Everything Booklikes & Leafmarks discussion

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

Too little, too late?

ETA: I'm really enjoying BL, btw :)

Still vague, still not site-wide.

Yup. Still doesn't address a crucial question :/

Indeed.

Given what their over-arcing intention is with their new guideline, I am uber confused as to why it took 12 days for them to put up this paltry update.
The questions that they did answer are really no brainers.
Does it really take 12 days to figure out that they should return members content when it was hastily deleted?
Would have liked to have been a fly on the wall during those staff meetings.

Now, now, now you jealous hater bullying trolls need to read the FAQs closer.

Because now you can look forward to relevant, quality reviews in appropriate tone, behold the forthcoming feature:

Helpful/Unhelpful review gaming upvoting

Yes, no more fear of hurt author feelings and being placed on pogrom lists on stalker sites. No worries at all for the bba. Once the amazon "helpful" review system goes live, why the poor little bullied by 1-star ratings dears know exactly how to game the review system themselves. The sockpuppets were getting a bit bored talking amongst themselves over at amazon anyway. They needed a new playground.

Jennifer (It's a review, not a Hallmark card) wrote: "Indeed."

Ignore me. Just needed to copy Jennifer's parenthetical for posterity :D

:)

Debbie R. - site-wide announcement of new policy+FAQs needed no matter how few members effected - wrote: "Now, now, now you jealous hater bullying trolls need to read the FAQs closer.

Because now you can look forward to relevant, quality reviews in appropriate tone, behold the forthcoming feature: ..."

Say it isn't so! Is the Amazon bully trigger aka "Helpful/Unhelpful" button really coming this way?

Let's hope not, but frankly, it wouldn't surprise me.

Miss wrote: "Debbie R. - site-wide announcement of new policy+FAQs needed no matter how few members effected - wrote: "Now, now, now you jealous hater bullying trolls need to read the FAQs closer.

Because n..."

It will be nothing but a dog fight between the factions.

Courtnie wrote: "https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Too little, too late?

ETA: I'm really enjoying BL, btw :)"


Just discovered we can actually flag this post, just like member posts. Should we all flag it as inappropriate and inundate them with protest-y comments?

Susanna wrote: "Let's hope not, but frankly, it wouldn't surprise me."

The way things are going, I have no doubt that this is just right around the corner.

Jennifer (It's a review, not a Hallmark card) wrote: ":)"

Can I just say I love that parenthetical?

I came to GR in the first place because of the way my reviews were disrespected on Amazon. What am I to do now?

Karma♥Bites~Bookin’ Freely wrote: "Ignore me. Just needed to copy Jennifer's parenthetical for posterity :D"

HAHAHAHAHA! Priceless!!

Some examples of shelves that are allowed are:

not-interested
not-for-me
will-never-read
did-not-finish
authors-i-don-t-want-to-read
russian-authors
female-comedians
LGBT-authors
signed-by-author
booker-prize-winner-authors

I don't see the authors in question being very happy about being shelved "authors-i-don-t-want-to-read." Especially if a lot of people adopt that exact shelf name, since that would mean the shelf would appear much higher in the shelf name list.

I just got a note forbidding my "author-behavior-unacceptable" shelf.

Carol. Shelve this! wrote: "I just got a note forbidding my "author-behavior-unacceptable" shelf."

How dare you have such a shelf!

Well, it's the same philosophy I use in kids and dogs... They aren't bad inherently, they are just behaving in unacceptable fashion.

Carol. Shelve this! wrote: "Well, it's the same philosophy I use in kids and dogs... They aren't bad inherently, they are just behaving in unacceptable fashion."

How dare you criticize their behavior! Who are you to do so? They're just hard-working artists, trying to make a living. They need the protection and oversight which Goodreads offers!

Carol. Shelve this! wrote: "I just got a note forbidding my "author-behavior-unacceptable" shelf."

I added authors-behaving-badly, but nothing so far.

Maybe they'll feel more kindly to an "authors-gone-wild" shelf?

@24 - I'm not sure I like that particular image that gave me lol.

Mmm what about authors that we (I) love to hate?

Zafia wrote: "@24 - I'm not sure I like that particular image that gave me lol.

Mmm. What about authors that we (I) love to hate?"

What part of Goodreads' "stop-having-unprofitable-opinions" policy aren't you understanding?

I suppose it comes down to how one perceive the words. I don't see the difference in authors-gone-wild and my suggestion.

Moira wrote: "Carol. Shelve this! wrote: "I just got a note forbidding my "author-behavior-unacceptable" shelf."

