The Mystery, Crime, and Thriller Group discussion

Mikela wrote: "James, that was a very interesting and informative article that you wrote. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that there are such unethical people out there but I am. One of the things to look for ..."

Given that sockpuppetry is so easy to detect through data mining, I can only conclude that it's so widespread that the literary social sites don't want to terminate their accounts because the loss would create a major negative impact on the sites. I looked at Stephen Leather's Amazon account yesterday. The vast majority of his reviews have been removed, but the account not terminated.

James wrote: "Hi Gamal. I'm no expert in these things, but I don't know how they could. But then again, I don't know a lot of things. I haven't even figured out how they decide how to order them here on GR when ..."

That makes sense. Some reviewers are in high demand because of their influence in the genre. If review manipulation isn't detectible through data mining or some other type of analytics then I guess someone smarter than me will have to figure out a solution that will then be manipulated by the next wave of writers.

I'm not going to use sock puppets, but I can't worry about this anymore because I don't think I can do anything about it. I need to just go back to writing and leave the sock puppet issue alone for now.

I think it would be a mistake to remove a rating system of some kind (i.e., stars) coupled with a review system. I also think it's a mistake to continue with what is an awkward, statistically suspect, and easily game-able system.

The difference between a 5 and 4 star rating is 20%. In the American school grading system, this is the difference between perfect (A+) and skirting almost unacceptable (B-, one point above a C). Consider also that a 3, while seemingly "in the middle" is actually handing the book a majority of stars (60%...there is no 50%). A 100 or even a 10-point rating would be much more useful.

But getting back to your original point, Gamal, until major retailers like Amazon overhaul their entire system and implement more "Real Name" reviews or IP-identified accounts (as James mentions), we're going to be saddled with losers who work the system to their advantage (or their colleagues' disadvantage, as RJ Ellory did).

Matthew, I really like the 10* idea. There are so many times that I've agonized over how to rate a book that I thought was better than a 3 yet didn't quite reach a 4 in my opinion. Since half stars have been vetoed here then the 10* system would more accurately grade a readers response to a book.

Matthew wrote: "I think it would be a mistake to remove a rating system of some kind (i.e., stars) coupled with a review system. I also think it's a mistake to continue with what is an awkward, statistically suspe..."

It seems to me that the matter has been dropped. Konrath hopped in and jabbered about the terms of reviews being misunderstood because the print was so small and similar ridiciulous arguments. Never mind that the matter is taken very seriously in the UK and punishable by a penalty similar to that of grand theft auto. Sockpuppetry is illegal. In the UK it is an 'unfair practice' under Consumer Protection Regulations 2008 (Schedule 1, para 22). It is enforceable by Trading Standards and the Office of Fair Trading. Penalties on conviction include a fine and/or up to two years in jail. Yet, the admitted offenders haven't even had their accounts terminated, let alone been indicted for crimes that they've already admitted to. The message, as in almost all matters: generate enough money and you will be above the law. I've never lived in the UK and am not familiar with procedure, but I would imagine it only takes one person to walk into a police station and say, "I would like to report a crime," and things would become very interesting indeed.

I check to see what other reviews the person has left. I'm surprised by how many times there are no other reviews. If you are going to the trouble to create a sock puppet, why not use it more than once.

I'm not sure the police in any country have the time to investigate reviewers.

P.A. wrote: "I check to see what other reviews the person has left. I'm surprised by how many times there are no other reviews. If you are going to the trouble to create a sock puppet, why not use it more than ..."

He has very few left because all the suspicious ones were removed. True about the police, hence my comment about a formal complaint. I wouldn't expect the police to take the initiative, but I think are required to investigate formal complaints of crimes.

I had never heard of sock puppet reviews before this thread, but it certainly explains the glowing reviews of a very poor book I recently read. Thanks for the information.

Mikela wrote: "Matthew, I really like the 10* idea. There are so many times that I've agonized over how to rate a book that I thought was better than a 3 yet didn't quite reach a 4 in my opinion. Since half stars..."

Mikela: Agree with you and your comments. No need to repeat them.

