SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion

Scott wrote: "I think my only fear is that once merged the reviews and discussions that I may be involved with will effect or change what Amazon may do with recommendations for reading, especially if they incorp..."

My reviews have started their mass exodus to my blog tonight. No idea how long it'll take me to transfer them one by one and leave behind a stick-in-the-eye-of-Amazon stub snub. Here are the first three as an example:

http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/...

http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/...

http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/...

Well I love my kindle and maybe they could do some good integration there. Hopefully they wont make too many changes to the site but I guess we will have to wait and see.

Reminds me of when B&N bought Fictionwise...granted, Goodreads is mostly a review site, but I still see a lot of similarities. I predicted that Fictionwise would eventually be shuttered, and figure one of two things will happen here:

1. They integrate it into their Kindle and lop off any usefulness for other platforms, but it still serves enough use for Kindle users that they keep it around for them alone. Want the usefulness? Buy a Kindle...everyone else, too bad. (I'm a Nook user, myself)

2. They tinker with the interface and start changing the rules (to benefit Amazon sales) so much that most users stop using Goodreads, and it simply becomes more advantageous to eliminate the site.

Trike wrote:" IMDB became horribly difficult to use after Amazon bought it."

Conversely, I've found that Love Film is better post- Amazon.

Guess we'll wait and see but I'm more optimistic than pessimistic about this. Been trying to get more of my friends and family onto GR and with its link to Amazon, chances are they will join up now.

Trike wrote: "Jeff Bezos comes across as an affable, nice guy, but he's as ruthless as the head of any other big company you can name."

Uhm. I've actually read and heard some less than nice things about Bezos from his (former) employees...

I'm not crazy about just having had another major chunk of my data handed over to Amazon, although I suppose one can never bank on an indie company staying indie forever.

I would not appreciate reviews being modified or yanked for content, and I'm not happy about Amazon being such a monolith in the book publishing/selling/reviewing - landscape.

On the plus side, Amazon does have a lot more money than GR, so the service will probably be more stable, and I guess the GUI will shape up a bit, although I remember reading Bezos was absolutely gung ho on keeping Amazon.com looking like a bomb went off, so the aesthetic might not appeal to me much.

I think we should all worry when huge global corporations buy up smaller organisations.

Out of curiousity, I checked out Shelfari.
The format is nice and clean, but if Amazon owns it (clearly - it is branded at the top) why can't I import books from my Amazon purchases (Kindle or DTB)? That seems like the most obvious improvement.

Here's what I want from Amazon, here:

1. Include/Exclude of books from my Kindle (or DTB purchases). I should be able to easily add books I've purchased to Goodreads (i.e. no need to look them up).

2. Automatically update how far I've read. If I get 10% further, then turn on wireless, I should see my Goodreads status also at 10% further than before.

3. Book reviews should move in one direction only (opt-in). FROM Goodreads TO Amazon. The reviews here are high quality - the reviews on Amazon.com are moderate to low quality, with only a few exceptions.

I'm very open to this purchase, though. Hopefully they see this community as an asset rather than an acquisition. If so, us Kindle owners should be made very happy. Hopefully other device owners have the same experience here as before.

In any case, I think it will be at least a year before we see any major changes.

It appears that the competition has taken note -- got an email from Barnes & Noble yesterday, encouraging me to join their Facebook Community to "Get the latest on your favorite writers, converse with fellow readers" etc.

Always liked B&N... something about being able to walk into a REAL bookstore and just browse the shelves.

Zeke wrote: "if Amazon owns [Shelfari], why can't I import books from my Amazon purchases (Kindle or DTB)? That seems like the most obvious improvement...."

I believe you can. See Shelfari-Amazon instructions. Should be a link ("Import Amazon.com Purchases") on your Shelfari home page, right-hand column, under "Your Content". One of the few things Amazon added to Shelfari, other than the obvious "buy at Amazon" links.

