Harnessing the community

[Fishbowl Helmet]

Whether we individually read, enjoy, or bother with reviews when selecting our own reading material is almost beside the point. The vast majority of readers seem to care as it's the internet version of word-of-mouth (along with chatting up books on social media) and the actual retail sites such as Amazon use the star-rating and number of reviews in their algorithms.

If we're talking about helping others boost the signal of their projects, then high-star reviews are an amazing way to do that.

 

[Parson]

Same here. I don't see much, if any, critical analysis in most 5* reviews. Usually they offer little more than gushing enthusiasm about a favourite character, or unabashed fan worship of the author. And a culture has grown up around ratings where anything less than a 5* is a penalty in the contest of overall ratings, so if you like a book at all it's your duty to give it 5*. I regard reviewers who throw around 5* like candy with a jaundiced eye. I'm a cranky, fussy reader, and appreciate reviewers who are the same. In my experience, 3* and 4* reviews are much more likely to offer critical analysis.

I certainly would not agree. There are 5* ratings that qualify, but like Teresa I have often found that they are the ones who have actually read the book. I do review a few books on Amazon --- Probably 25? --- or about 1 in 6 that I read. Unless I really love it, I give it 4*'s I want to save the 5* rating for really exceptional books. But I've been re-evaluating that and haven't done a review in a while because of my thinking. When I look at a new book on line (almost all of my book buying is on line) there are 3 things I consider. #1 by far is "Have I read this author before?" For good or ill, this is the most telling. But #2 is "What is the rating for this book and how many ratings does it have?" Any book with less than a 4.3 rating is on seriously shaky ground, and any book with less than a 100 ratings worries me. (So am I doing a favor by rating a book 4* when too many of those kinds of ratings would cause me to look askance at the offering?) #3 The title, blurb, and cover; If the first 2 look probable then these might be the deciding factors but they don't come into play until the first two have been satisfied.

So (he gets to his point at long last) do I do my author, and especially my author friend, any service by reviewing the book and giving it a 4* rating for a book that I thought was pretty good?

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Interesting, because I'm going through the same thought pattern (although I'm generally okay looking at books with 3.8 and above ratings.) But I choose my books mostly through the bookshelf, the library or word of mouth and rarely look at ratings until after I've read it (usually to see if they agree, it's more a fun thing.) I have to say, based on this thread, I'll be inclined to up my ratings a little.

But, that's always the problem with a points related quality system - one person's 2 is another person's 3, even if they liked the book about the same as each other. But if the benchmarking looks to be high - and that's what it appears from this and other thread - then not to come into line with that makes a review seem unfair. Hmmm. Hard one.

 

[TheDustyZebra]

I totally read the title as 'harassing the community'.

I swear I just came here to say the exact same thing.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I shy away from anything with less than a four star rating, unless it's an older pre-amazon book and only has a couple of ratings, in which case I'm less likely to be swayed by what two or three strangers have to say, or unless it's by an author I generally like pretty well and I am really bored and desperate for something to read. 3.5 is my lower limit no matter how bored I am.

 

[Mouse]

I swear I just came here to say the exact same thing.

Get out of my brain, freak!

Re reviews. I think they're different on Goodreads. 3 stars = good. 2 stars = ok. If you hover your cursor over the stars, it tells you. I do read reviews because I'm quite fussy about what I like and I don't have much money to spend on something I might not like. One star reviews are my fave. (Of other people's stuff. I'll weep when I get one!)

 

[HareBrain]

I swear I've read "harnessing" all day, and just now it said "harvesting the community".

I'm off to bed.

And those kidneys are mine!

 

[Dan Jones]

One can usually tell by the style and tone of the reviewer whether it's one to pay attention to. If the review is quite prejudiced or just uses very high-level, broad criticisms (the story was dull, the characters didn't work) then I tend not to pay much attention to it. A reviewer who takes the time to post something a bit more thoughtful is probably more worth the time to read.

So I tend to look for good quality reviews and go on that.

But the problem with reviews is that we're all subject to confirmation bias - I've frequently found myself looking for good reviews that tell me what I want to hear. If I really want to buy a book, I sometimes look for the good reviews to convince myself of my own sound judgment...

 

[Dan Jones]

In my experience, 3* and 4* reviews are much more likely to offer critical analysis.

I think this is probably true.

And I look out for these especially if I'm looking at a self-published book. I've not come across many (if any) SP books worthy of a 5-star, exceptional rating.

 

[HareBrain]

I've not come across many (if any) SP books worthy of a 5-star, exceptional rating.

Doesn't stop them getting them, though -- mostly from reviewers with at most a handful of other reviews, to no one's very great surprise.

I was interested to find yesterday that Amazon.com (though not uk yet) has removed the "see all my reviews" feature, which was an easy way to check if a SP book had likely been reviewed only by the author's friends. You can still check by clicking on the reviewer's profile, but the "invitation" to check is no longer there.

I no longer trust the rating system at all, same as I don't trust cover praise by other authors. What I trust more are long-ish, well-written reviews by people who review a lot. If there's a general sense that the rating/review system is becoming debased, I wonder what will take its place?

 

[Dan Jones]

I no longer trust the rating system at all, same as I don't trust cover praise by other authors. What I trust more are long-ish, well-written reviews by people who review a lot.

Exactly (confirmation bias notwithstanding).

If there's a general sense that the rating/review system is becoming debased, I wonder what will take its place?

I don't think reviews will be replaced as such; it's more likely that they'll just start to take a different form in the future. There'll be far cleverer people than me out there who will figure out a way of harnessing (there's that word again) social media or something to give a new picture of how well read or well regarded a book (or anything else for that matter) is.

