Aussie Readers discussion

This is just kinda for fun....But I was just looking at my profile and I'm one of those people who doesn't always agree with the star rating system here SO I may rate my books harder than others....I truly wish there was a feature where you could give a half star...


Anyways...So, I found out my rating for books overall is 3.57% average. What about you? Do you find the system here a little hard to agree with or are you happy with how it goes? I think if I was able to give a half star my actual rating would be a lot truer!

Mine's 3.58.

Good thread Laura:) A lot, lot of people would like half star ratings but GR doesn't appear to be able to (at the moment anyway)

Mine is 4.29% - I must read a lot of books I love:)

I can be a harsh critic - mine is 3.45 at the moment.

mine is 4.35, almost the same as yours, Brenda, same reason, probably

Andrea wrote: "I can be a harsh critic - mine is 3.45 at the moment."

Yeah but is that "harshness" due to not being able to give half stars?

Mine is 3.86.

How do I find this out?

Go to your profile page Kiera and on the LHS you'll see (under your profile pic) # of ratings with the average in brackets...

Phrynne wrote: "Mine is 3.86."

Snap! Me too, but I give some 3.5 or 4.5 - I'm so indecisive. I with there were a way to rank within genres somehow.

I mean a 5★ light rural romance or quick myster which is a briefly satisfying fun read hardly equates to a 5★ literary prize-winner, which is an overall much better book that might change the world or the way people think.

Whether it's as much fun to read is another question!

Okay, my average is 4.10. There aren't many books I don't dislike. Lol. I have very eclectic tastes.

Mine is 3.83 and I would love to have half star ratings....I do add them in when I rate books for our Challenges.

I think a lot of us do that Kim - it's a shame they're not "officially" recognised!

My rating is 3.6. I think I rate them hard. I would like to give half stars.

A book has to really 'knock me over' to get five stars.

PattyMacDotComma wrote: "Phrynne wrote: "Mine is 3.86."

Snap! Me too, but I give some 3.5 or 4.5 - I'm so indecisive. I with there were a way to rank within genres somehow.

I mean a 5★ light rural romance or quick myster..."

SO true! Which is why the rating system is kinda fun too...Kinda mixed.

For me to give a true 5 it really has to be something which is why I stick with a 4 but others wouldn't agree to that which is also fair enough.

Mine is 4.22
I rate books according to genre. If it's a light romance or suspense or young adult and it delivers on those areas I will rate highly. Although I must say I'm pretty easy to please.

I read somewhere recently someone from Goodreads posting that they will never have half star ratings.

Laura wrote: "Andrea wrote: "I can be a harsh critic - mine is 3.45 at the moment." Yeah but is that "harshness" due to not being able to give half stars?"

Probably a bit. I rated something 2.5 today and rounded down, and when I did that I was thinking to myself how inconsistent I can be with my rounding. Sometimes up, sometimes down.

Yes, so do I Andrea. It depends whether I feel the book was closer to one or the other.

Michael wrote: "Yeah Veronica, they have a post addressing that in the feedback group and Otis made it abundantly clear that it own't be happening. Then again i also thought numbers for the pages at the top would ..."

Haha, maybe the powers that be can be broken down over time.

My average is 3.35. I also give half-stars, unofficially, of course. I don't think my rating is close to average because of the half stars, or lack thereof (although I do round my half stars down), because I can't imagine an extra half a star here or there would make a lot of difference - I think I'm just a bit picky with my ratings - and 3 stars still means "I liked it", whereas 4 is a bit more special because "I really liked it".

Has anyone read the thread in the feedback group about people wanting or not wanting half-stars (I think it was probably started before Otis' post about half stars)? I haven't read it lately, but boy, does the idea of half-stars cause a lot of angst for some people!! I would like it, but can cope with not having it and just assign half-stars in my reviews anyway, but for some of these people commenting it sounds like a major problem one way or the other.

I remember someone said that if half-stars were ever brought in, they would leave GR because they simply wouldn't be able to go back and rate their previously read books according to whether they need an extra or less half a star (too many books and not enough time), but they couldn't leave their ratings as they are, knowing that the books they've already read would then be wrongly rated.

Kathryn wrote: "I remember someone said that if half-stars were ever brought in, they would leave GR because they simply wouldn't be able to go back and rate their previously read books according to whether they need an extra or less half a star (too many books and not enough time), but they couldn't leave their ratings as they are, knowing that the books they've already read would then be wrongly rated. ..."

Oh for goodness sake! Some people take it too seriously!! It's supposed to be an enjoyable past-time! lol

Brenda wrote: "Kathryn wrote: "I remember someone said that if half-stars were ever brought in, they would leave GR because they simply wouldn't be able to go back and rate their previously read books according t..."

To be fair - there may be things that frustrate me that they would be much more laid-back about. To each their own, I guess.