One curiosity is that Goodreads already has an App for the Kindle Fire, whereas Shelfari doesn't (and searching Amazon's App Store for "Shelfari" points you to the Goodreads app (and that was true even before last week's announcement.)

Thanks, good to know... it just didn't stand up to the minute or two I played with the site ;)

G33z3r wrote: "One curiosity is that Goodreads already has an App for the Kindle Fire, whereas Shelfari doesn't (and searching Amazon's App Store for "Shelfari" points you to the Goodreads app (and that was true even before last week's announcement.) "

That makes sense to me ;) Amazon searches for things (in part) based on what people get when they search for certain keywords. If there's no Shelfari app, and people download Goodreads instead, Amazon finds a correlation and will point others in that direction.

Always liked B&N... something about being able to walk into a REAL bookstore and just browse the shelves.

I love my Nook, but I can't even remember the last time I actually walked into a Barnes and Noble.

The first change I've noticed is that in the "Online Stores" menu Amazon has gone from the very bottom to the first choice. I always got the impression from Amazon's placement on that list (you had to click "More" to see it) that Goodreads was somewhat anti-Amazon. Until money walks in the door, I guess.

Trike wrote: "The first change I've noticed is that in the "Online Stores" menu Amazon has gone from the very bottom to the first choice. I always got the impression from Amazon's placement on that list ... that Goodreads was somewhat anti-Amazon. ..."

Goodreads lets you customize that retailer list in any order you want. I've always put Amazon at the top of mine, because that's where I happen to shop. But if you want to get rid of it, click "More", then over on the right, beside "Find This Book at:", click "customize order". Rearrange, delete, whatever.

Amazon used to be the preferred vendor (where Barnes & Noble shows up today), until about a year ago when Goodreads stopped using Amazon's database for its book info. You may remember a little over a year ago (Jan 28,2012) when Goodreads send e-mail to all its users, subject "Action Needed by January 30: Preserve Your Books on Goodreads". From that email (yes, I'm an ePackRat):

For years, we've used Amazon's data for information such as the book title, author, and publication date. Unfortunately, the terms required by Amazon have now become so restrictive that we decided it makes better sense to work with other data sources.

After that, Amazon ceased to be Goodreads' preferred retailer (Though Goodreads still used an Amazon Associates code on the purchase link to get a small commission on any sales it drove.)

The real issue is Amazon is steadily buying sites then using them to funnel traffic to them. With Amazon already so dominant this kills competitor access to customers.

I'm in general a "wait and see" person who hates the reflex freaking out that many people do whenever confronted with any change that might have a potential downside.

My trust will partially be based on stuff that unfortunately I won't be a position to see.
-Will it be set up as a stand-alone division or company or fully integrated into the Amazon staff? (I would prefer a stand-alone revenue generating unit.)
-What will be their strategic plan and mission statement?
-What will be on their list of long term objectives?

If they are interested in making GR a profitable stand-alone unit that yes, can increase Amazon sales as a side effect, then cool. If their focus is ONLY to drive Amazon sales then that can make some unethical behaviors tempting (removing reviews, fake reviews, etc).

Lara Amber wrote: "I'm in general a "wait and see" person who hates the reflex freaking out that many people do whenever confronted with any change that might have a potential downside."

I agree. Integrity is the #1 thing here. Drive sales to Amazon all they want - Just let Goodreads stay as 'For the readers, by the Readers'.

Chris wrote: "As a Nook user, I'm concerned. This site is already too "Kindle this" and "Kindle that"."

I agree

Last week I received an email from Goodreads support informing me they had deleted many of my reviews (nearly 90 alk told). All the reviews where I specifically noted that I had relocated my review to my blog to protect it from Amazon. only took them three months to axe them. Wonder how long it will be before they disable or silence my account here?

Jon, wow, I'm a little surprised. This is the first I've heard of it. Did they explain why in the email?

