Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion

I'm coming to this discussion quite late. I've read nearly every post. I admit that I skimmed during some of the OT posts and disagreements that were rehashed repeatedly.

I published my first novel this year. I tried to read everything I could on the business of publishing and to do what I needed to do to present a professional product. I had professional editing. I consulted with a former police chief who did some editing on the investigative details. I was in contact with a detective in my area to make sure the local police procedure and investigative sections were accurate. I had a proofreader and copyediting. I'm not saying it's error free. I'm saying that I tried to do the best I could.

I had no idea all of this was going on! I'm sorry to read it, actually. I'm a reader first. I'll be a reader always. I read the latest two JD Robb novels last weekend, instead of working on my second book. I love to read. I need to read. It's unfortunate readers are bashed because they've provided their opinions on a book. It's an opinion! Everyone has one. If an author has done what they needed to do to put forth a professional product, the opinion of one person is just that. The opinion of one person. Not everyone will love the book. There are several best-selling authors whose books bore me. Others love their books. I used to like them, but I no longer do. I wouldn't write a review stating that, however. It doesn't matter. Not to me. I move on to the next author's book.

I have a question for readers. When you purchase a self-published author's book on Amazon and it sucks, do you request a refund? If there are formatting, punctuation, and grammatical errors, do you flag it as such? If not, why not? Why let that author keep your money if they're not delivering the goods? I haven't seen that mentioned in this topic. Maybe I missed it. If I found a book that offensive, I'd return it.

Thank you, Linda.

I actually have returned a few that were particularly bad. Often the ones that took a significant turn for the worse (conveniently?) after the sample portion.

So, yeah. I will ask for a refund depending on how bad the book is and how much money I put out. Unfortunately, I buy books at least once a week and usually a few at a time and I almost never read them within the seven day window.

It should be noted that more than a few authors complain about returns, as well. They've called readers thieves, accuse them of stealing their intellectual property, etc. etc.

Thank you, Tina. I forgot about the 7-day ebook return policy. I returned a book, but it was within a couple of days.

ThreeRs (Got Logic?) wrote: " I think the readers who had their picture blasted on the internet, or received hateful phone calls late at night, or had letters sent to their place of work in an effort to get them fired would disagree..."

This sound like harassment and I would certainly report it to the police.

Linda wrote: "Regarding returns: I rely on free sample or "Look Inside" before buying to make sure the text and formatting and so on is clean. I won't buy anything I can't read. Therefore I've never returned a digital book to Amazon for poor composition, but I have reported several that were outrageously bad, and most of them have been removed, either permanently or until they were fixed."

Same, and I've rarely been disappointed on the matter of editing/formatting. I've written an author that the last part of his book looked like a proofreader copy with struck through sections, he admitted that he was totally embarrassed that the wrong version was uploaded to KDP. And he rectified the situation.

I am harsh on what I consider lazy writing: exposition and info dumps, vague descriptions, character changes halfway through the story, deus ex machina endings... If I feel cheated out of my time, I generally put that in a review.

Honestly, I don't see that much of these attacks. The ones I do see have long since been resolved. I've reported a few people now and again when I've seen harassment or someone breaking the rules, as I figure the best way to handle it is to report the incident to those running the website.

I'd like to stand up for readers. As often as I can, I encourage anyone and everyone to give their honest opinions. Until I stumble across any of these attacks where I can defend the readers, I suppose that's the best I can do, while taking any negative reviews into account when editing or writing. Because the readers are important and deserve to have their say on what they like and didn't like. How else would we ever grow without criticism and receiving feedback on what we did right and what we did wrong?

Dustin wrote: "Honestly, I don't see that much of these attacks. The ones I do see have long since been resolved. I've reported a few people now and again when I've seen harassment or someone breaking the rules, ..."

Excellent post.

Query: Why does it seem that some (most?) take 'defence of readers' and assume that it literally requires an actual, on-going incident of harassment?

As many have noted (quite correctly & reasonably, IMHO), one generally wouldn't know of such unless one happened to 'stumble' across it. So why not a more round-about approach/attitude? Meaning, if someone is talking nonsense on some thread, speak up. Call people on their BS/petty whines or if applicable, correct the misinformation.