That's true! Some people are so passionate about some things though, and not necessarily in a good way!

Yes, since it's been this way for so long, it might create difficulties in ratings if everyone tried to go back and re-rate the books they'd read.

I wonder if the rating takes in books not starred because they haven't been read or just weren't starred?

Mine is 4.25%. I'm one of those person though who want give a book a single star, and not sure if I have given two stars. I would prefer to just ignore that I've read a modern book that I don't like.

I haven't yet given a book only one star. I think for a book to get one star from me I'd have to not be able to finish it, and while there have been some books in that category, I don't believe in rating books I haven't finished as I don't think it's fair. What if it improved?

Mine is 4.0. I try to only give 5s to special books and rarely give less than a 3. I think that's because I've read fewer books that I don't like since joining GR as it's been a while since I came across a book I thought was really bad enough to give a 2.

I'm a little with Lynne, I guess why I don't rate books under 3 is because most I won't complete and if I don't complete a book it does seem unfair to rate it badly because I couldn't get past the first paragraph or chapter or whatever.

Apparently my average is 3.29. I think I am a tough judge but apparently not...I have been lucky enough this year to have a lot of 5 star books

yep double checking confirms that this year over half my books are 4 or 5 star

3.30. I thought I was the toughest critic here, but Stef just beats me.

Thanks for restoring me to a sense that I am a tough critic. Just gave a book 2 stars today because I really, really couldn't summon up any liking for it (but if didn;t actively offend me so I couldn't give it one)

Mine is 4.07, I wonder if it considers half ratings when the total is being calculated?
I am very selective with what I read and try only to choose books I know I will like...life is too short to read just everything...so my ratings are fairly consistent.

I really hate being duped, or finding that I have been duped, so if I find a book is so far removed from it's blurb that it is total bs...then I will give my honest opinion and rate it accordingly low.

One thing that I really detest in a book [of fiction] is propaganda, ie; when the author chooses to push an agenda which may or may not be relevant to the story, but which causes the reader to have to sift through the opinions (even with statistics) of that author on said subject. It might be political or it might be social issues of which details are not necessary to a work of fiction.

So, regardless of my political or social leanings on a subject being promoted, I will always rate such a book very low, because I think it is a low form of propaganda, and misleading the reader about the true agenda of the book.
If and when I want that, I will read the paper or watch the news...or read the relevant books.

Don't you think every book is political anyway Julie? Even if it is usually only the politics of the status quo?

Stef wrote: "Don't you think every book is political anyway Julie? Even if it is usually only the politics of the status quo?"

One book springs immediately to mind Stef, but I gave such a serving to with my rating at the time that I don't want to do it again here.

It's more than just being political, it's when a book suddenly turns from being an interesting work of fiction, to downright propaganda which are clearly the personal opinions of the author. I might even agree with them on the subject, but I don't want to be force fed something which I didn't choose to read at that time or in that book.

Another book I recently read, which was a murder/mystery, started sprouting pages of statistical information on the effects of waste in our oceans and global warming...which is interesting in its place, and was partially relevant to the story...but was just over the top and way too much information as it caused me to lose the thread of the story...and also my interest in it.

Yes, authors need to be careful with things like that. It's called author intrusion. Sure, we usually write about things we're passionate about, but we also need to know where to draw the line when it comes to including things like that. If it doesn't serve the story it should be left out.

I think I understand. Some people call it info dump as well. The book should be above all entertainment

No, info dumping is more when you supply large quantities of information at one time without a break. Author intrusion is when information is included that seems like the author pushing an agenda, rather than something that is strictly related to the story.

Yeah ok I can see that

Lynne wrote: "No, info dumping is more when you supply large quantities of information at one time without a break. Author intrusion is when information is included that seems like the author pushing an agenda, ..."

Yes it was exactly like that Lynne, it totally put me off that author as it occurred many times throughout the book.

Yeah, that's not great. Their editor should have nipped that in the bud.

Mine is 3.52 apparently.

Nice to see you back Liam!

Mine is 3.75 - I mostly pick books I know I'll like - my average was 3.2 a few years back so I think this shows I am heading along the lines of reading to please me so the average is going up

I'm on and off Goodreads at the moment :P haven't been keeping up with AR stuff.

Liam wrote: "I'm on and off Goodreads at the moment :P haven't been keeping up with AR stuff."

Hope that means you're doing something really good!!!

Ha, yeah... definitely not just lazing around the house.

LOL!

My average is 4.12.

I'm a "high marker", but then I tend to only rate books I feel passionately about one way or the other. For me, books are one star (a complete waste of paper); four stars (great!); or five stars (fantastic!). I rarely give a book two or three stars.

Liam wrote: "Ha, yeah... definitely not just lazing around the house."

Story of my life. Deferred uni until February, doing nothing and loving every moment haha