Carol wrote: "Jon, wow, I'm a little surprised. This is the first I've heard of it. Did they explain why in the email?"

Their excuse was I was self-promoting my blog. I posted their e-mail and my reply verbatum on my blog.

Jon wrote: "Carol wrote: "Jon, wow, I'm a little surprised. This is the first I've heard of it. Did they explain why in the email?"

Their excuse was I was self-promoting my blog. I posted their e-mail and my..."

I think lots of people gave up on this site after Amazon got their paws on it. Many were alienated by authors schlepping their ways, and just as many authors were turned off by threads chastising them for doing so.

You'd think Amazon'd want people promoting books, right? Well, if you're not established forget about it and take your rubbish elsewhere.

I don't pay anything to use GoodReads so ...

I heard Patrick Brown of GR speaking several times at the Frankfurt Book Fair about the purchase. Of course, he said this only meant good things for GR and more integration for Kindle users.

I'm curious, has anyone noticed any integration that enhances your GR or Kindle experience? I don't own a Kindle, but have the app on all of my devices. While I prefer the Nook app, I must say I do most of my reading in Kindle because it allows me to upload manuscripts that I can read on the go.

Any good news on this buy-out?

I also found it difficult with amazon, since they refused to take a review of a book, by a Goodreads author, that I got for free in an amazon giveaway. Weird. They don't even like their own books, but want me to buy it first.

I have yet to see any integration for my Kindle with Goodreads. But when I finish a book one of the links is to tweet about it, though I'm not sure why I'd want to.

There is integration on my Paperwhite. I do feel the interface is clunky and needs to be rethought and/or better integrated for any real value.

I would prefer for the integration to detect my progress and update GR for me. This would include current progress, completion, and finally ratings. What they have now feels like I'm changing to a different app to do these things manually.

Toni wrote: "Any good news on this buy-out?"

The GR website used to go down a lot pre buy-out. Can't say I've noticed this happening since.

Art wrote: "I also found it difficult with amazon, since they refused to take a review of a book, by a Goodreads author, that I got for free in an amazon giveaway. Weird. They don't even like their own books, ..."

The rules for posting reviews at Amazon is that you have to have purchased ANYTHING from them in the past (something that cost actual money - not a free thing). After that, the door is open (unless you try to scam them by reviewing your own book or something similar).

Hmm... Then I must be caught in some sort of galactic beaurocratic whirlpool, because I HAVE purchased books, kindle and software from them in the past. I must be approaching it incorrectly.
Thanks.

Art wrote: "Hmm... Then I must be caught in some sort of galactic beaurocratic whirlpool, because I HAVE purchased books, kindle and software from them in the past. I must be approaching it incorrectly.
Thanks."

Strange indeed. Do you have some sort of association with the author or publisher? They'll catch that.

Of course, you have to be signed in to post reviews (common problem). And reviews have to be more than just a few characters long (I forget the exact count, but it's not particularly high).

I wish the reviews on Goodreads would show up on Amazon!

Florence wrote: "I wish the reviews on Goodreads would show up on Amazon!"

I don't because currently there is no way to make reviews on GoodReads private. I've been bashed by some people for my reviews and had to lock down my reviews from any comments. I write my reviews for myself (and maybe my close friends) not the whole world.

Lara Amber wrote: ". I've been bashed by some people for my reviews and had to lock down my reviews from any comments. I write my reviews for myself (and maybe my close friends) not the whole world. "

he he. Writing stuff that fangirl/boys aren't big fans of, eh?

I admit that I never thought of it that way. I'd still like as many reviews as possible to show up on Amazon but perhaps that wouldn't be for the best.

Finally back ..,, No, I'm not associated with any sort of enterprise, but maybe I didn't sign in correctly. I'll keep trying.

Florence wrote: "I admit that I never thought of it that way. I'd still like as many reviews as possible to show up on Amazon but perhaps that wouldn't be for the best."