Gamal wrote: "James wrote: "Hi Gamal. I'm no expert in these things, but I don't know how they could. But then again, I don't know a lot of things. I haven't even figured out how they decide how to order them he..."

Hi Gamal, me too. I've been very vocal about this--GR moderators are aware of what I've written on this site--and I feel that I have nothing left to contribute to the discussion, no power over the outcome, and the best thing I can do is just leave it be and go back to enjoying reading and writing books. If something transpires that changes the situation, I'll throw my two cents in, but I've already thrown in at least a nickel or dime. Nothing else to do about it.

Hi everyone, you all sound like a very interesting group. This topic of sockpuppets is a very interesting topic. I, too, was not familiar with the fallacy in the ratings until the scandal several weeks/months ago on Amazon. It's sad that someone would give a one-star because they were upset with the price or didn't like the ending, etc. Rather than do away with the star system, if it were expanded, would we take the time to review. For instance, a rating on the story itself, author's writing ability, editing (spelling, grammar, etc.) would combine for a total review. Just throwing it out for discussion.

Nancy wrote: "For instance, a rating on the story itself, author's writing ability, editing (spelling, grammar, etc.) would combine for a total review."

That's why I think a 10 or 100 point system makes more sense. More complicated? Sure, but literature is, too, and deserves something a little more nuanced than a 5-star system.

I feel like it's only a matter of time before we see a major retailer and/or review site move to something a bit more sophisticated.

Hi,

Hello, everyone

I'm a new to this group. It's terrible that we have become so suspicious. As a fellow author I can't understand why people would resolve to such tactics. I've approached a few people, asking to review my book, and they were very kind so far.

On the contrary, most of them have not reviewed anything else on Amazon, which makes them look like sock puppets. I think, though, that the context of a review will give an idea if it's genuine or not. It's sad that one has to check other reviews to see if they're trustworthy.

I'm sorry, I think you all have moved on with the discussion. Just ignore me. I'll go and stand in the corner.

Ryan wrote: "Hi,

Hello, everyone

I'm a new to this group. It's terrible that we have become so suspicious. As a fellow author I can't understand why people would resolve to such tactics. I've approached a few..."

Ryan:

Don't be silly! No body stands in the corner on Goodreads. Your opinion is yours and is valid. Thanks for offering your take on the sock puppets. All reviewers have to start with one review and if it happens to be a review of your book, so what?

Take care and come back into the conversation any time you want. Get out of that silly corner, now!

Cathy

Hi all: If you haven't seen his article already, you might be interested in author JK Konrath's views on this topic at
http://www.thepassivevoice.com/09/201...

Also, The Passive Voice is a really cool blog, put together by a California contracts lawyer and indie author and featuring a digest of info from an array of bloggers on indie publishing and the big six.

Elle wrote: "Also, The Passive Voice is a really cool blog..."

I love both of their blogs, but I especially like PV's response to the Stephen Leather/sock puppet kerfuffle:

The first phony review appeared approximately five minutes after the launch of the first review feature on an ecommerce site. Shoppers figured out what was going on about five minutes later. Somehow, ecommerce has survived.

For the most part, my reviews will explain WHY I liked/disliked the book. Usually it is ME not the author. The prose is difficult, too many characters, boring characters, incredible imagery, detailed interesting plot.... I never criticize the author unless the book is SO poorly written I NEED to. But then that too is the opinion of the reviewer. I also will sometimes briefly explain the book's premise. But this is in the book synopsis so only briefly.
As far as the stars, I have five stars for books that have had a profound impact on me, and low stars on ones I simply sis not like.

When I review a book I base it on the way I felt about the book, I don't mean for it to discourage someone from reading it based on my opinions. Just because I didn't enjoy the book does not mean others won't.
I would never be rude about an opinion because we all feel differently. I use reviews more as a guideline of if I would enjoy the book.Everyone raved about the 50 Shades books but because they aren't my type of book I didn't even bother. It's really just a matter of choosing books for your own tastes and enjoyment.

I did not go into what I need from a review to read a book. Usually the synopsis then maybe a short recap in someone else s words. IE If really gory, heavy on the romance, too much war material? Won't read it. If reviewers repeatably mention poor editing, or bad endings, or areas I do not care for I may think twice picking it up.

