Your Book Sucks.

Some of my favorite reviews are those where a reviewer eviscerates a work well deserving of it. Roger Ebert is the king of this for movies, having several books (including Your Movie Sucks) that collects his dark gems. Where is the best "bad" review on Library Thing?

tanstaafl's review of The Book of Mormon is my favorite. I don't know how to set up a link for a particular book review, but it comes up first if you order them by votes.

>2 aulsmith:
You mean this one, right?

3: Yup. Now how do you get there to get the url?

>4 aulsmith:
There's an icon that looks like three links of chain, to the right of the reviewer's name at the bottom of the review. That gives you the direct link.

It's fun to trash a bad book, no doubt, but if the trashing is not supported with evidence then I lose respect for it. My rule of thumb: someone who has not read the book should be able to understand in the context of your review why you're poking fun at it, and someone who liked the book should understand your case against it. I seem to be in the minority, however. When I've flagged reviews that didn't meet this requirement, the flag quickly disappears. I chalk it up to others' opinions that at least the reviewer is saying "Hated it", if in a more colourful way.

> 6

When I've flagged reviews that didn't meet this requirement, the flag quickly disappears.

That's not a basis for flagging reviews on LT. The only allowable reasons for flagging are that the item is not, in fact, a review (i.e. someone uses the field for prices, LC numbers, etc.) or that it violates the terms of service. A review that doesn't meet your personal standards of what a review should be is not flaggable.

> 7 : May we flag when the review is a copy of the 4th cover or a copy from the editor's site ?

I think it's perfectly OK to parody the work or to make flip comments without detailed reasoning if there are already loads of other reviews. No point simply repeating what everyone else already said. We're not working for the TLS or the LRB here; we're allowed to have a bit of fun from time to time.

If it's a work that hasn't got any detailed reviews yet, then I would say there's a stronger sense of obligation to write the sort of review that would be useful to someone who doesn't know the book at all.

> 8

A cover image is not a review. Copy from the editor's site posted as a review would be a violation of the Terms of Service (copyright violation), unless it's quoted as part of a larger review.

Both flaggable.

> 10 : Thanks. There is a member who wrote more than 1000 reviews but all of them are copies from covers or sites. I flagged some but stopped, not sure for the violation.

> 11

I think I know who you mean.

What happens when a review is flagged and removed? Is the author of the review told about it, so they can avoid repeating the same mistakes?

Incidently, I very nearly flagged that member, but in the end, didn't. I was torn between self-righteous annoyance at his cheek, and a feeling of unease at flagging someone... In any case, if we're thinking of the same member, he hasn't written a review in a few months, so he might have got the hint.

>7 lilithcat:, do the terms state what *is* a review, so we can determine objectively what is not? I'll have to have a look. I'll confess I've not read them. I only see a flag that says "not a review", and I thought I knew well enough to judge that for myself.

> 13

This notice appears when you click "flag" to flag a review:

"Not a review" is not intended for short reviews, poorly-written reviews or reviews you disagree with. Links to the reviewer's blog are also acceptable. "Abuse of terms of service" includes violations such as spam reviews and posting copyrighted material without permission. See the terms of service for more guidelines."

> 12 : The member said on his profile page that he doesn't understand English, he cannot know about the Terms of Service as they are not translated.

>14 lilithcat:, I've read that notice, but I don't think it eliminates my contention: that if a review doesn't speak to the quality of the book in some manner, describing where it falls on a scale of good or bad, then it's not a review. If others believe these reviews by implication are saying "bad" then that must be the argument that's defeating me. I wouldn't use that argument myself, since its possible (however unlikely) I might parody something I actually like. I just don't see reviews being the place to entertain people if they can't simultaneously be actual reviews.

> 16 -- Cecrow: Why pay any attention to a one-word review that says "Bad"? Why pay any attention to a one-word review that says "Good"? Remember a review is supposed to be a rational discourse on the subject of WHY a book is "good" or "bad." Anybody who can't articulate their reasons for making such a judgement is probably not capable of making such a judgement to begin with. Ignore him/her. He/She isn't worth your time.

On the other hand, we used to have Dorothy Parker, who once famously wrote: "This is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force."