 

[Cat's Cradle]

I have not had the time to read through all of the posts, but I am going to go ahead anyway and rashly jump to a conclusion as to what the OP meant by the title of this thread...my response: I am against the harnessing of other Chrons members as some sort of draught animals, and I am surprised and saddened that the OP would suggest such a thing!

Actually I have read the posts...I plan on purchasing several more Chrons-members' books from Amazon in the near future, and posting reviews on that site. They'll be honest reviews (though perhaps not 5-star reviews, unless I feel the work really has earned such a rating; the discussion here of star ratings has been enlightening). Must run! Have a pie baking, CC

 

[Dave]

I have not had the time to read through all of the posts, but I am going to go ahead anyway and rashly jump to a conclusion as to what the OP meant by the title of this thread...my response: I am against the harnessing of other Chrons members as some sort of draught animals, and I am surprised and saddened that the OP would suggest such a thing!

I read something yesterday - The difference between an Audience and a Community is the position that the seats are facing - I think that it is important that Chronicles is seen as a Community and fairly sure that Springs knows that too.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I read something yesterday - The difference between an Audience and a Community is the position that the seats are facing - I think that it is important that Chronicles is seen as a Community and fairly sure that Springs knows that too.

Oh, I know it. Actually, I worried about starting the thread for that reason, in case it sounded like I was trying to ra-ra support for myself, but I wasn't. I thought it was a useful thing to talk about because I like to give support, as well as being very glad of it. For instance, for Dave's walk last year, I found it really interesting following the progress on twitter and retweeted it when I could and what not, as I have some family over in that neck of the woods.

I'm hoping some others will get involved - like I know we have some amazing artists here. What supports them? Is there a like function on Deviant, for instance? Because in a community we're all pulling together, and that's what's always made Chrons special.

(I think CC was teasing me with the harnessing comment, though. )

 

[Cat's Cradle]

(I think CC was teasing me with the harnessing comment, though. )

Yes-yes, absolutely! I was having such fun reading everyone's comments on their own mis-readings of the thread title, that I thought I'd join in...the joke was that I could have stupidly thought springs wanted to literally harness us to a plow in a field in Ireland! And whip us poor draught creatures! And I'm fairly sure that's NOT what the thread is about!

I like your thoughts about Deviant Art, and other ways of supporting the community, springs.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

We have tractors nowadays ...

 

[Juliana]

We have tractors nowadays ...

And elephants... http://abcnews.go.com/US/elephants-rescue-stuck-18-wheeler-louisiana/story?id=29883947

 

[ratsy]

I try to help out how I can, but as you know, there is only so much time in a day between work, school, free time, reading and writing, for me. I think you have it all down very well Springs and I'm not sure what else there is! I have nothing to do with Goodreads yet (think I signed up some time ago). It feels like there are too many things to keep up with online or on our phones that it can seem overwhelming at times.

I try to do my own blog, like peeps FB stuff, Share it, retweet it, favorite it...and so on. I have tried to support the Chrons peeps more lately, whether that means beta reading something, or buying their books and reviewing. In the past year I have had the chance to read, Teresa, Stephen Palmer, Ralph Kern, Chris Guillory, and have bought a few others. (still waiting for my Boneman book to show up at my home via Pterodactyl someday) And I will continue to buy the books (at the least the Ebook) and not because I feel guilted into it, just because I do want to support and offer sales...and in truth, I want to see what my peers are writing, how they do it, and maybe just maybe, it will help me improve my own writing.

So after all of that, I think you are on the right track Springs.

Oh one thing I have noticed, is there are select people who often post to the groups on FB and get some conversations going there...in the Horror Writers group or the Space Opera group, so maybe there is another avenue that might help? Becoming a regular contributor to those groups, so when you blast them with a 'Buy my book' (Sam Sykes style), they will know your name and might pick it up because of it.

And just so you know Springs, I'm trying to time my book right now so I finish and don't start another book, so I can read your's via Kindle at the end of the month!

 

[MWagner]

I no longer trust the rating system at all, same as I don't trust cover praise by other authors. What I trust more are long-ish, well-written reviews by people who review a lot. If there's a general sense that the rating/review system is becoming debased, I wonder what will take its place?

The thing is, ratings and review systems don't serve the same purpose for all readers. Some people use them as a critical rating analysis tool. But for many others, they're a platform for sharing enthusiasm and support. This is especially true for genre books, whose readers are often fans, rather than simply consumers. Those readers don't want judgement and empirical valuations of the objects of their affection. They want to appreciate and share that appreciation with their friends and other fans. Just look at the fierce reaction a negative review of popular fantasy or YA novel stirs up on goodreads.

And that attitude isn't restricted to books. Gamers on forums like boardgamegeek often react with hostility to criticism of not only their favourite games, but any games by designers they like. There's also an attitude that since boardgames are a labour of love for the designers, it's mean and 'unsupportive' to treat them with the callous objectivity that we treat other consumer products.

With social media, we no longer have a separation of creator and audience. The kind of critical assessment that was the norm 15 years ago increasingly looks hostile or even bullying to those who regard their hobby as a community. Criticism and fandom are cohabiting uneasily. I don't know if those approaches are so incompatible that they'll cause a breach, or if we'll just have to accept the tension between the two.

 

[Parson]

@MWagner -- That was an insightful post. I hadn't really considered the "fan based" reviews and what that might mean. But I'm certain that you are right. It reminds me of something that was said about the young Russian Communists in the 70's? "For them truth is relevant. Whatever helps the party is what is the truth."