Over the past year, I've see more commiserating, pity-sharing and 'there, there' posts than not. I've seen flagrant spam posts which most tend to ignore instead of a quick 'hey, don't do that'. (Sadly, the one time I noticed that someone did speak up, the author repeated the spam post immediately. Nice, huh?) Wouldn't a more effective method be to disabuse certain folks of their ignorance? Or correct misinformation when one can? Or simply say 'no' in the face of a bald-faced erroneous statement?

Inevitably, someone brings up the Thumperism of 'don't say anything if you've got nothing nice to say'. Which--again, IMHO--is rarely applicable beyond childhood. In my experience, it generally isn't necessary for mature adults (b/c the speaker is presumably old enough to know how to temper their words and the recipient is old enough to absorb the criticism) and it doesn't work for immature adults (b/c for most of them, silence is taken as approval of their behaviour).

Why speak up in the first instance? *shrug* Personal choice for each individual and not my business or concern. But then, I'm not an author so I'm not getting swiped by the bigger and bigger brush dirtying and souring my reputation w/o due cause.

TinaNicole wrote: It should be noted that more than a few authors complain about returns, as well. They've called readers thieves, accuse them of stealing their intellectual property, etc. etc.

Which is pathetic. If authors don't like the returns facility, they should whinge to Amazon (or whoever). A reader who returns an ebook within 7 days is not doing anything against the rules. If authors don't like the rules, they should not use that distributor.

I speak both as a self-published author who has had books returned, and as a reader who has returned books. It's a necessary system, especially since the books that are bad after the sample are not necessarily self-published. I have not yet had to return a self-published book (admittedly I don't read many), but I have returned three ebooks put out by major publishers, one because it hadn't been properly proofread when the print book was converted to an ebook, and two because the sample only went as far as the introduction to the book and included none of the significant content, so that it was not possible for me to assess the quality of the content without buying the book. When I did, and found the content to be crap, I promptly returned the book, and felt entirely justified in doing so.

This is really depressing.

The first thing I'll say is I hate that we're dividing readers and writers. And not just here. I've seen it elsewhere.

There's the reader camp and the writer camp. I'm in both, and I don't think I'd be too happy to read something from a writer who was otherwise.

As a reader, I've not yet been attacked by another self-publishing author. But I've been in your shoes in terms of being attacked online, and not being defended. It's very hurtful.

I think we all need to support each other. Readers need to support other readers. Writers need to support other writers. Readers need to support writers and writers need to support readers.

Julie,

It's horrible you've been attacked for having a gay character. The novel I'm working on has gay characters. Will the same happen to me? Maybe in some ways it's a compliment. Some of the best books have been banned.

I love your last sentences in your post. We all need each other!

I think we can dislike a book without being nasty about it. I think we can be hurt by a review without being evil and cruel about it.

I've been annoyed by reviews I've received, and as a reviewer I've been annoyed by responses to my review. I assume I'm not the only one who has been in both places.

Julie & Dina: The world is full of idiots, and probably always will be. If what we hear on the news and entertainment shows is true, it's also more full of gays than we ever thought in the "closet" era. They will be your audience. If you write about a crusading fundamentalist, the gays will hate you. If your protagonist is a greedy banker, basically everyone who has to deal with a bank will hate you. If you write about an empowered black man with the courage and power to change his society, the bigots will hate you. Choose your audience and write. If a member of the lunatic fringe castigates you for it, put his statement on your book jacket as a badge of honor. There are many things in this world it is appropriate to be afraid of; fools are not among them.

Well first and foremost I'm STILL a reader.

I've been reading books since I was about 4, my mum took me to the library every week. I joined a book club at primary school and would have a book on layaway while i saved up for it. I love literature and I love books. I don't see this as a US vs THEM debate of authors versus readers because I am a reader, I am a writer and i am SPARTA.

Well maybe not the last bit. I digress.

People behave badly in every industry. Dodgy second hand car dealers give my excellent professional Mercedes franchise dealer a bad name. etc. I didn't actually become a author to get rich, or rah rah rah self publishing is great, I write books because I love to read stories and i love to write them.

