The Extra Cool Group! (of people Michael is experimenting on) discussion

I know I am.

Ur doing it rong, Mr. Not on the List.

Personally, yes.

Somebody should dig up David's treatise on How to Whore Votes and post in here for our edification.

usually.

Perhaps I should change the title to, "How are you a pandering vote whore?"

FIGHTFIGHTFIGHT

Am I a pandering vote whore?

Yeah, kinda. I mean, I definitely (usually) (sometimes) write with votes in mind, wondering if what I'm saying is clever/funny enough for other goodreaders to read/like/vote on, but not all the time. The majority of my reviews don't get more than two or three votes, but then the majority of my reviews are short and boring, so it doesn't matter. It's some of the big ones--War and Peace, The Way of Kings, Les Miserables, The War of the Worlds, etc. (those four are the only ones with 20+ votes, and notice I wasn't vote-whorish enough to link, eh?)--that do get the most votes, but I've written a few shorter ones that people like, and...I dunno. I'm still a (fairly) little fish in this pond, and I haven't appeared on any of the lists, so there must be something I'm not doing.

How am I a pandering vote whore?

Well, I did once post a comment casually mentioning my W&P review on one of Ceridwen's book reviews, then quickly deleted it out of shame even though the self-promotion got a lot of votes...but I don't do that stuff very often. Usually I just post a review and hope people read it.

okay really the vote whoring thing is complicated, because unlike karen I don't have a billion friends who vote for my reviews, and I don't actually think the quality of my reviews is at all relevant to which ones get votes. People vote for my reviews based on the book I am reviewing caris' book and torn got a lot of votes but my latour review (which was thoughtful and well written by the way) got none, except I think greg and mfso, I'm too lazy to check, this is because no one actually cares what I think of latour cause no one has any fucking idea who strange french philosophy of science guys are.

I like being on the top votes list and I expect anything I review by mykle hansen or david foster wallace to get a lot of votes, but generally I don't tailor content for votes since I think it doesn't help.

I do tailor content to avoid changing other people's opinions, such as putting pictures in my review of torn to block karen from getting sucked in by my opinion, and I have multiple reviews of books I don't like that specifically instruct people who like the book not to bother reading my review.

as a sidenote unlike richard I believe I am #11 on the list.

Dude, that was just fine. Your W&P review is Epic.

There is something about what you read though. If you go in the "top reviews" list, and toggle to the Best Reviews Evah!!!1!, it's all super popular stuff, like a shitton of Twilight Saga, various middlebrow tear-jerkers, Hunger Games*, etc. Popular fiction is searched most often; people are more likely to read the reviews of the popular books; people are thus more likely to vote. It eats its own tail at a point.

*Hunger Games rulz, just for the record.

Ceridwen wrote: "Dude, that was just fine. Your W&P review is Epic."

But I still feel baaaaaaddddd.

(But didja notice I recently revised it a bit? Didja? Go check it out!)

karen votes for all my reviews, I don't want to seem like I don't appreciate that.

as a sidenote unlike richard I believe I am #11 on the list.

*Scoffs* in America, maybe!

**Hunger Games does totally rule.

I would also like to clarify that I am a total vote whore.

yeah in america. did i not mention earlier no one votes for my reviews except karen.

I was kidding, Jasmine! Most of the users on this site are American but it makes my #3 on the list sound stupid when I have to put a little * and say *In Australia.

Some how that unvalidates my ego and makes me cry a little inside.

okay I was seriously considering picking a new country so I could feel better about my self, no I really live in andorra I swear!

ha, mine is also this week, I'm not on any ovverall.

Jasmine wrote: "okay I was seriously considering picking a new country so I could feel better about my self, no I really live in andorra I swear!"

Didn't Goodreads put a stop to moving virtually?

Esteban?

I don't know. I wouldn't actually do it, just like I wouldn't actually force people to vote for me, but I would certainly consider it.

It would suck if they did.

How would you go about forcing someone to vote for you? I've been trying to figure that out for ages but I'm just not coming up with anything...

karen emails me if I miss a review. or tells me at work, I did that to her once.

I vote whored once when I had a really bad day and I posted in a group I'd feel better if people voted for my review. I got like 10 votes out of it.

