Everything Booklikes & Leafmarks discussion

The discussion page looks like it will be almost identical to the old discussion page, so I'm thinking I'll just set a shortcut to that and attempt to never ever visit the homepage. I really hope I can do that.

I've already changed my bookmark, but it's going to be hard to get out of the habit of clicking the homepage to refresh.

I really hate the new feed page, it's full of friends of friends I don't know, repeats, and summaries of books instead of the reviews I want to read.

Please if you are used to the discussions page and want it back as an option on the homepage, go to the blog post (top of the home page) and fill in the survey they linked in it.

Agreed with Krazykiwi--anyone who would prefer to have the discussions tab restored to the homepage should definitely take the survey and let Goodreads know:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/MWN8LVZ

I've already trained myself to refresh the discussions page by choosing it from the "Community" drop-down menu, so if the goal is to force users to keep encountering the new homepage, this isn't going according to GR plans.

I can't look at the home page anymore, it's just too unappealing. I'm not happy about it, because I liked seeing what was going through my feed (for the most part), what my friends were shelving.

I've been mostly using the "My Discussions" from the avatar dropdown.

I feel like I've lost 70% of what I came to GR for, though, by missing out on the feed.

I'm afraid to like, share or comment on anything on the feed in case it just really clutters it up for my friends and followers.

Honestly, I use so little of goodreads anymore and so less frequently that I'm not that worked up about it except to say I really do loathe it.

The language is so dumb - "Kris made progress on Secret Assets" as if Kris is in the slow reading class in 4th grade and now we all need to cheer her on.

Plus the section titled "Want to Read", I stopped using the Want to Read shelf and gave it another name when they changed it from To Read to Want to Read, so I don't want to see "Want to Read" anywhere.

The only way I can track my friends now is to go to each of their pages individually, which is too cumbersome.

Wow. I literally couldn't stand to look at it, so I hadn't realized it was that bad.

I really dislike the new homepage. Why can't we choose between the new homepage and the old page? I think that's would suit everyone.

~Calyre~ wrote: "I really dislike the new homepage. Why can't we choose between the new homepage and the old page? I think that's would suit everyone."

Because obviously we aren't using the site the right way. But GR has fixed everything and now we're doing it right.

I was forced onto the new home page when I got up this morning, and I spent my first 15 minutes online learning how to use AdBlock to get rid of the sections I don't want shoved in my face. I've never been big on social interaction here (probably less than a dozen comments in nearly seven years), but they've somehow managed to ruin home page functionality even for me. :/

Every year I have to relearn how to use Adblock in order to block whatever new features GR has created I don't want to look at. I've blocked part of the Browse dropdown menu, part of the UGB, and a bunch of features on the former home page.

Now I guess I learn how to block the new features on the new home page, or just don't ever go there.

Isn't AdBlock great? It has reduced the trauma GR's has created. I highly recommend it for this site.

I don't know if it really has enough in the way of discussion, but I've started playing with Litsy (and found a much different population of readers there during #24in48 than I've hooked up with on BL)

J wrote: "I don't know if it really has enough in the way of discussion, but I've started playing with Litsy (and found a much different population of readers there during #24in48 than I've hooked up with on..."

That site prohibits "book bullying" and wants positive content only. See http://Litsy.com/about .

Seriously, they really think an inaminate object, a commercial product can be bullied and that the book's just as traumatized as a person who was bullied.

I'm fine with being required on book sites to be civil and respectful of others, with all personal attacks prohibited.

I don't need a book site with only positive content ( Nevermind one so demeaning and dismissive of what actual bully victims go through). I need a book site where I can honestly engage with other readers and effectively catalog my books.

But, keep it positive? No book bullying? Book bullying? How about no attacking or bullying your site members even if they don't like a book and dare say so? What about protecting the people on the site and just letting the book be a commercial product they are reading and discussing?

I really don't feel it is an unsafe place for me if someone does something other than churn out book promotional stuff.

ETA: many participants are publicity firm employees and very easy to find even for new members.

Off topic for Litsy and booklikes, but I also don't need any of the book sites that basically just want me to let them choose my next read/purchase. I need consumer/ reader reviews and a reader community -- with excellent book cataloging features.

Mirkat wrote: "Agreed with Krazykiwi--anyone who would prefer to have the discussions tab restored to the homepage should definitely take the survey and let Goodreads know:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/MWN8LVZ..."


Done.
The homepage is horrible.