I added authors-behaving-badly, but nothing so far."

Trust me -- they're going to get to you. They got to Susanna (I assume, based on her amended profile name) and me as well. Just takes them a little while, given that it's actually a rather widespread sort of shelf name ...

I had this morning 5,900 some books marked as "read". GoodReads is finding it difficult to remove all these in batch edits. It keeps choking. But It'll got done today. Then they won't have to worry about reviews that seem off topic.

Kaethe wrote: "I had this morning 5,900 some books marked as "read". GoodReads is finding it difficult to remove all these in batch edits. It keeps choking. But It'll got done today. Then they won't have to worry about reviews that seem off topic."

Yes, I removed virtually all several 1000 of my books today also; for the same reason.

It's an annoying chore, isn't it?

Just see it as a labor of love ... (the side effect being, that YOU no longer have to worry about screwing up formatting on GR when reformatting on BL, either).

Truly sad state of affairs, this, though ...

I'm creeped out by a link someone posted in the Feedback: Important Announcements thread that is a slideshow presentation by GR for authors/indies/advertisers. I mean, I suppose I intellectually knew it, but it's another thing to see it in action.
http://www.slideshare.net/GoodreadsPr...

Carol. Shelve this! wrote: "I'm creeped out by a link someone posted in the Feedback: Important Announcements thread that is a slideshow presentation by GR for authors/indies/advertisers. I mean, I suppose I intellectually knew it, but it's another thing to see it in action.
http://www.slideshare.net/GoodreadsPr... "

Oh, (Big) Brother.

Just look at that graph showing the direct link between the volume of GR activity and Kindle sales. I don't even own a Kindle (or other e-reader), but seeing that alone made me doubly glad I deleted virtually all of my books today.

I think everybody needs to see this one. Created another status update: https://www.goodreads.com/user_status...

Zafia wrote: "@24 - I'm not sure I like that particular image that gave me lol.

Mmm what about authors that we (I) love to hate?"

Tsk, tsk, Zafia. Doncha know? No hating permitted on the new kinder, gentler GR. ;-)

Is there a list anywhere of shelves deemed illegal on GR? Because GR is currently acting as though only shelves that contain dire threats and vile suggestions are illegal, and they seem (at least in that top post) to have backed down from their previous position on thoughtcrime-shelf-names, where they reinterpret your naming scheme based on the authors' tendency to abuse reviewers, presumably. Savor the irony.
Carol, how has your unicorns-and-rainbows shelf fared?

Carly wrote: "Is there a list anywhere of shelves deemed illegal on GR?"

Yes, Kara posted examples here: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Plenty of thoughtcrime still in evidence, if you ask me.

"victim-of-troll-attacks" -- who exactly is [thought to be] the victim, and who are [thought to be] the troll(s)? What about books that DEAL with the victim of a troll attack and are shelved accordingly?

"off-topic reviews that single out individual readers or authors" -- single out for WHAT precisely? In what "off-topic" context?

"If we determine that something does not fit within our guidelines, we will [...] delete it from the site ..." -- So it's still GR perception rather than actual intent that matters.

Etc. ...

Carly wrote: "Is there a list anywhere of shelves deemed illegal on GR? Because GR is currently acting as though only shelves that contain dire threats and vile suggestions are illegal, and they seem (at least ..."

I don't agree. Their update doesn't change thier positoin or policy at all. All this "update" does is try to furhter explain what they mean by Offensive shelf names or shelf names that are actually personal attacks.

It is really a

"See, we never meant to delete anything that wasn't an attack."

and

"we may have been too hasty on deleting things without notifacation or explaination etc..... but we still did it right."

(well, I put my twist on it but that's what it says to me.)

They give lists of exmaples of "them that stayed" and "them that we deleted."

Overall it's an "update on enforcment of policy" not an actual change in policy. Which really hasn't changed in the first place. (Only their decisions to enforce it have and the way they choose to explain it).

Themis-Athena (targeted by GR censors) wrote: "Carly wrote: "Is there a list anywhere of shelves deemed illegal on GR?"

Yes, Kara posted examples here: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Plent..."

I don't know, but I suspect that releasing that example is their way of saying "See, we deleted theirs too."


I wonder why that's considered an attack in the first place? Labeling someone a victim is an attack?

Is there a stigma on being a victim that I didn't get the memo on?