Not any more. I discovered through this that I have a short attention span.

It's probably just me, but I vote for those with cool pictures and mega long ones that I don't bother to finish.

Yeah I'm a vote whore!

I feel like the voting system both makes for better reviews all around - because it adds a sort of competitive side to the site and makes people want to write as well as they can - as well as hinders authenticity - because in pursuit of votes people often try too hard to be brilliant, funny, sophisticated, or meta, and in the process lose sight of writing a real, meaningful review.

But yes, I am a pandering vote whore.

Ceridwen wrote: "Didn't Goodreads put a stop to moving virtually?

Esteban?"

That was a temporary thing. By the time it was corrected, everyone knew I wasn't REALLY the dictator of Malta; so what was the use?

Oh, those lazy, crazy, halcyon days of my carefree Goodreads-youth...damn IP addresses, anyway! Long live the proxy server!

And for the record, I don't think of myself as a vote whore; but then again, I guess anyone who bothers to write a review here is technically a vote whore.

Since we're on the topic, all you assholes should vote for my reviews.

Well, I'm clearly a vote whore if the definition is based on writing in a way that's more likely to get votes. But I don't pick books on those grounds - I know that YA and romance are far more likely to attract votes than obscure French and Scandinavian stuff, but I just don't much like YA/romance and hardly ever review it. And I don't often add pictures, even though I'm well aware that they tend to up your vote count. So maybe I'm only vote-promiscuous.

In general, I agree with Aerin in post #28.

I'm with Choupette. I don't have a good enough attention span to pay attention to these things. I didn't know there WAS a best reviewer list until pretty recently.

(I'm lying. I'm hurt I've only had one troll ever. I'm a nobody.)

What? People get trolls?! I've never had ANY trolls! Unless you count Manny.

Choupette wrote: "What? People get trolls?! I've never had ANY trolls! Unless you count Manny."

I'm searching my conscience. Was that a reference to my attempts to convince you that Houellebecq actually isn't so bad? Or to my possibly somewhat over-enthusiastic advocacy of Smolin?

The first thing that comes to mind was Animal Farm. How dare you, try and force me to clarify my opinions! Definitely troll behaviour if you ask me.

Choupette wrote: "The first thing that comes to mind was Animal Farm. How dare you, try and force me to clarify my opinions! Definitely troll behaviour if you ask me."

I'm sorry. I just have a deep, passionate, unreasoning love for this book. I can't understand why the whole world doesn't share it.

I was only trying to save your soul. It's funny how often people don't actually want their souls saved.

You're not a GR celebrity unless you have trolls. You have to have had at least three trolls to be a proper vote whore.

Manny, I have Animal Farm right here and ready to read!
I have to say though that you are definitely a votewhore. Just one of those high-quality vote whores that get work with senators and gajillionaires.

Manny, I have Animal Farm right here and ready to read!

Kat, this is the bestest book ever! It's even better than Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows. Though I know a lot of people disagree.

I have to say though that you are definitely a votewhore. Just one of those high-quality vote whores that get work with senators and gajillionaires.

Er... thank you! I think. Just for the record, I have never knowingly received a vote from Eliot Spitzer. Mind you, I wouldn't turn one down if it arrived.

Manny prefers to rely on Ms Meyre for his vote-whoring capacity.

Jasmine wrote: "karen emails me if I miss a review. or tells me at work, I did that to her once.

I vote whored once when I had a really bad day and I posted in a group I'd feel better if people voted for my revi..."

that is for your benefit. my reviews are your lifeblood and you know it.

Aerin wrote: "I feel like the voting system both makes for better reviews all around - because it adds a sort of competitive side to the site and makes people want to write as well as they can"

I agree with this response. When I started to add strangers to my goodreads network, I realized that a lot of people were putting effort into their reviews to get votes. So instead of writing "pretty good but not great" as a review, I would try to come up with a in-depth response.

Manny wrote: "Well, I'm clearly a vote whore if the definition is based on writing in a way that's more likely to get votes. But I don't pick books on those grounds."

Next discussion question could be "What strategies do you use to get votes."

As for picking unusual / popular books, I think Manny's reviews stand out because they're about string theory, chess techniques, and other techniques.