The simple reality is that the decision to self publish vs indy is no different than going to work for McDonalds or starting your own burger bar. I don't rail against indy restaurants WHY DONT YOU WORK AT McDonalds. I eat at both. I read trad books, i read well made, well written indy books by authors who I consider professional.

I love my readers. I value each and every one of them like a little kitten, they have given THEIR VALUABLE TIME to read words which i have penned, I hope to entertain them, but certainly I appreciate them for allowing me to do a job I love to do.

All the hate is wrong - the readers hating on writers because they think their books are too expensive or because they choose to be self-employed rather than work for the man, the writers who complain at anyone who critiques their work - readers and professional writers should love each other in equal measure. We are nothing without the other, without great authors readers have no stories to read, without great readers writers words are meaningless.

We are a partnership, the whole RAH RAH RAH indy vs trad debate needs to go someplace and be locked up, that is a simple business decision for most writers - do I want to control my own business or be a part of a big public goliath - i don't discriminate against mom and pop stores vs walmart, writing is the same. Judge everything based on its quality to you is the only important point.

So i agree, I think writers need to stop treating readers as the enemy and vice versa.

Jack wrote: "Julie & Dina: The world is full of idiots, and probably always will be. If what we hear on the news and entertainment shows is true, it's also more full of gays than we ever thought in the "closet"..."

Jack...thank you!

I think there's always going to be someone offended by our work in some way. Well, maybe not always. But often. I guess you just have to hope they're relatively nice about it. That's probably too much to hope for.

Josef wrote: "Well first and foremost I'm STILL a reader.

I've been reading books since I was about 4, my mum took me to the library every week. I joined a book club at primary school and would have a book on l..."

Josef, I think I might love you. Well, at least I love what you've said here. I love your restaurant analogy. I never thought of it that way.

Sometimes the products of entrepreneurs are awful, but sometimes they're better than what you'd get from a big business.

It takes courage to go at it alone. It also takes some courage to spend money on something that's not backed up by good reviews and a recognizable name/platform.

Josef wrote: "Well first and foremost I'm STILL a reader.

I've been reading books since I was about 4, my mum took me to the library every week. I joined a book club at primary school and would have a book on l..."


That's not really what this thread is about.

Etc: quoted the correct person

No matter how amazing a book is, it can't completely please everyone. One of the important things a writer has to learn, in my opinion, is to accept that and move on. Read the reviews and use any constructive comments to help you make your next work better, but leave it there. All that will happen if you attack readers for negative comments is that you'll come across as being a real jerk. Yes, negative reviews are upsetting - especially if you've been given a low rating for a really stupid reason - but people are entitled to their own opinions. If you feel bad about a negative review, go and do something to make yourself feel better without hurting others, like going on a shopping trip, eating your favourite snacks in front of your favourite movie, etc.

Dina wrote: "Julie,

It's horrible you've been attacked for having a gay character. The novel I'm working on has gay characters. Will the same happen to me? Maybe in some ways it's a compliment. Some of the bes..."

In 1996, author Pamela Morisi wrote a romance book called Simple Jess. It was remarkable for the non-cliched religious characters, a hero with a mental disability, and a revealing scene about homosexuality. She wrote me that it was almost not published due to the content. Maybe the best romance book I ever read.

Victoria wrote: "No matter how amazing a book is, it can't completely please everyone. One of the important things a writer has to learn, in my opinion, is to accept that and move on. Read the reviews and use any..."

Victoria,

I think it's also helpful to remember that all writers get bad reviews. There's no book that's loved by everyone.

I like your advice about finding things to make yourself feel better. I also want to remember (when it happens to me) that though I shouldn't attack anyone or protest in anyway...it's okay to feel sad and hurt about a bad review. It's human. I think if I push myself to pretend it doesn't bother me, I'll end up feeling worse.

TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "Josef wrote: "Well first and foremost I'm STILL a reader.

I've been reading books since I was about 4, my mum took me to the library every week. I joined a book club at primary school and would ha..."

the OP asked in their post the question why should authors expect readers to support them if they don't defend readers against badly behaved authors.

What i was answering (as a reader) is that if a member of McDonalds staff is rude to me, I don't expect Burger King's customer service team to deal with it.