If it was a check box option at the bottom of the review, similar to the Facebook one, I'd be okay with that.

I would be very concerned about Amazons censorship habits. Amazon makes a choice not to sell certain books on their site, which is okay and their right. But if they go through goodreads to censor certain topics that would be awful, because Goodreads is about creating a giant book archival database for readers to explore. Even if someone writes a book about incest, for example, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I worry that Amazon will try to erase the existence of some books, because "they don't like them."

https://onezero.medium.com/almost-eve...

All the valid critiques in this article make me wonder all over again why Amazon bought this site in the first place. What are their long-term plans? And why aren't they actively working to make it better?

Oof, I really disagreed with that article. I mean, yes there are things that Goodreads could do to update but the last thing I want it to do is bring in more influence from authors or big name critics. Goodreads is crowd-sourced and that's what I like about it. Book recommendations and lists happen because that's what the broad majority of people suggest. And while I may take the snooty opinion that the majority has terrible tastes in books, I do know how to gauge it against my interests and judge from that. The Forbes list, or other critic lists are found easily and I don't think Goodreads necessarily needs to add them as resources. (especially because I often think those lists are crap as well)

Mostly though, I don't WANT Goodreads to be a tool for authors and publishers. I'm sorry but I don't. It's a reader's tool. Could the site be a better tool, absolutely. But making it a better marketing tool for publishers and authors would probably push me off of the site altogether.

In terms of functionality, I agree, this site is dated and clunky. I showed it to some of my dev friends and they said that likely the issue is that the source code is so poorly written that they'd have to start from scratch entirely if they wanted to have even basic things like the ability to type in italics without doing manual html, let alone things like having cascading forum threads or more wieldy mod tools.

I do agree that I'm kind of glad that the marketing is largely ignorable because it's so obviously wrong in its algorithms, but it would be nice to have the option to integrate with PopSugar or Forbes or whatever.

And I've thought the same thing, what is Amazon doing?? I think it made an impulse buy when social media was just seeming like it was gonna take off and then it realized that actually running social media platforms is nothing like running shopping platforms and they couldn't figure out how to use the social as a shopping and gave up.

I'm hoping that the removal of the Feedback group means that they're working on some big changes, so dealing with the drips and drabs of individual user experiences isn't useful anymore...but I'm afraid that it just means they're throwing in the towel.

I've been approached by a few folks looking to make the "next Goodreads," but so far even what they're suggesting isn't what I want in a book forum, so I guess fingers crossed that Amazon gets their ish together before someone else gets wise to the untapped potential.

Travis wrote: "https://onezero.medium.com/almost-eve...

All the valid critiques in this article make me wonder all over again why Amazon bought this site in the first p..."

Oh, gosh.

I disagree with this entire article with the exception of the HTML functonality.

GR doesn't allow Vulture or whomever because those people are considered competitors and GR would lose $$ and eyeballs consistently encouraging people to leave the site.

And I am FED UP with all the "upgrades" being focused more and more on making readers fish in a damned barrel. I don't want more marketing. I don't want authors who are not readers getting easy access to me. I lived through that hell already. NO THANKS.

I don't trust this article because the writer did not make an effort in finding both newbies and power users. The author seemed to focus mostly on the ways that GR, amazon, publishers and authors can make more money. Off readers. Nothing else.

Anybody ever think we are tired of that??? My every waking moment cannot be spent in being sold to.

I have no problems finding recs - just not with the GR tool.

The sections about the HTML and the back coding was the only places were I was nodding my head.

The rest of the time I'm wide-eyed in horror.

GR TRIED to get more publish-y, more author-y. AND WE REVOLTED. Review sections were war zones. Authors fighting editors fighting readers fighting reviewers...all the while begging for reviews. Thousands of people quit GR and almost as many were kickbanned.

Y'all trying to bring that back again?

