Review Group discussion

89 views
Finished rounds > Group 304. Clean - Mod. Loralee

Comments Showing 51-100 of 236 (236 new)    post a comment »

message 51: by E.M. (new)

E.M. Swift-Hook | 3487 comments Gene wrote: "There's no sex, and I'm not sure how to define "graphic violence" to be honest. Basically, the hero gets beaten up pretty badly in one scene. I'll gladly withdraw if this is too much."

I think that might cross the 'clean' line, unfortunately, Gene.


message 52: by Gene, Admin (new)

Gene Kendall | 1207 comments Mod
Understood. Thanks!


message 53: by Loralee, Admin (new)

Loralee (loraleeevans) | 2377 comments Mod
Here's a definition of "Graphic Violence" you can use to gauge if your book has it or not:

"Graphic violence refers to depiction of especially vivid, brutal and realistic acts of violence..."


message 54: by P.L. (last edited Mar 23, 2022 02:04PM) (new)

P.L. Tavormina | 282 comments I admit I have struggled with this line myself. It's hard to write SFF without at least a few punches thrown if not a sword or ray-gun of some sort. On the other hand, I'm content to be in the other groups so even though I think several of my books might be clean, I opt out of this group.


message 55: by E.M. (new)

E.M. Swift-Hook | 3487 comments P.L. wrote: "I admit I have struggled with this line myself. It's hard to write SFF without at least a few punches thrown if not a sword of ray-gun of some sort. On the other hand, I'm content to be in the othe..."

I think if it is not going into graphic detail one is fine - 'He fired the ray gun and the alien fell over' kind of thing is fine. A description of how the alien's innards explode in gory detail, is not.
A good guide is to think would you be happy with a child imagining it.
Same with sex. A romantic kiss and walking off hand in hand is fine, going into insert tab A into slot B, isn't.


message 56: by Dorothy (last edited Mar 23, 2022 02:47PM) (new)

Dorothy Mbori (dmbori24) | 83 comments Hi,

I would like to join with my book, The Quest: Journey to the Golden City.

I just finished review round 299 and just waiting for my amazon link to be posted. I have already submitted my Goodreads link. Is it ok for me to join this round, or do I have to wait for the Amazon link to post before I join this group?

I have read a few of Loralee's books, Puppies and portals, Kits and Cubbyholes, and Felicity, a sparrow tale. I won't mind reading another one of her books if it's ok. Anne Birdgenaw has read both of my books, but I should be in her blindspot if you put me in number nine.

Here is a link to my book and author page

https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09P4RGLNQ

Please let me know if I can join.

Thank you,
Dorothy


message 57: by E.M. (new)

E.M. Swift-Hook | 3487 comments Welcome Dorothy - do keep checking back frequently as we are going to roll soon.


message 58: by Ian (new)

Ian Welch | 71 comments No conflicts that I can see apart from already mentioned Loralee


message 59: by Amanda (new)

Amanda Stuntz | 63 comments I would love to join this round with my book, New Hope, if there is still room.

Book: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6...
Profile: https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...


message 60: by Loralee, Admin (last edited Mar 27, 2022 09:24AM) (new)

Loralee (loraleeevans) | 2377 comments Mod
Hi, Amanda! Have you reviewed or been reviewed by any of the other people on the list?

Also, can you confirm that your book fits within the standards of a Clean review round?
This from the first post: "Fiction and non-fiction, adult and children's books are acceptable.
No explicit violence or explicit sexual situations."


message 61: by Amanda (new)

Amanda Stuntz | 63 comments It doesn't look like I have reviewed anyone or been reviewed by anyone.

Yes, it is a clean romance. No explicit violence or explicit sex scenes.


message 62: by E.M. (new)

E.M. Swift-Hook | 3487 comments Welcome Amanda.

Everyone - please post to tell me if you have reviewed any of the four people above you on the list (the list wraps around so (10) is 'above' (1) ). Please also check that if you have already reviewed any of the four people 'below' you on the list they have more books available that you have not yet reviewed and post to tell me if they have not.

Remember that you can check if you have reviewed anyone before by going to your reviews through your profile (the link is under your portrait), and searching their name. You can check if someone has reviewed you in the same way through their profile and searching for your name.
Please check all those who are the 4 above and 4 below you.
If you have no review clashes - or if you are scheduled to review someone who you have reviewed before but can see they have another book available just post 'Good to go :)' or words to that effect.

When everyone has posted 'Good to go' we will be :)

If you are new to these rounds do not worry, full instructions will be provided at every stage.


message 63: by M.C. (new)

M.C. Harrison | 26 comments Good to go


message 64: by Loralee, Admin (new)

Loralee (loraleeevans) | 2377 comments Mod
I am good to go!


message 65: by Nicki (new)

Nicki Snyder | 37 comments Good to go :)

-Nicki


message 66: by Amanda (new)

Amanda Stuntz | 63 comments Good to go!


message 67: by David (new)

David Gordon | 310 comments Good to go.


message 68: by Ann (new)

Ann Birdgenaw (annbirdgenaw) | 358 comments good to go


message 69: by Dorothy (new)

Dorothy Mbori (dmbori24) | 83 comments Good to go.


message 70: by E.M. (new)

E.M. Swift-Hook | 3487 comments Thanks to those who have already checked in. Still need to hear from Nataša, T.N. and Ian.


message 71: by Ian (new)

Ian Welch | 71 comments Good to go


message 72: by E.M. (new)

E.M. Swift-Hook | 3487 comments Thanks Ian - I have messaged Nataša and T.N. so hopefully they will respond here shortly.


message 73: by T.N. (new)

T.N. Traynor | 51 comments Sorry for the delay, I've been away from the computer for a while.
Yes, good to go :)


message 74: by E.M. (new)

E.M. Swift-Hook | 3487 comments T.N. wrote: "Sorry for the delay, I've been away from the computer for a while.
Yes, good to go :)"


Thanks T.N. :)


message 75: by Cat (new)

Cat Green | 35 comments Hello my book is a very clean cozy no violence or sex.


message 76: by Cat (new)

Cat Green | 35 comments I would like to join this round. My profile is here. https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...