Dan Brown is no more obligated to police Stephen Kings behaviour than any independent author is to police others, what i was pointing out is there is no 'us versus them' where you have to choose a camp and defend it at all costs. I see bad behaviour from all walks of life, I don't think method of publication has any bearing on if a person is a good public figure or not - there are plenty of badly behaving A list actors after all.

We're going through a massive period of disruption in the book business, there are a lot of people who have come into the business without really understanding the expected code of conduct by their audience and peers. If readers choose to boycott indie or SP books then that is their free market choice, it's no different than boycotting a restaurant that gives you food poisoning then is rude to you and throws you out of the door.

If the SP industry collapses on itself due to bad author behaviour then books will still exist, great authors will go back to the trad publishers and life will go on.

I have literally no dog in this fight, I'm well aware of how badly some of my peers behave, i shake my head at people who spend more time trying to game amazon rankings than focusing on being a good storyteller, I'd quite like everything to go back to the pre internet age when people were polite to each other, but we are where we are, the people best positioned for policing their supplier behaviour is Amazon, Apple and others, and the body most appropriate for laying down a code of ethics is the authors guild. If you get a bunch of authors who cannot take criticism, rail against their own readers or behave badly then they probably have deeper issues to resolve than worrying about their book sales.

If i have mis-read the purpose of the OP thread then I apologise, if someone would like to point out what the purpose of the thread was that I have misunderstood I will gladly read it.

Dina wrote: "Victoria wrote: "No matter how amazing a book is, it can't completely please everyone. One of the important things a writer has to learn, in my opinion, is to accept that and move on. Read the re..."

Dina,

That's why I say to go and do something to make yourself feel good. You aren't pretending to yourself that it doesn't hurt; it does hurt. Instead, you're pretending it doesn't bother you, then throwing a private pitty party. That way you get to feel bad about it, but without attacking readers for not agreeing with you that your work is awesome.

Victoria,

Yeah. I think by doing something nice for yourself, you're recognizing your pain and helping yourself feel better. And you're right. It's definitely better than attacking readers!

Dina wrote: "Victoria,

Yeah. I think by doing something nice for yourself, you're recognizing your pain and helping yourself feel better. And you're right. It's definitely better than attacking readers!"

Exactly!

Josef,

I'm really loving your posts. I think you're right. We're not obligated as writers to police other writers. However, I think as fellow humans we can speak up when we see someone being attacked and/or treated unfairly. If we see a reviewer getting attacked, it would be nice to speak up in their defense, or at least write them privately and give them support.

I think that applies in both directions. If a reviewer is being attacked for writing a negative, but courteous and honest, review, then they do deserve our support (up to a point; see Josef's burger analogy!). But the opposite can also apply. A bad review is usually just a bad review, but now and again it could be spiteful and/or dishonest.There was the case of a well-known historian who was caught a couple of years ago writing multiple negative reviews of his rivals and posting them on Amazon under an assumed name. In that case he was caught out, but what if he'd gone on doing it? In that situation it's the writer who needs support from their peers.

Mike wrote: "I think that applies in both directions. If a reviewer is being attacked for writing a negative, but courteous and honest, review, then they do deserve our support (up to a point; see Josef's burge..."

Yes! I completely agree. I do NOT think all reviews are okay. Some people are simply being cruel and nasty. Maybe getting revenge for something, or are you say...competing against rivals.

I think people can give negative reviews without being cruel. There's a difference between saying, "I personally hated this book. I was really bored reading it, and couldn't get past the third chapter. It made no sense to me," and saying "This is a horrible book. The writer's a fool for imagining he can write. If there's anyone in the world who likes this book, there's something wrong with them."

Just as there are writers who are under the delusion that they've created a perfect piece of art, and everyone should agree with their opinion; there are people who review books with the belief their opinion is gospel.

ThreeRs (Got Logic?) wrote: "Josef wrote: "TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "Josef wrote: "Well first and foremost I'm STILL a reader.

I've been reading books since I was about 4, my mum took me to the library every week...."

What she said. :)

I agree with you 100 percent. If it's left to continue there won't be a book business, what we'll have is basically a store selling collections of unedited blog posts for 99c.

This post is about number 502. It would be interesting to analyze the discussion for direction and meaning.