I often wish there were more than 5 stars because I want to give say 4.5 or so.

I also look at the substance of what people comment about in the book. Preferences can be personal and unique. So I consider whether the comments are general (poor grammar, etc) or personal (maybe the person didn't like some aspects of the character or the writing style). If personal then the comment may be irrelevant to me.

Thank you, Cathy.

I have to agree with the posters above. It's important to be factual, of course an opinion is always personal, but if it's explained it's most helpful for readers making a decision.

As for fake reviews: I think it's unnecessary. If the author puts a little bit of effort into finding readers or review bloggers, they'll be successful. I put hours into finding mine and luckily enough they liked my book. There are more to come. I dedicate an hour or two per day to 'hunt' them.

Candice wrote: "I often wish there were more than 5 stars because I want to give say 4.5 or so.

I also look at the substance of what people comment about in the book. Preferences can be personal and unique. So I..."

Don't some sites have half stars? But anyway, I think the 5 star system was developed to dumb it down. The less people have to think, the more likely they'll be to give a rating. A 1-100 system for instance, requires much more thought. Sub-ratings would be really interesting too: plot, characterization.

I think the best way to combat sock-puppet reviews is by writing reviews. Of course, none of us wants to get stuck with a book that had great reviews, but ends up being terrible - but it does happen.

As an author, I hope every day for more reviews because my book is heavily weighted toward the four and five star range - especially on Amazon. I hope for more reviews (good or not-so-good) because I know that will lend more credibility.

And, honestly, it isn't just the sock-puppet problem I worry about. It's also some folks' tendency to not write reviews unless they can write four or five stars. As an author (or a reader), it makes you wonder what people really think of a book. It makes you wonder if a book would be rated much lower if more of the people who have read it shared their opinions.

Just my three cents :-)

Mike wrote: "I think the best way to combat sock-puppet reviews is by writing reviews. Of course, none of us wants to get stuck with a book that had great reviews, but ends up being terrible - but it does happ..."

I like this idea. Write more real reviews (even if they aren't 4/5 stars) as a way to shift the balance away from sock puppets. It is a concept that is brilliant in its simplicity.

Thanks Mike.

Matthew wrote: "Elle wrote: "Also, The Passive Voice is a really cool blog..."

I love both of their blogs, but I especially like PV's response to the Stephen Leather/sock puppet kerfuffle:

The first phony revie..."

I don't know how I missed PG's blog on Stephen Leather & sock-puppets: I'm going to go look it up. TKS!

Hi there,

I run a blog on Noir, crime and pulp novels and often review crime fiction (and even some related non fiction) there. Many of my reviews are positive but I don't mind writing the odd scathing one if the title warrants it and I get through it. My reviews are all real - I take no money or favors from writers or publishers. In fact, given the genre I review, many of the authors are long dead.
I do occasionally receive review copies, so if you want an honest review and write crime fiction, take a look and if you like what you see, get in touch.

http://thedevilsroad.com

Say no to sock-puppets!

Tom wrote: "Hi there,

I run a blog on Noir, crime and pulp novels and often review crime fiction (and even some related non fiction) there. Many of my reviews are positive but I don't mind writing the odd sc..."

Thanks Tom. I do have some work that I'd like to have reviewed. I'll try to send it over tonight.

Thanks again
Gamal

When I look at star ratings and they're all fours and fives, I tend to the think the book is very commercial. I check the one stars as well. They're usually really supid, but if it's a well-written one star, I think, 'this writer took some chances and they affected people in different ways and the novel is likely thought provoking,' and then I get interested. I'm a pretty tough reviewer myself. I get annoyed when a writer who I believe is capable of great things writes a mediocre book. I get annoyed by conveniences and gaping story holes, which I find in an amazing number of bestsellers. Give me a well-plotted and thought-provoking, and reasonably well-written book, I'll give a four. Expose the world to me in a way I've never seen it before, and I give five. When I just give star ratings and no text reviews, it's just my way of pointing people toward books I think noteworthy. I don't bother to put the hex on books I didn't care for.