Yes, I took the survey and gave them a piece of my mind. (Why I think that will help when I gave it to them repeatedly during "Beta Testing" on the Feedback group, is beyond me. But whatever.)

I signed on after a week away today and screamed, and then tried to remember where the Feedback group had said the Discussions page was now. (And a couple of seconds later it came to me: under the Community menu.)

I don't think goodreads is listening to either the feedback group or the survey.

Wouldn't surprise me.

I think they read all the feedback and then just do what they had planned to do anyway, which is always to make changes. Soliciting feedback is just a way of keeping the peasants satisfied so they won't revolt.

If they had put as much energy into programming re-reads as into design changes, the re-reads would have been done 2-3 years ago.

But with rereads, you're not spending any money, you already have the books.

Now it's SELL, SELL, SELL with the book blurb and ridiculously large cover displaying ad infinitum. I realize it was always sales directed, just wasn't so in our faces.

Even if I liked it or found it useful -- it's really badly laid out. Actually so poorly designed it's just ... for want of a better word ... ugly.

Debbie's Spurts (D.A.) wrote: "I don't think goodreads is listening to either the feedback group or the survey."

Over in the GR Feedback group, the staff were telling us to complete the survey over and over again. When someone asked when the results would be released, we were informed that they *wouldn't.* Which means that we'll never know how many people said "This sucks." And GR will continue to tell us that "users" tell them they love it.

Truth is, the site is now set up to sell books via Amazon -- which should surprise none of us, since Amazon bought the site. I don't think any of us as readers really need a book blurb and an enormous photo of the cover attached to a review that will give us information about the book's content.

When asked when we would once again have the option to make Discussions our landing page (as it appears the vast majority of users did), GR staff told us that it wasn't going to happen. :-(

Honestly, I think the survey is a way for them to say "Well, we asked ... but no one had a problem" -- and we'll never know because, again, they have no intention of being transparent.

I say this as an author, BTW.

In the end: thank god for AdBlock Plus.

AdBlock is the best. I got it when GR had its last fiasco and it has worked wonders. I order from Amazon (gluten-free food in bulk), but no longer books. I have found other places who have great books with great prices.

Debbie's Spurts (D.A.) wrote: "Even if I liked it or found it useful -- it's really badly laid out. Actually so poorly designed it's just ... for want of a better word ... ugly."

The new GR Home Page is not only ugly, but it is terribly inefficient at getting me to look at (and buy) books. There is so much chaff to scroll through now, much harder to find what is interesting. I have tried to give the new look a fair trial. Maybe there was some benefit that would become apparent…. But after more than a month of using the new page layout I can say it sucks even worse than when I commented on the “beta” version back in June.

I used to page quickly through updates and reviews, adding books to my TBR with abandon and often going to Amazon to look and buy. Now a single update might take up the entire screen. My TBR shelf is growing at a much slower rate. My rate of buying has dropped commensurately. I can’t imagine the regular GR member asked for this change; had to be an author or a marketing department driven change.

I can say one positive thing about the change. After 9 years of always having a GR page open, constantly checking, liking and commenting on reviews, the new update has cured me of the GR addiction. I pay attention to my friends’ updates and my groups but not to the wider GR universe. I don’t have the GR webpage open constantly anymore. GR has jumped the shark for me on this change. I lost a favorite hangout. Did gain more time to read the books I already have.

Yeah, I used to almost always keep the goodreads home page open.

My goodreads newsfeed and all the discussion and reviewing and activities from friends also used to continually add to my TBR and wishlist shelves (or at the very least have me sampling the book and exploring quirkier shelf names for more books).

Number of books added to shelves or found interesting after seeing on the new goodreads home page = zero.

I obviously haven't been able to like the new home page.

I really did expect any upcoming design changes would be to make it look better on Amazon Fire and other tablets with lots more presumably book promotional stuff -- while continuing the trend towards burying reader to reader conversations and content. So that part didn't really surprise me.

What has surprised me is the size and amount of screen space to show a book and its description for almost any reason. Not the presumably promotional aspect but how surprisingly it actually fails at book promotion. They run together with such little reader comments or content that it's like browsing the Amazon deals or top whatever lists -- kinda defeats the presumably promotional purpose because I have yet to even add to TBR or at least sample something I saw on my goodreads feed even if rated highly and recimmended by a friend.