Victoria wrote: "No matter how amazing a book is, it can't completely please everyone. One of the important things a writer has to learn, in my opinion, is to accept that and move on. Read the reviews and use any..."

This is too true. I've received bad reviews before, some pointing out problems that I acknowledged and tried to work on, others that were simply a matter of taste or only affected that reader. It's a balancing act. The best you can hope for is that you write the story you want to tell that simultaneously pleases as many people as it possibly can. This can be anywhere from a dozen to thousands, but as long as it's the best that it can be to the largest group of readers who will read it, then there's not much more you can do.

ThreeRs (Got Logic?) wrote: "No, it shouldn't be readers vs. authors, as we have a lot in common. And I don't think it is readers vs. authors. Because I don't believe a true author would want to publish if their book wasn't edited and polished and ready. So it's readers vs. charlatans and hacks. It's readers vs. no talent wannabes with delusions of grandeur and no morals. That those people want to call themselves "authors" is unfortunate, and yet another reason why real authors should be siding with readers to try to boot them out."

I totally agree with this. Thank you.

I think there may be scientific evidence to suggest that there are many people who do not think in their "mind voice" in what most of us would consider to be correct sentence structure. I suspect that many poorly written books are written by those who read these texts and think they are perfectly comprehendable. I'm not speaking of correct spelling or even proper punctuation, I'm talking about sentence structures that appear bewildering to the point that you wonder how someone reading the sentence aloud would not understand the problem. I suspect that they are read aloud by the writer, and that to the writer they are correct.

It's about authors behaving and acting professionally, since that is what the vats majority of SPers aspire to. Behaving professionally means not getting drawn into spats, not turning on your readers, not responding to a critique good, bad or indifferent, other than perhaps to say thank you and leaving it at that.

Yes there may well be the odd review by someone who hasn't even read the book, but suck it up. Any reader who buys and reads your book is engaging with your work. If they opt to engage further by leaving a review is a bonus, even if the review is unflattering. Twenty years ago when I read and loved William Burroughs or Hubert Selby Jnr (and felt utterly engaged with their work) I didn't feel the compunction to write a review and disseminate it. Times have changed, in the same way access to publishing has opened up to all, so does access to reviewing.

ThreeRs (Got Logic?) wrote: "No, it shouldn't be readers vs. authors, as we have a lot in common. And I don't think it is readers vs. authors. Because I don't believe a true author would want to publish if their book wasn't edited and polished and ready. So it's readers vs. charlatans and hacks. It's readers vs. no talent wannabes with delusions of grandeur and no morals. That those people want to call themselves "authors" is unfortunate, and yet another reason why real authors should be siding with readers to try to boot them out..."

As a reader I've interacted with TPAs, at times with good results and at times with bad. The same is true with SPAs.

While I can agree with parts of your original thesis, I can't say I agree with all of it. The reason is readers come in all flavors just as writers do; some are good, some are bad, and some can get very ugly.

Self-policing sounds nice, but the reality of what you're suggesting is a bit different -- it's called vigilantism. Vigilantes, in the long-term, rarely dispense justice.

An alternate view is that personal self-control and good personal ethics is what is needed, but that is a suggestion that holds true in all professions.

As Richard said: "But yeah, anti-social behavior is something everyone should be concerned about -- and not just about a few authors behaving badly."

When my neighbor has his work-buddies over for a drunk-fest, odds are one of them will say something rude to my wife. This concerns me because the very 'children' getting rude provide security where I live, and they feel the rules of civilized behavior don't apply to them. Should I cudgel the next malefactor into submission? Somehow I don't think I'd fair well in court if I were to get vigilant even though I should have the right to defend my wife and child.

Solve the bigger problem of people and their societies acting badly, and most of the problems of authors acting badly will go away whether they're traditional, hybrid, or self-published. Good luck with that.

R.F.G. wrote: "As Richard said: "But yeah, anti-social behavior is something everyone should be concerned about -- and not just about a few authors behaving badly."..."
Amen to that one. Culture has deteriorated across the board. And although I have no experience with a misbehaving author, most of them are probably not even a real authors, just people who are convinced that their dribble needs to be "out there" and are just posing as authors. That's why they react so badly when people tell them they can't write worth a damn.

