Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

Hi dear members of the Librarians Group.

As we may all be aware, books and their authors, especially those nonfictional centered around delicate societal or fringe issues, can and are too many times subject of disputes among persons and groups.
Generally, this "silent" disputes of numbers is conducted through the ratings system: silent because no reason (review) is provided for such polarized ratings (either 1 or 5).
Being a newcomer to the unique Goodreads initiative it was not difficult to find patterns of such biased ratings practice among users (one wonders how many have really read the books on their own...).
Imho, this practice in the rating system bring unfair consequences to both books and authors, how many times for a promotion to a higher ranking on the top lists or just for hiding away books that do not share or may threaten our own world view...

My proposal is simple: in order to rate a book with 1 or 5 -- the rating values that have respectively the most power to damage or uplift a book and/or author, a normal review should be compulsory.
It is meant to have dissuasion purpose against unfair individual or group pratices, such as described above.

Thank you in advance for your attention.
Kind regards,
Marco

Yeah no thanks - no one should be forced to write a review of a book no matter what rating they gave it

I can see what you mean and why you're suggesting it but I think making reviews compulsory would put people off, even if it was just for the 1 and 5 star ratings. I'm not good at writing reviews, I only leave one if I have something to say, and while I often leave them on 1 or 5 star books, I sometimes dont have time to or don't know what to write and would essentially be punished because of that. In the end, I would probably stop rating books at all unless I have a review to go with it.

Marco, this is not likely to happen.

Proposals as this should go to either the Feedback group or directly to support. Librarians are not staff and we cannot do anything but give advice or post links.

Similar topic has been discussed on "rating for books that are not yet published." I think your suggestion falls into the same category. This would be an ultimatum - review or don't rate = Censorship. You can read the comments on this:
Topic 1; Topic 2

And then we have the review guidelines

And FAQ's from the staff

Disabling rating a book before its publication date. Goodreads policy allows members to rate books as soon as they are listed on the site. Many of our members receive ARCs (Advanced Reading Copies) from publishers, which means they tend to write reviews of books pre-publication. Other members like to use the rating system to indicate their level of interest or excitement in a book. As there is no one set way to use the rating system, we view this as a valid use of the site.

And Otis's FAQ on GR changes.

Suggestions regarding site policies belong in the feedback group; it's not something that librarians can address.

I'd readress your concern in the Feedback group, as has been mentioned. While I highly doubt it'll be met with much (if any) support, a mod will probably be by soon to close this thread, as it has nothing to do with librarians.