James wrote: "When I look at star ratings and they're all fours and fives, I tend to the think the book is very commercial. I check the one stars as well. They're usually really supid, but if it's a well-written..."

You present a thoughtful perspective: Ideas on reviews and rankings that I hadn't seen expressed before.

Elle wrote: "James wrote: "When I look at star ratings and they're all fours and fives, I tend to the think the book is very commercial. I check the one stars as well. They're usually really supid, but if it's ..."

Thanks. I try to take a book on its own terms and not impose myself on it. I question myself after reading. What was the author trying to accomplish? Was it a worthy goal? Did the author succeed? Why or why not?

James wrote:"I question myself after reading. What was the author trying to accomplish? Was it a worthy goal? Did the author succeed? Why or why not?"

Truly wonderful questions. I'm going to start doing the same. I feel sure it will make me a much smarter and more sensitive, appreciative reader. Thank you.

Thanks back. I try.

Hum... That sock puppet review crap is really detrimental for us indie authors. But here's where Goodreads could be used - we can publish the first few chapters for free, people read and decide before they pay for the whole book. But I'm not sure a lot of authors or readers actually do that. Its always safer to buy a NY Times bestseller for most.
Ah, well. What do I know, really? I'm too new in this business.

Annelie, there are definitely a large number of people that find indie authors that way. Some make a point of searching indies out for something that might be new and interesting, but there are so many that a sample helps swing the choice. It makes total sense as marketing strategy for an unknown author--or even a known one that wants to increase numbers. A couple of my favorite up-and-coming even publish chapters/snippets on their blogs. Great way of building buzz.

Carol wrote: "Annelie, there are definitely a large number of people that find indie authors that way. Some make a point of searching indies out for something that might be new and interesting, but there are so ..."

Thank you Carol (and Annelie). As a new author I also need to start posting samples of my work. I did it with my first few stories and on Smashwords, but I need to start doing it here as well.

Here is a follow up question for everyone. Do you feel that GR is a better platform for a new writer to distribute their work than Amazon? If so, why?

Have fun.
Gamal

Gamal wrote: "Carol wrote: "Annelie, there are definitely a large number of people that find indie authors that way. Some make a point of searching indies out for something that might be new and interesting, but..."

A smart new writer would do both, I think. There are so many forums though, that it's a lot of work to find the right ones for you and your work. I prefer GR simply because I've found groups with people I have the most in common with and I enjoy chatting with the most.

James wrote: "Elle wrote: "James wrote: "When I look at star ratings and they're all fours and fives, I tend to the think the book is very commercial. I check the one stars as well. They're usually really supid,..."

James wrote: "Hi Gamal. I'm no expert in these things, but I don't know how they could. But then again, I don't know a lot of things. I haven't even figured out how they decide how to order them here on GR when ..."

Hi James I am English author I write crime fiction from the villains point of view.So why don't you try my book The Party. Its about London's east end criminals. Give it a go and have a look at my web site on www.thepartybyjdcarter.com.uk

^ And that is the biggest reason I'm turned off by new authors on Goodreads. Its like bookworld spam to me; offers nothing to the discussion but intent on self-promotion.

Carol wrote: "^ And that is the biggest reason I'm turned off by new authors on Goodreads. Its like bookworld spam to me; offers nothing to the discussion but intent on self-promotion."

Me too. Across my social networks, I'm so inundated by BSP that each one is an automatic delete. Hundreds every week. And it's not their fault. Self-proclaimed web gurus have made an industry out of telling writers this is the way to do it. Another big scam to prey on the hopeful.

Bill wrote: "This has been a thread in one of the other groups I belong to. I guess ultimately if you're concerned about fake reviews, trust your own judgement. Read the blurb on the book and if it interests yo..."

Very well put. I go by the blurb as well.

I'm new to Goodreads so I don't have a lot of reviews up yet. I write and am an avid reader. I think so far I've done 3s and 4s in stars. I would also find the 1/2 point helpful.