I've always liked that. It tells the whole story in two sentences. At the same time it leaves open the possibility that the reader might WANT to know why Parker felt that way and will buy the book despite her warning just to see why she was so tough on it. In that regard she's not nearly as tough on the author as she might have been, had she taken the trouble to pick the thing to pieces, item by item.

Reading takes a lot of time. People who read for a living value their time accordingly. Some books are just so bad that they're not worth the trouble, and the professional reader gets in a snit at the horrible author who has the gall to waste the reader's time with a bucket of slop. The need to express such anger (combined with a jug of bourbon) might lead the reader to compose a review that rips the author to shreds rather than just fob him/her off with a one-or-two line negative comment.

Ergo: Parker's victim was probably lucky.

I'd like to repeat 12's question, since it doesn't appear to have been answered (and if it has, please kindly show me, since I evidently missed it):

"What happens when a review is flagged and removed? Is the author of the review told about it, so they can avoid repeating the same mistakes?"

Another question along these same lines: if a review of mine has been (in my view) unjustly flagged, is there anything I can do about it?

(Note: I used to have a flag on one of my reviews and I didn't understand why, and of course now I can no longer remember nor find the review in question, but I do know that I only discovered it when browsing my own reviews; I did not receive any kind of notice from LT.)

According to Tim and Jeremy, once a review is flagged, the flag remains unless people vote it away or you remove the book and reenter it.

The author of the review is not informed, unless the person flagging the review chooses to leave a comment on the reviewer's personal page. (Difficult when reviewers have comments turned off.)

If you feel a flag is unjust, you can email jeremy here at LT to review the flag and possibly get it removed.

(To find flagged reviews, sort your reviews by votes, so all the flags end up on one end and all the positive votes go to the other.)

edit for type

Speaking of flagging reviews ... I'm hoping that Tim & Co. will make the recent policy change CLEAR(ER) ... that links to off-side reviews "count" as reviews, and that the only reviews that HAVE TO be written out in the review field are ones for the Early Reviewers program. I just had some moron go through and flag all 500+ of my entries that link to my review blog ... I don't know if it is the same waste-of-skin who had done this previously or not, but it's now BLATANT harassment since the policy has been laid out that it's OK to link to (one's own) off-site reviews.

It does say in the flagging pop-up:

Important: Do not abuse this feature. "Not a review" is not intended for short reviews, poorly-written reviews or reviews you disagree with. Links to the reviewer's blog are also acceptable. "Abuse of terms of service" includes violations such as spam reviews and posting copyrighted material without permission. See the terms of service for more guidelines. {emphasis mine}

... but this is obviously not enough clarity for the vermin who are spending large chunks of times flagging hundreds of my reviews!

Being the bitter, vindictive, person that I can be, I'd hope that The Powers That Be suspend/ban/execute/slowly-torture-to-death the flagger(s) responsible for this ... although I'd grudgingly settle for having the damn flags removed so *I* don't have to spend hours un-doing (currently there are only single flags, so I can "green flag" them away ... the last time the cretin was using multiple "sockpuppet" accounts as well) what the scumbags have done on my review listing!

It amazes me that some people have that much free time and that little good sense.

Grrrrrrrrrrrr...

> 20

Well, I've gone in and counter-flagged those.

But at least we can make a reasonable guess as to why those were flagged (though wrongly). I still can't fathom why this review of mine was flagged.

Lilithcat ... thanks!

However, it appears that whoever the culprit is has gone back in and re-flagged them all ... amazing.

I complained about this to Jeremy a few days ago, and he said he'd bring it up with Tim ... I suppose that it's too much to ask that the perpetrator would be slowly fed into a wood chipper, but I hope they get slapped around with at least a suspension!

As far as your review ... I can't imagine what they're seeing to flag there. While it's not a "traditional" walk-through of the book, it certainly addresses it within assorted contexts.

(sigh) Humanity ... I just wish stupidity was painful to the stupid.

 

I'm going through with counter flags where I can as well... I'm not sure if its just all the counter flagging is working, or what, but it seems only about 50 of the reviews had flags when I got there.

ETA: This is one reason why we ask for either a comment on why the flag to teh reviewer or to make the flagger public knowledge...

Yes ... having the flagger have to take some responsibility for the flag would be a good thing!

Thanks for the "green flag" effort too!