Navigating Indieworld Discussing All Things Indie discussion

OK, so I recently released a new novel, "Primal Nature." Getting my ducks in a row before I do a marketing push, so I don't expect sales and reviews yet.

Therefore, I was surprised when I saw "Primal Nature" had a new rating on Goodreads - two stars. Definitely not encouraging, and there was no accompanying review. I clicked on the person's profile to see if I could learn anything about their aesthetics, and what I saw vexed me - to put it nicely.

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/5...

The sole purpose of this account seems to be to give sci-fi novels low ratings. Looking at the dates of the posted reviews, I find it hard to believe this person (bot?) reads this swiftly. Even if they do, it's extremely unlikely they'd have a 2.25 average through 322 ratings. No one is that picky.

Normally I don't kvetch about reviews. Everyone has different tastes and expectations, and complaining alienates readers if they happen to come across your comments, and makes you look thin-skinned in general.

But this appears to be troll account, or a bot - if such a thing is possible on Goodreads - and I certainly don't want someone screwing around with my books (or anyone else's books) just for the lulz.

Should I email Goodreads about this issue? Would they even care? Has anyone here had similar experiences? Am I totally off base, and this is a real person who just hates everything? Any insight is appreciated.

I have one of these, too. Not the same "reviewer" but seems similar. 1-star, no text review, has over 1000 ratings but only 2 reviews, a "top 10" reviewer. Yours is "top 25." I wonder if they spam ratings just to move up the ranks.

That is so unfair and wrong!

I found some discussion on this issue here on Goodreads. Very dated discussion, but....

Apparently some people use the rating system to classify their interest in a particular book, not to actually review the book. Therefore, my two star review could mean they're not really interested in my book.

Nothing to be done about it. As long as they're not breaking Goodreads's terms, they can use the rating system for any purpose they like. I see no mention of this in the terms, so I assume they're in the clear.

Perhaps Goodreads could take a look at how the system should work and how it actually does. No point in having a system of star ratings if some people choose (as is their right at the moment) to ignore how it works.Perhaps authors ought to be allowed to opt out of a broken system. If it is deemed broken, that is.

We get those all the time and I know they haven't read the book. I think it's bots. Matt's explanation makes sense, too.

Matt wrote: "OK, so I recently released a new novel, "Primal Nature." Getting my ducks in a row before I do a marketing push, so I don't expect sales and reviews yet.

Therefore, I was surprised when I saw "Pri..."

Hard to say what's going on with Harold (assuming the name is real). According to his 2018 stats page, he's read 186 books so far this year. He's given 4 5-star reviews, 4 4-star reviews, 76 3-star reviews (if I counted right), 87 2-star reviews, 9 1-star reviews, and left 6 unrated. The spread is definitely heavy on 2-star reviews, but I wouldn't say this is necessarily a sham account. It could just be a voracious reader who doesn't give 4 or 5 stars unless a book really stands out in his mind. His 2017 and 2016 spreads are similar, although there aren't enough books in 2016 to say much.

What might be odd is that he's reported reading just over 20 books per month this year. Some of those might have been books started at the tail end of last year, but even so, that's a pretty heavy pace. He'd have to finish a book every 1 to 2 days to keep that up. That's possible for a fast reader with little else on their plate but could be considered questionable.

No, I don't believe this person has read the entire book. They may have read 30 or so pages, then given it a rating, but completion? Nah.

Well, nothing to be done about it. I could message the person, but that would likely generate ill will, if they are flesh-and-blood and not a bot. Just gotta roll with the punches....

Matt wrote: "Well, nothing to be done about it. I could message the person, but that would likely generate ill will, if they are flesh-and-blood and not a bot. Just gotta roll with the punches.... "

Exactly. Besides, a low rating isn't actually a bad thing. Not everyone will like every book, nor will everyone hate every book. A spread of ratings is normal and an indication that both your work and your reviews are not shams. If you got all 5-stars or all 1-stars, that would indicate something questionable going on.

Congratulations! A low review or two helps make your book look more real and genuine when all the five stars pour in.

C.L's right, you know.

She is absolutely right!!

Thanks, ya'll. I'd rather nuke the spammers and bots, but I suppose I should channel my energy into more productive endeavors. Like, you know, WRITING.