The book Poisoned in Provence is a clean cozy mystery, no violence profanity or sex. I have reviewed in another group before


message 77: by E.M. (new)

E.M. Swift-Hook | 3487 comments Cat wrote: "I would like to join this round. My profile is here. https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...

The book Poisoned in Provence is a clean cozy mystery, no violence profanity or sex. I..."


I can't promise you a place as we are still waiting to hear back from Nataša. However, if she doesn't respond by the end of the weekend there will be a free spot and you are in pole position for it.
That said, once this round starts new rounds will be opening up soon after so please keep checking back.


message 78: by Cat (new)

Cat Green | 35 comments Thank you!


message 79: by M.C. (new)

M.C. Harrison | 26 comments If Cat Green does join the group, I have no conflicts with regard to reading or reviewing her work. I thought I'd say that ahead of time.


message 80: by Loralee, Admin (new)

Loralee (loraleeevans) | 2377 comments Mod
Cat, looking at the list, can you see if anyone else in the group has reviewed you, or is there anyone whom you have reviewed before?

I haven't reviewed or been reviewed by Cat myself.


message 81: by Kat (new)

Kat (katwiththehat) | 2277 comments Cat, also because you write under multiple pen names, please post links to all your GR accounts so that people can check each of your accounts and make sure they haven't reviewed you or been reviewed by you :)


message 82: by Loralee, Admin (new)

Loralee (loraleeevans) | 2377 comments Mod
Cat, as Kat requested, (that sounds funny out loud!) will you post links to all your Goodreads accounts, so we can make sure there aren’t any conflicts, in case you are able to join this group? Reviewing someone who has reviewed you before, or being reviewed by someone you have reviewed is against the ethos of these review groups. What matters is the individual person, regardless of different pen names.


message 83: by Cat (new)

Cat Green | 35 comments Loralee wrote: "Cat, as Kat requested, (that sounds funny out loud!) will you post links to all your Goodreads accounts, so we can make sure there aren’t any conflicts, in case you are able to join this group? Rev..."

Yes doing this now. My Cat profile you have I will post Sass Green in the next reply.


message 84: by Cat (new)

Cat Green | 35 comments This is my Sass Green profile. I had four reviewers in that one and had reviewed four books. None here I recognize.

https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...


message 85: by Cat (new)

Cat Green | 35 comments Kat wrote: "Cat, also because you write under multiple pen names, please post links to all your GR accounts so that people can check each of your accounts and make sure they haven't reviewed you or been review..."


thanks https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...


message 86: by Cat (new)

Cat Green | 35 comments Cat wrote: "Loralee wrote: "Cat, as Kat requested, (that sounds funny out loud!) will you post links to all your Goodreads accounts, so we can make sure there aren’t any conflicts, in case you are able to join..."


https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...


message 87: by E.M. (new)

E.M. Swift-Hook | 3487 comments As it has been a week since we moved to the checking phase and Nataša still hasn't responded to PM or here on the thread I have removed her from the group and added Cat.

Unfortunately, this means everyone has to check their clashes again, just to be extra sure - and if Cat is now set to review or be reviewed by you please check the other profiles she linked as well. If you have forgotten what to do re-read Message 62 ;)

If you are still good to go please post that you are.

Thanks :)


message 88: by David (new)

David Gordon | 310 comments Good to go.


message 89: by Amanda (new)

Amanda Stuntz | 63 comments good to go


message 90: by Cat (new)

Cat Green | 35 comments Thanks .... grateful. I will check back for further instructions


message 91: by Ann (new)

Ann Birdgenaw (annbirdgenaw) | 358 comments good to go


message 92: by M.C. (new)

M.C. Harrison | 26 comments good to go


message 93: by Loralee, Admin (new)

Loralee (loraleeevans) | 2377 comments Mod
I am good to go. No conflicts with Cat on either of the profiles she's posted.


message 94: by Cat (new)

Cat Green | 35 comments Thanks all! Loralee it's been a year since I've last done this so if you can suggest the next steps I should take that is greeat.


message 95: by Loralee, Admin (new)

Loralee (loraleeevans) | 2377 comments Mod
Once everyone confirms they’re good to go, EM will post some more instructions. Then you’ll contact the people you’re to review and the people who will be reviewing you to get started.


message 96: by T.N. (new)

T.N. Traynor | 51 comments I'm good to go :)


message 97: by Dorothy (new)

Dorothy Mbori (dmbori24) | 83 comments I'm good to go.


message 98: by Loralee, Admin (new)

Loralee (loraleeevans) | 2377 comments Mod
Waiting on Nicki and Ian to post "good to go". I've messaged them, so hopefully they'll post soon, and we'll be able to get started! :)


message 99: by Ian (new)

Ian Welch | 71 comments Yes, good to go.


message 100: by Cat (new)

Cat Green | 35 comments Loralee wrote: "Once everyone confirms they’re good to go, EM will post some more instructions. Then you’ll contact the people you’re to review and the people who will be reviewing you to get started."

Thanks will wait then.


back to top