I like votes only if people promise to read the book. I expect a commitment!

Other than this, crafting a proper review takes time and I'd rather get paid for the privilege (whenever I get any reviewing work, which is rare these days, damn economy).

Manny wrote: " Was that a reference to my attempts to convince you that Houellebecq actually isn't so bad?"

he's lovely.

Note a vote whore. Probably because I'm not on this site as much as I used to be, I dunno.

Used to enjoy a feature back in the old days of Goodreads, called "top profiles."

That list I worked very hard at being on, finding crazy, attention grabbing avatars.
But now that's all gone.
*weeps*

The reviews I write are usually misspelled, grammatically incorrect... nothing great. If it makes someone laugh and they vote for it, I'm happy.

If it challenges the way someone thinks, I'm happy.

If it starts a heated debate... good.

It is rare that I have the time to look at what the top reviews are. When I do, I'm often surprised at the dumb ones that get a ton of votes. And yet, there's some damn good writing on this site as well. I just don't think the cream rises to the top here as much as it should/could.

I am not a vote whore, but I play one on Goodreads.

Sometimes I think that voting on Goodreads is a touchier, more emotionally-charged issue than abortion or Keri Russell's drastic haircut on Felicity. I have tried to delve into the psychology of voting on review threads, but often people take such discussions personally -- as if you are personally accusing them of being vote whorish or slutty in the disbursement of their votes.

When I first started on this website, votes were harder to come by. There wasn't a general assumption that you'd even reach double-digit vote counts because voters were more -- I won't say discriminating, but maybe reluctant is the righter word. My review of Emma Goldman's Autobiography maxed out at two whopping votes.

Since then, voting seems to have suffered from rampant inflation. A review that was once worth ten votes is now worth thirty. I speculate that the way votes are used has changed. It was once more meritocratic (to some extent), and now it's more like writing 'David was here' on the desk in homeroom underneath some obscene squiggles. It's also like signing the guestbook at a wake, I think. Morbid, yes, but there does seem as though there's something more ritualistic or ceremonial about voting than there used to be. This is not a value judgment, by the way, (i.e., it was better in Ye Olden Days), but an acknowledgement of perceived difference.

Votes do mean a great deal to people, however. I have had more than one or two Goodreads members confront me privately about why I do not vote for their reviews. No, unfortunately, I'm not joking. This strikes me as not only very sad, but entirely contradictory to the way in which I happen to use my vote. I've also noticed some trends wherein people only vote for your reviews if you vote for theirs. I'm not begrudging anyone his or her particular motives for voting, but I wish (for some reason) that people were more honest about it. You want your back patted. Fine. I'll pat it -- if you're fine with the pat losing its value by being requested...

I have had more than one or two Goodreads members confront me privately about why I do not vote for their reviews.

That is fucking stupid.

and sad.























oh, please go vote for my reviews when you are done here.
Thanks!!

I'm probably a little bit of a vote whore, because I know that every time I write an abridged Shakespeare review it's probably going to get a lot of votes, even if the whole thing is just "'Fuck you, Hamlet!' 'No, fuck YOU, Laertes!' DIES."
(in my defense, I started writing the Shakespeare reviews before Goodreads introduced the vote system)

But I definitely agree that the best way to get a ton of votes is to write a critically strong but funny review of some really popular, usually YA book - visit the Twilight page sometime and see how many votes some of those reviews get.

Based just on the numbers, my most popular review is my abridged Romeo and Juliet - I've gotten a few notifications about people voting for it lately, which means a lot of high school students are going to be tested on the play soon.

I like the communicative aspect of voting, too. When I vote, I'm not just telling the writer "I like this", but also telling my friends "hey, you should check out this review". And I've found so many amazing reviews I never would have seen otherwise because my friends voted on them. So beyond the controversial popularity-contest aspect of voting, I think it is a force of good.

Exactly, Aerin. Seeing when other people 'like' something nearly always makes me want to read it (sometimes even if I know I don't like the book; it isn't the book that interests me, it's the written expression of the reviewer).

If I'm not fussed on the review, I might leave a polite comment just to acknowledge the reviewer. Or the review might not be the trigger, but the thread that follows, and I can't stop myself from adding my 2 piastres worth.