As far as I understand it, the shelf name "due-to-author" is now legal... as long as no mention of why is made at any point, correct? What I'm currently curious about: in the original thread, Kara responded that shelves with names like "Hormel" would be deleted because GR would try to examine and reinterpret shelf names based on the content. (Which I find hilarious, because it means that to delete such a shelf, they essentially have to admit to incidents of bad behavior from authors on those shelves.) Have they followed through anywhere with that level of mind-reading?

I. Curmudgeon wrote: "I wonder why that's considered an attack in the first place? Labeling someone a victim is an attack?

Is there a stigma on being a victim that I didn't get the memo on? "

It's Goodreads's construction on shelves that may seem to indicate that there's a victim-troll situation between the reader/reviewer who created the shelf and authors on the shelf. Which may or may not be true, but you sure as hell can't tell from the shelf name alone ... nor, often enough, from the books on a given shelf.

'unicorns and rainbows' has fared fine. at least until it's flagged. so has 'not-even-if-you-poked-my-eye-out,' so my take is that they are either responding to specific flags (on the part of authors shelved there?) or anything in the shelf name that refers to negative author behavior.

Whatever. Ultimately, it shows me that the GR corporation couldn't find its way out of a paper bag without a scissors, a ball of string and a guide dog. They are sending so many mixed messages and disinformation to their customer base, and in conjunction with the passive-aggressive 'quote of the day,' that i'm less inclined to ever post full reviews here again, and I won't be adding to my 'tbr' list from Goodreads database.

Karma♥Bites~Bookin’ Freely wrote: "Tsk, tsk, Zafia. Doncha know? No hating permitted on the new kinder, gentler GR. ;-)"

I found that out when some of my books got removed from a couple of my shelves.
I've no trouble taking my stuff elsewhere.
Although I'm really looking forward to having groups on BL.

I think it's pretty clear that Otis has realized that if he caters to publishers and authors he'll end up not merely incredibly rich, but disgustingly, roll-around-in-hundred-dollar-bills-on-the-bed rich. Maybe he can be the hero of his own bad boy billionaire BDSM novel.

GR is looking to add a lot of casual readers to its user base, and isn't afraid of alienating it's old user core. In fact, honestly, I think it's pretty clear that they would rather that we just move along.

Themis-Athena (targeted by GR censors) wrote: "..."victim-of-troll-attacks" ..."

Hahahaha!! IIRC, this shelf belongs (or rather, belonged) to a certain author. :D

ETA: To clarify, a certain author had that shelf re: other authors supposedly 'bullied' and 'abused' by GR members. :/

I. Curmudgeon wrote: "...They give lists of exmaples of "them that stayed" and "them that we deleted."

Overall it's an "update on enforcment of policy" not an actual change in policy. Which really hasn't changed in the first place. (Only their decisions to enforce it have and the way they choose to explain it)."


Clearly. Which is why this gem is still around: https://www.goodreads.com/review/list...


ETA: Am I wrong in thinking that *this* shelf could fall under 'defamation'?

Moonlight Reader wrote: "I think it's pretty clear that Otis has realized that if he caters to publishers and authors he'll end up not merely incredibly rich, but disgustingly, roll-around-in-hundred-dollar-bills-on-the-be..."

LOL, but maybe he will not the dominate one in the relationship?

GR is banking on those casual readers to view all the content posted (for free) by their members.

Karma♥Bites~Bookin’ Freely wrote: "I. Curmudgeon wrote: "...They give lists of exmaples of "them that stayed" and "them that we deleted."

Overall it's an "update on enforcment of policy" not an actual change in policy. Which really..."

Disgusting, isn't it, that after two weeks and many reports, that the shelf is still there along with the "only place author can be popular" shelf?

Moonlight Reader wrote: "GR is looking to add a lot of casual readers to its user base, and isn't afraid of alienating it's old user core. In fact, honestly, I think it's pretty clear that they would rather that we just move along."

Yep. Same as when Amazon itself had its paradigm shift back in 2008. Which was when I joined Goodreads. Time for the caravan to move on, clearly ...

Carol. Shelve this! wrote: "...They are sending so many mixed messages and disinformation to their customer base, and in conjunction with the passive-aggressive 'quote of the day,' that i'm less inclined to ever post full reviews here again, and I won't be adding to my 'tbr' list from Goodreads database. "

This.

Can I just say betwixt these 2:

abusive-attention-whore-authors
butthurt-crazy-stalker-authors

It's like Sophie's Choice which one I like better! I think I'll have to ahem borrow butthurt-crazy-stalker-authors for BL of course. Wouldn't want to get sent to detention by GR.