is meant to be ‘I Liked It’”

I think Goodreads no longer offers guidance on what the ratings should mean. In the past, when it did offer guidance, the guidance was something like this:

1: I disliked it.

2: It was OK.

3: I quite liked it.

4: I really liked it.

5: I loved it.

For myself, if I read a book once but have no interest in rereading it, it gets a 2; if I have some interest in rereading it someday, it gets a 3. If I reckon to reread it periodically, it gets a 4. Only top favourites get a 5.

This year I started being harder with my reviews not in the sense that nobody will get a 5 stars. It is more the fact that if i don't believe it be a tree 5 stars then i won't put a 5 stars.

I am also trying to figure out what a true five star look for me. As I know each person is different, everybody taste is different and that the gun thing about reading.

Reading through the beginning of this thread, I really wish that the people WOULD write thoughtful 1 and 2 star reviews. I am very picky about books. I am particular about the quality of writing, the character development, the realism, etc. Most books I read are 1 to 3 star, if I finish them at all, and I rate them so on goodreads. When I am looking for books, I rely on those negative reviews. I understand why Robin Hobb would give up rating books, but I wish you wouldn't, Robin! Yours is the epitome of good writing (along with Jane Austen and GGKay and several others) and I would LOVE to have your honest opinion about books before I read them. However, most people don't feel good about writing negative reviews, so Goodreads is essentially useless to me. The most highly rated books on here (including some that win the goodreads choice awards, or whatever they are called) I think are just dreadfully written and I can't finish them. Authors can't grow unless they get honest feedback. I'm not saying we need to be jerks when we write a negative review, but it IS helpful - to other readers and the author. I am still looking for a site that will give me honest reviews from literary-minded folks.

How can it be that you have your own grading system haha. Come on.. If your book gets a 1 star in a newspaper you will probably not be happy. Also if the books gets a 2 star review. Why? Because 1 and 2 stars are for reviews that say: "this is not great, i do not recommend this one". That is the concencus. How can you say otherwise haha. And then be surprised that people don't get your grading.

I had the same issue with Stars. I finally decided that 3 was as low as I would go because anyone writing a 300 page piece of c.....p has put a great deal of work into their c....py book. Maybe it's their first book, maybe they shouldn't be writing at all but they have and covered 300 pages with legible words and that in itself, I decided, was worth my measly 3 stars.
To go off issue here, don't mean to be rude but I have a question for Ms Hobb.
I am an older dude. I read most of your books as they hit the bookstore back in the day. Last year I decided it was past time to enjoy them all again. For no particular reason other than I had all three books on my shelf, I began with Soldier Son. I am wondering about how you felt when you were writing this trilogy, because it is darn strange, almost eerily weird, not your general fantasy, a definite soul shifter, the hero so painfully lost, his family so clueless, the warp and weave of the curse he labors under rich and brutally mysterious - Talk about an outsider?
Wow, I love this book. I love all your books but this one a bit more maybe? And yet, Soldier Son Trilogy is the interloper here, the most underrated of your Series. Every list of where to start, which Hobbs’ books to read first, which has the best action, the most likeable characters, the finest writing style, the largest reservoir of glue that keeps the reader’s eye fixed on the page? Soldier Son is left off all the lists concerning your output of great work. My question too you is, what do you think about ranking your babies like they do? Do you agree with their estimation, that Soldier Son deserves its outsider status? Why? Did it fail to sell upon release? Was it reviewed poorly at that time? Were you disappointed in the work itself or did your disappointment take root when readers reaction to the book was less than wonderful? (Or was it?)

Questions, questions. Anyway, (Writer Alert) I have written a book that I believe is eminently readable. More blunt than mysterious but with a solid style and the page turning quality that I try for. I would love your take on it.

My book is called Tayo and the Porpoise Child.
It is 1999 in a small, late Jim Crow era Alabama town. A young African man comes to play basketball for a local ‘college’ team and boy does he land in a heap of trouble.

Thanks for listening and thank you for so many hours of enjoyment I got from reading your books,

Chris Cee Morris

If the only rating you want to give is 5 stars, and I get the reasoning, why not mark a book as read, and if it isn't 5 stars, just not rate it?

Ahhh ratings...it varies from person to person. I am one of those who think a 3 star rating is bad (for me). 5=exceptional, 4=good, 3=fine, just not for me. 2=poorly written, the story doesn't make sense, and 1=offensive. I give very few 1s, usually it's a DNF. My recent 1 was the Rule of Nines by Terry Goodkind. Also, To Your Scattered Bodies, Go by Phillip Jose Farmer. Sexist drivel from BOTH of these awful writers. Still, I understand the struggles over a 3. Maybe it's forgettable or derivative, but 3s are nothing exciting. There is nothing wrong with the book, it just didn't do anything for me. Whereas a 4 is fun and a 5 is EXCELLENT. Some folks are stingy with their 5s, but I'm not.

I only read for pleasure. THAT'S IT. Therefore, if I derived pleasure from your book, it's a 5. If it made me think or cry or laugh, I'll give the author a 5.

Now, a 6 star.....that's a book I would actually re-read.

Well, yeah. If a book isn't a 4 or 5 star, I don't bother finishing it now. Time is too precious and I can't leave an honest review if I've not finished the book.

not everybody has the same rating system for me 2 stars means I don't like not hate it but just dislike it but see why people might like it and to be honest that is fine

Robin wrote: "Well, as I mentioned before, if I can't give a book 5 stars, I don't review it. Not every book is for me. And I really see no point to reviewing a book I didn't like, or one that was too slow or on..."
I've never tried the not finishing thing before. I just tough it out, but I suppose I have to start valuing my time better.

I appreciate that the author shared that. Since I'm on the last third of my life, I don't have time for bad books. I started DNFing several years back. It felt wrong but that's where I'm at- short on time. I will not go on to the bitter end of a book hoping for redemption. Those ARE my 1 and 2 star reviews that never happen because I DNF.
3 stars- I liked it, it was entertaining. I would recommend it. When I give a 4 star rating that means it's VERY GOOD, I maybe even loved it. It might go on my "keep" shelf. I rarely reread but I have that shelf of books that I think I might like to reread some day. I have many shelves TBR. Nothing like having your own library of unread books. :)
5 stars- it blew me away. I've read very few 5 stars. Those are the ones that leave me in daze, perhaps half in and half out of the story world that just ended, altered my perspective or mind profoundly. The Night Ship by Jess Kidd did that to me, but I didn't keep it because I felt haunted after reading it and I also gave it only 4 stars because it was gruesome to read though I couldn't stop reading it. Maybe that's not fair and it deserves 5 stars. Very rarely have I been left feeling haunted and bereft. Hmm.

I rather have a scale of 1 to 10. But it's not up to me so...Sigh ;)
Anyway, I can imagine that someone with so much influence and 'clout' as Hobb doesn't want (or need) to be negative and tear down lesser known or starting writers . And that's decent in this day and age. However , with only 5 star reviews there's no distinction between : Fine, good, great and 'masterpiece for the ages !

I came across this thread today, I had not even thought of commenting, but then I am not one who reviews either. If I like a book, it remains on the physical bookshelf, or the kindle or if disliked it doesn't.
I really had to stop and think, because for me my buying the book in the first instance is my signifying I would potentially like it...
Off hand, I cannot think of a book I have bought that I did not enjoy.
And Robin Hobbs books are all on the 5 scale easily 4 or 5s.

Just my 2 cents :)