I have two shelves. "Books I read to me" (mostly mystery and crime)and "Books I read to my granddaughter" (who is 16 months old.) Totally opposite ends of the spectrum but I use the same criteria to rate the story. Did I like the characters? Did I like the plot? Did the ending work? You know, the usual things one uses to judge a book but you really can do that with picture books too. I also consider the illustrations with the kids books.

When I first joined and started browsing around, I already knew about Sock Puppets. It really made me question the ones with star ratings but no actual written review. Personally I wouldn't star a book without writing a review as well. I figure, if someone looks and sees I gave it 4 stars, OK but, why? What was the reason to give it a 4 and not a 3 or a 5? Stars without the written review is pretty useless to me as a reader.

I wonder if the system was changed so that you couldn't star rate it unless you wrote a review, would that help any? I imagine from Sock Puppets who wanted to leave stars they would write a bunch of nonsense just so they could star rate the book, but that might help people find the puppets easier and get rid of them. Thoughts?

The other thing I noticed on Goodreads, from a writer's point of view, was Authors giving their own book five stars. Gads. How embarrassing is that? That's just bad form. If A book is connected to an author who is a Goodreads user then the rating/review system for that book should not be available.

"^ And that is the biggest reason I'm turned off by new authors on Goodreads. Its like bookworld spam to me; offers nothing to the discussion but intent on self-promotion."

Ah, well. The newbies (author-wise) may have absolutely no idea that they are spamming. Equally, they probably don't know that its the worst thing they could do to themselves.
I started that way and learned it after half a day. Really, HOW THE HELL is one going to get attention in the freaking world wide web if one wants it NOW. Thats how we authors may see it, when we just started our self-marketing. After all, every single one of us has just written a book the world was waiting for, right? And it took months, if not years to finish the opus grande.
Then, luckily, most of us learn that its just like in real life - its not about taking, but about giving.

^ And that is the biggest reason I'm turned off by new authors on Goodreads. Its like bookworld spam to me; offers nothing to the discussion but intent on self-promotion.

I feel your pain, Carol, but--as Annelie said--there are a lot of us authors trying to be good GR citizens. I was a reader before I was a writer and I've enjoyed the exchanges I've had with other GR folks over books immensely. I get as much of a thrill from a "Like" on a review I've written about someone else's book as I do from a 5-star rating on one of my own. Hopefully other writers will find this balance.

And, it's lousy, but--just as in real life--spammers and clowns might just be the price we pay to have a robust online community...though nothing says we can't gently remind others about common courtesies, which I think I might go and do right now for David. :)

Annelie wrote: Then, luckily, most of us learn that its just like in real life - its not about taking, but about giving.

Yes. This is an uplifting comment that gives me renewed strength. Thanks!

Cindy wrote: "I'm new to Goodreads so I don't have a lot of reviews up yet. I write and am an avid reader. I think so far I've done 3s and 4s in stars. I would also find the 1/2 point helpful.

I have two shelve..."

I'm going to get around to blogging on this. Since three million-selling authors were outed for all sorts of fraudulence, the stated policy that Amazon, GR, etc, would terminate the accounts of sock puppeters was proven false (have a look). Most of their reviews were removed, nothing more. Since then, it's open season, people know they can do whatever they like if they sell enough copies. This appeared last week. Want reviews? Go buy a thousand. http://buybookreviews.pro/home/

James wrote: "Want reviews? Go buy a thousand."

Sacrilege!

Creating an Amazon account is free, so even if sock puppet accounts were terminated that wouldn't solve the problem since the companies selling reveiws could just create new accounts.

If Amazon altered its search algorithims to discount or eliminate sock puppet reviews, then the value of selling reviews would be reduced and the sock puppet companies wouldn't make as much of a profit. That might make them stop. The fact that Amazon isn't willing to rework the algorithm makes them complicit in the deceit.

Gamal, is this true of Goodreads also?

Gamal wrote: "The fact that Amazon isn't willing to rework the algorithm makes them complicit in the deceit."

How would you propose Amazon identify these sock puppet accounts such that their algorithms could eliminate them?

Gads, James, that is really bad. Kind of reminds me of people who feel they have to buy friends or they wouldn't have any.