R.F.G. wrote: "Self-policing sounds nice, but the reality of what you're suggesting is a bit different -- it's called vigilantism. Vigilantes, in the long-term, rarely dispense justice."

This, in spades.

I stand on what I said earlier in the thread: the only person we can control is the one we see in the mirror. I can say to people until I'm blue in the face, "do *not* respond to a review," but at the end of the day I cannot stop them.

Julie wrote: "Has anyone ever just browsed around and noticed that there seem to be people who sit and wait for anyone to start a forum topic on authors on Amazon or other sites and attempt to attack and discred..."

Julie, buy some thick skin. The problem with the internet is that it gives everyone an equal voice and that is way too much for some level of intelligence and integrity. Think of it that way: Take any three mile stretch of busy Interstate highway. Within that population there is a certain likelihood that a serial killer is behind the wheel. When we pull out into traffic we're exposing ourselves to the possibility of some very unsavory and frightening contact. It's probably worse on the Internet. Computers are cheaper than cars and they don't require a driver's license or even any particular level of intelligence.

The life of a writer is somewhat brutal and depressing. It may not be too late to opt out for Paint By Numbers. And, of course, Julie, that was a joke. A writer is someone who gets knocked down, beat up, wounded and still picks up the pen and writes, because that's what they do.

ScaryBob

Julie wrote: "Reading your post I realize that no matter how engaged I have been, how thrilled with a book I never considered blogging or posting reviews ..."

A reviewer has never been anything but a guy with an opinion. I remember reading an article by a TV reviewer back when the "reality" programs were just coming to the fore and the internet was in its infancy, who was lamenting the fact that "crap like this is gaining traction because people are ignoring the opinions of qualified critics [paraphrase];" in other words, I'm smarter than you are, so you need to listen to me! I'm no fan of reality garbage myself, but dude, get over yourself!

A review is an opinion, nothing more nor less, and it helps me choose a book from among a vast sea of otherwise random titles. For example, I like steampunk. Well, steampunk contains stories that focus on the technology, or the constructed worlds, some contain paranormal influences, some are detective stories, some are romances, you get the idea... If I can look at a book title here or on amazon and see it carrying a 4-star average after 1,000 reviews, that is far more helpful to me than to open a newspaper and see that J. Puffington Blowhard, Critic at Large, did or didn't like it. It's like the difference between a democracy and a dictatorship; I'll take the democracy, thank you...

Julie wrote: "Reading your post I realize that no matter how engaged I have been, how thrilled with a book I never considered blogging or posting reviews. It's become the norm and I find myself trying to move along ..."

I think it really comes down to: "because we can." I never had any urge to write reviews either when I was younger; I'd just discuss books with a few friends, and nothing more. But when I finally had internet at home, boy, did I embrace it fully, and I haven't stopped since. I wouldn't be surprised if most people who write reviews, here or wherever else, do so for similar reasons: because they can. Human beings in general like having their opinions heard, and I'm not surprised this outlet works as well as any other for that.

Also, reviews pre-internet age weren't as easy to get. You'd buy a couple of magazines, sure, but you couldn't buy them all. Well, at least I couldn't, I didn't have the money. If I really wanted to cross-compare critiques about basically anything, I had to sit at the library, hogging a pile of magazines, and put more work into that than I wanted. In other words, I never did it, but I admit I'm a lazy bum; as soon as internet made this easy, I embraced it just like I did the rest.

And, as Jack wrote, now that I do have the opportunity to check readers' reviews, not only those written by this or that famous critic, I find it more helpful. Hundreds of opinions help me narrow it down much better than just a couple.

So, as far as I'm concerned: because I can. :)

Julie wrote: "Jack wrote: "Julie wrote: "Reading your post I realize that no matter how engaged I have been, how thrilled with a book I never considered blogging or posting reviews ..."

A reviewer has never bee..."

Sorry, Julie, if that came across as harsh. In your last sentence you said, "This whole topic is very interesting to me now." I was just utilizing that democracy to offer you one person's view. I only hope you got something out of it.

Yzabel wrote: ""Because I can..."

Yzabel, I have read your posts on several threads I've been following, but haven't addressed you directly until now. Just want to say it's very impressive how you cut through all the noise and get right to the heart of an issue. "Because we can" sums up the situation elegantly. People do like to be heard, and this is where the whole world comes to do it.