Allison wrote: "In terms of functionality, I agree, this site is dated and clunky. I showed it to some of my dev friends and they said that likely the issue is that the source code is so poorly written that they'd..."


That also follows with what they said every time we asked for things like nested shelves and half-stars and whatever else - that they'd have to redesign the whole database.

Because, frankly, it's badly designed, and I don't think there's a way to "fix it". They'd have to just start from scratch - which I'd be ok with, but I doubt they're going to bother with, especially since I think Amazon realized that the ads here aren't as lucrative as they probably hoped they would be...

colleen the convivial curmudgeon wrote: "That also follows with what they said every time we asked for things like nested shelves and half-stars and whatever else - that they'd have to redesign the whole database.

Because, frankly, it's badly designed, and I don't think there's a way to "fix it". They'd have to just start from scratch - which I'd be ok with, but I doubt they're going to bother with, especially since I think Amazon realized that the ads here aren't as lucrative as they probably hoped they would be... "

Agreed.

I think what the article is saying (and it is Medium, so it's very much an opinion piece meant to spark conversation more than a deep dive into investigative journalism, let's keep that in mind!) is that if Amazon can't even be bothered to look at obvious ways the site could be tailored to help users consume more, what is a consumer-mecca like Amazon doing with it, and what are its plans?

I have to say- I also disagree with a lot of what is being said in that article.

One- they keep saying the website- but it seems like they are judging the app. The search functionality in the app is frustrating but I find it to be less of an issue on the website.

Two: a lot of that content they complain out, the YA centric lists, the lists over and over again recommending the same books, is user created and voted on.

Look at small book blogs. The overwhelming majority of them is YA SFF. I’ve been blogging for a little over a year now and I’ve struggled to find other Adult SFF bloggers. I can think of two off the top of my head, and some who read Adult SFF occasionally. I think it’s coming from the community who is most vocal about books they love.

I don’t really understand the complaints with the shelves. There is an option to do what they said. I don’t see how not knowing the option is a fault of GoodReads.

The reviews and having author reputations destroyed.. again I feel like that comes back to the user. It’s usually pretty obvious if someone gave a book a bad review because they don’t like the author. But this isn’t a GoodReads problem, it’s an internet problem. And frankly, I’d hate it if there was a report function or something else available- because it’s just another way trolls and whiny authors can use to have reviews removed they don’t like. I’ve personally had negative comments left by authors on books I did in fact read and did not like, and other comments left by users who simply disagreed with my opinion. Having an option to report reviews or a direct path to getting them removed would deter me from ever reviewing anything.

Sorry, TL;DR I know. Yes- the GoodReads app and route could probably use some updates, but I don’t think it’s as atrocious as they are making it out to be.

The author of the article interviewed 18 whole people. It’s an article based on ignorance.

Honestly, though, if people think the trolls are bad on goodreads, you have to wonder if they ever ventured into the cesspool that was the amazon forums...

Faith wrote: "The author of the article interviewed 18 whole people. It’s an article based on ignorance."


But, honestly, what do the rest of us know? We're probably likely to have “insanely bland and entry-level taste"...

colleen the convivial curmudgeon wrote: "Honestly, though, if people think the trolls are bad on goodreads, you have to wonder if they ever ventured into the cesspool that was the amazon forums..."

THIS.

LOL.

Also funny is the idea that Amazon has no experience running a social network. Two of the biggest romance groups on GR are Amazon Forum refugees. What the author has confused is that they think Amazon should care.

And they do. About $$.

Allison wrote: "if Amazon can't even be bothered to look at obvious ways the site could be tailored to help users consume more, what is a consumer-mecca like Amazon doing with it, and what are its plans?"

Amazon isn't really for building - it's for making money.

Amazon has its fingers in every single social book company. They SHUT THEM DOWN. They never build them up. Look at Shelfari. Leafmarks. Fictfact. Those are just the ones on the top of my head I use.

There are no plans. They did their plans. Kindle Integration.