I think I'm cutting back even more severely on time spent on goodreads and my participation here. Still some friends and groups (including real life bookclubs and library groups) only here or I don't think I'd miss it if I closed my account. When back with my desktop tomorrow, I think it's time to get a good backup, delete all my books, then only track currently reading with a quick rating to meet my group needs that I clean off every 2-4 weeks. I'm not sure if I'll leave my favorites shelf of books -- it's useful for book comparisons but not sure anyone new will want to follow/friend me as active as I likely won't be here.

I do miss the days when goodreads was a fun way to connect with other readers, find great books, ...

ETA: I'm likely finished with online book cataloguing and communities if fictfact (where I can at least track my series) goes under but I'm also kind of giving up on finding a fun, active, reader-centric community. I am very much enjoying the "social" scene over at booklikes -- where a lot of my previous and current goodreads friends are -- but staff is so inactive my hopes to that site are also dwindling. That's not an invitation for anyone to recommend book sites to me that are all up in arms against bullying a book (yet have no wording prohibiting bullying authors, readers or other site members -- *snark* must protect commercial product inanimate objects from the psychological trauma it suffers from bullying which is presumably defined by the number of non-5-star ratings from the bullies but so long as not doing anything impacting book sales feel free to ...) or that are retailer, publisher or author-group owned.

I usually stay on the Discussions page, which is the only one I can stand to look at. As a result, I see all the covers of books which people have linked to in discussions and topics.

This book cover has been showing for, literally, weeks. Weeks.

And I just found out why. There is one group that uses certain book covers as emoticons in their conversations, so they don't have to use words. This is one of their covers acting as an emoticon or emoji.

I'm pretty much done with Goodreads at this point. Just done. It's an eyesore now that focuses more on images than words, totally missing the point.

[Name Redacted] wrote: "I'm pretty much done with Goodreads at this point. Just done. It's an eyesore now that focuses more on images than words, totally missing the point."

Sadly, they do seem to increasingly keep forgetting we like to read.

This is how you know the GR staff is never actually on the site themselves: because a good chunk of the book covers shown under "Books Being Discussed" on the discussions page are there because spammers are spamming.

Example:
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/list_...

shows spam accounts from 2014 to 10 minutes ago. That's just one tiny example. I flagged a list of book discussions the other day that was 334 pages long. Before that, an Indonesian edition of Harry Potter had generated dozens of pages of spam accounts.

There is spam all over the site, rampant. In quotes, in groups, in book discussions. Yet GR never seems to find the spam on their own. They rely on you to flag it. I'm done flagging spam; they need to start doing their own jobs.

Lobstergirl wrote: "And I just found out why. There is one group that uses certain book covers as emoticons in their conversations, so they don't have to use words. This is one of their covers acting as an emoticon or..."

Okay, wth? I don't even understand how this happens. I guess I'm a purist and I like the idea of a book site with actual words. About books. And don't get me started on the youtube book reviews.

I just found out by accident that GR has stopped adding Listopia votes (when you vote on a listopia) to your feeds. Even if you have it selected to show up in your feed, it doesn't anymore. They just made a unilateral decision that they didn't want this on the home page. Who knows why? Seems like they wanted to "streamline" the page, but it's always looked junky and ugly and cluttered so I don't know why removing listopia votes would make it any less so. I always enjoyed seeing what lists people were voting on. No announcement was made, obviously....users kept in the dark, as usual....

I think it is a terribly foolish decision, as Listopia is one of GR's assets (I know of no book site with a list function like it), yet they don't seem to appreciate it.

It's a unique feature, plus it almost certainly helps sell books. I don't understand the reasoning.

They've also made it so that authors cannot add their own books to lists ... that's very new.

Sharon wrote: "They've also made it so that authors cannot add their own books to lists ... that's very new."

That I am strongly in favor of, having seen so much author spam and abuse of lists over the years.

Yep, that is a very good thing :)

Having tried cleaning up the mess that some authors make of the Listopia lists.

They left that about 5 years too late, but better late than never.

Lobstergirl wrote: "I just found out by accident that GR has stopped adding Listopia votes (when you vote on a listopia) to your feeds. Even if you have it selected to show up in your feed, it doesn't anymore."

And yet when you join a Group, it does show up in the feed. For some reason joining a Group doesn't mess with the streamlining they want, but voting on a Listopia does.

Voting on a listopia is possibly reader/user content and readers "talking" about a book.

They appear to be decreasing reader content and influence on the feed.