Nice job!

A book of mine (HELL'S GATE) had two, five star reviews written up by two readers I had no connection with. They made me feel on top of the world. There were no more reviews added for several weeks until someone posted a nine word comment and gave me a one star review. Why did that reader bother? Sometimes the review says more about the reviewer than the book.

Michael wrote: "A book of mine (HELL'S GATE) had two, five star reviews written up by two readers I had no connection with. They made me feel on top of the world. There were no more reviews added for several weeks..."

So true. I was hospitalized when my giveaway came due, and one of the winners gave me a one-star review because she hadn't received the book in a timely manner. How do you review a book you've never seen? Oh well. As you say, says more about her than me...

Chris wrote: "C. wrote: The problem with the internet is that it gives everyone an equal voice

Actually the problem with the internet is simply the noise level. It's like being at a party: everyone is speaking..."

So true, Chris. There's a lot of talkers on the internet. Much less listeners. That's why I'm liking this community (so far). People seem to actually listen, even if they don't always agree with each other.

One other thing: Sorry to ask this here. But is there a way to quote from someone else's post...not the beginning, but something specifically?

Dina wrote: "There's a lot of talkers on the internet. Much less listeners. That's why I'm liking this community (so far). People seem to actually listen, even if they don't always agree with each other..."

The smart ones listen whether they agree or not, the others not so much. Part of being a member in a community is the exchange of ideas, unfortunately some believe the exchange is one-way only, theirs.

Dina wrote: "...is there a way to quote from someone else's post...not the beginning, but something specifically?"

Copy and Paste, m'dear, Copy and Paste...

Jack wrote: "Julie wrote: "Reading your post I realize that no matter how engaged I have been, how thrilled with a book I never considered blogging or posting reviews ..."

A reviewer has never been anything bu..."
I strongly agree with this. The opinions of 1,000 people who have (mostly) bought the book are one hell of a lot more useful than that of one person in a newspaper, who may or may not have read the book properly. Just now publishing is adapting to a brave new world, but I hope that, in the end, we're going to like it.

Julie wrote: "C. wrote: "Julie wrote: "Has anyone ever just browsed around and noticed that there seem to be people who sit and wait for anyone to start a forum topic on authors on Amazon or other sites and atte..."

"ScaryBob is a great name for someone so encouraging :)"

When I have the opportunity I like to tell about the origin of my nickname. It's a cute story and my imagination is dark and scary place, so cute is a little like a day off.

My wife and I moved into a condo in Bowling Green, Ohio. The master bedroom was upstairs in a loft and Mary voiced her desire to have our downstairs bedroom. It took me about that long to claim that loft as my writing and video game room. It was actually a beautiful room with an L shaped stairs leading to it. Double windows on the landing provided an abundance of light.

Not only did my claim stick, she left the decorating up to a horror writer. I had gargoyles, scary paintings, hanging plants. It think you get the picture.

Two of our granddaughters, probably 9 and 11 were visiting. I was in my loft either writing or killing things on the PlayStation. The girls were on the landing under the double windows, the very gateway to my kingdom, playing quietly.

Eventually it was time to take the girls home. We dropped them off, waived to their parents and pulled away. We hadn't gone very far when Mary turned to me and said she had something to tell me, but I had to swear that I would never speak of it. She had made her own promise.

I crossed my heart and swore to take the secret to my grave.

She then explained the made-up game the girls were playing under the double windows. It all had to do with them protecting the world from a horror named Grandpa Evil.

Oh my God, I loved it. I wanted to use it, but a promise was a promise. Afterward my imagination rewarded me for my integrity and ScaryBob was born.

ScaryBob

C. wrote: "I crossed my heart and swore to take the secret to my grave.

She then explained the made-up game the girls were playing under the double windows. It all had to do with them protecting the world from a horror named Grandpa Evil.

Oh my God, I loved it. I wanted to use it, but a promise was a promise. Afterward my imagination rewarded me for my integrity and ScaryBob was born.

ScaryBob "

I take it the Evile Council eventually stamped the confession with its officiale seal of approval -- children are so much creative because their worlds are full of magic.