Audiobooks discussion
Archives
>
Recent announcement by Goodreads - and its consequences
date
newest »
newest »
Your link to the thread doesn't work. This one should:Thread
As I understand it, all GR is saying is that reviews that attack only the author are unacceptable, as are comments from authors attacking reviewers or other GR members.
For example, let's say I read a book by George W. Bush or Barack Obama. I then post a "review" that is a lot more about what a horrible person I think GWB or OB is than about the book. GR is saying that's not acceptable. It's not a review of the book. On the flip side, if an author doesn't like my review, he or she can't flame me. Frankly, I don't have a problem with this.
I find it hard to believe there are a lot of people who have shelves called "author is a jerk," but then I was boggled to discover there's a genre called "erotic hockey novels."
Peace
Thank you for clarifying, Chris, I was very confused as to what constituted "author behaivior."
I agree with the idea, but I don't like the way they are handling it. How hard would it be to set up a method that sends an automated email to the author of that review/comment that says "change it or lose it"?Seems only fair. What if it's a long, well thought out review that only had one "author bashing" sentence in it? Also, who decides what is "bashing"? I noted in my reviews of Steven Gould's books that I feel he is overly pacifist. Is that bashing?
Member content (reviews and shelves) were deleted:
1. Without informing the member of his or her transgression;
2. Without offering an opportunity to correct the "offence";
3. Without first communicating the policy change to the entire community (not just the Feedback group);
4. Without clear guidelines as to what would henceforth be acceptable and what would not.
1. Without informing the member of his or her transgression;
2. Without offering an opportunity to correct the "offence";
3. Without first communicating the policy change to the entire community (not just the Feedback group);
4. Without clear guidelines as to what would henceforth be acceptable and what would not.
I think for the most part it was th elack of communication that has pissed people off...the deleting without warning (prior to this, reviews were just hidden - you couldn't see on the book page unless you were friends with the person/had the direct link)...one person lost at least 90 reviews...re: author behavior reviews...if an author is a jerk/attacks readers I want to know about it. There have been multiple instances in the last year where authors (both traditionally published and self-published) have had melt-downs over bad reviews - reviewers have been attacked not only on GR but on Twitter, on Amazon and personnal blogs. Personally, I don't want to give ANY money to an author who does that...ditto with authors who have plagerized books - even that cannot be mentioned now, because its a negative behavior...
yet, author is good shelves have been kept and other ones with positive conotations...
Makes me glad that I'm so paranoid about backing everything up regularly
In case the emotions roiling around Goodreads haven't touched you - from anger to disappointment to deep frustration - and since Goodreads does not seem about to release any kind of sitewide announcement about what's going on, allow me:
Important Note Regarding Reviews
Now, that there is a 4000+ post thread, and it is convoluted and angry - so here's a brief summary, in part: GR is now banning/deleting-without-warning all shelves/reviews/lists that focus on author behavior. Also, if your shelf isn't related to author behavior, but GR looks at the books on our shelves that decides the shelf is about author behavior, then that shelf will get the ax, too.
And it should be noted that - in addition to the fact that Goodreads has not made this announcement anywhere but in a group to which only a fraction of the population of this site belongs, but the representatives of Goodreads have been notably silent on that thread for over half its existence. Any further threads opened up are promptly shut down and/or deleted.
Everyone knows that the terms of service for the site can be whatever Otis and Amazon want them to be; it's their site. Had this all been handled correctly there might have been no real problem. However, a substantial number of reviews have been deleted with no warning, only an email after the fact; other reviews have disappeared with no commentary from Goodreads at all. And they're expecting their community to abide by new rules which they have not troubled to disseminate to the community as a whole.
Also, as the above thread has been seething and fuming and begging for some response, any response, this is what the Goodreads staff were doing:
People - power users - are leaving, and taking their reviews and librarian abilities with them. And if you notice some of your circle disappearing, they might be going to Booklikes; there's a group for those planning to emigrate, to help us find each other.