Reviews must be honest to be of any use, so if I were to review everything I read, I'd have to write some unfavorable ones. Being an author myself gives me three reasons to avoid doing this:

1. It could come across as snarky. No matter how much I deny it, if I say something bad about Joe Hypothetical Author's work, people will tend to see an implied "but my material is much better."

2. It could alienate potential readers. Even if I'm not crazy about Joe Hypothetical Author's work, some of his readers might like my material--if they aren't predisposed against me by learning my dirty little secret that I don't like their favorite author's work.

3. It could alienate or harm an author. Maybe Joe Hypothetical Author likes my work and will say nice things about it, if I haven't slammed him. Besides, even if I don't care for his work, it's nothing personal; I still wish him well and don't want to hurt his sales. We authors ought to help each other out.

All that said, I want the chance to tell you about some really great books I've read. So I'll still review certain selected books--not necessarily all the good books I've read, so don't assume the absence of a review means I'd say something bad.

The only place my reviews might wobble a bit from pure honesty is that I tend to be more lenient with authors I've actually met. I wouldn't say I liked something that I didn't, but I might advertise for them just a little more. Again, we authors ought to help each other out.