THE Group for Authors! discussion

So, what does everyone think about rating their own books? Is this something that is normally NOT done because it seems tacky, or is it something one should do?

Well, I do it with my book. I think it is okay for authors to do it. It shows pride in your work. Authors work hard in all of their works. We should be allowed to give ourselves the ranking we think we deserve. I don't think it's tacky unless an author adds a review saying how great it is. I added a review saying what poems from my collection book are my favorites. This is only my opinion on the matter. I'm no expert.

That is a good idea. I had seen someone else say they would review their book, saying what they liked and what they didn't like. Giving an actual honest review. I have thought about the same, but not sure. If there are parts I DIDN'T like, then I should have changed them lol.

I've always considered writing to be a sickness. Self-diagnosis is unavoidable, and when the malady calls for immediate and obvious therapy it may be appropriate for the patient to self-medicate. However, I think it's inadvisable to stand in the center of the surgical theater and announce that your problem is acute appendicitis, when it's apparent to the observers seated around you that your are merely flatulent.

If it needs rewriting, publish a second (or third) edition. If not, your pride in your work is irrelevant -- good or bad, you felt that your thoughts were important enough to warrant setting them down in writing. The vast majority of humanity could never accomplish such a task. When your cover art shows up on Amazon, you can't help but give yourself five stars.

I love how you phrased that Jon. Very humorous but it gets the point across.

LOL yes, well said Jon.

Al wrote: "I have absolutely no issues with self-promotion."

Nor should you. Marketing indie involves parking your modesty and doing whatever you can to fix your name or your titles in the long-term memory of people who, were you to approach them in the local mall, would immediately call Security.

What you DON'T want is for them to remember you as a sleazy operator out to trick them into giving you money. If you've made up your mind to rate your own book 5-stars, go ahead. More customers for me!

Jon Etheredge

Where's the "like" button? I enjoyed and agreed with your comment Jon.

I'm surprised no one has pointed out the hypocrisy of railing against self-rating while tolerating the existence of an autoerotic review of one my own books (currently languishing in the Amazon slush pile).

Jon Etheredge

I considered rating my own book, but I'm still mad there are no half stars. Now I'm torn between rounding up or down from where I think I am.

A lot of authors do it. I'm not sure what it is supposed to mean. I'd be interested in hearing what the "official" Goodreads advice is, but as a reader when I see it, it puzzles me. There are so many ways to communicate with one's readers through goodreads, so rating one's own book just seems like a way to pump up one's average rating. It could be an honest attempt at self-evaluation, but from what ive observed the majority of authors give themselves 5 stars. Again, many authors do it including authors I respect a lot.

I took the liberty of asking an unbiased reader to offer her opinion of the practice in question. Chosen at random from a local population of unpublished non-authors, she shares nothing in common with me and is, for all intents and purposes, a complete stranger. To ensure her personal safety from retribution by throngs of enraged self-raters, my wife has consented to be quoted here solely on the condition of anonymity.

"Ick," she said.

When I added my own book to my shelves at Shelfari I wasn't quite sure how to deal with that issue - didn't want it sitting on my "Read" shelf without anything indicating it had actually been read. I did not rate it but posted in the Review section that I was the author...

K.A. wrote: "When I added my own book to my shelves at Shelfari I wasn't quite sure how to deal with that issue - didn't want it sitting on my "Read" shelf without anything indicating it had actually been read...."

If it's a book you wrote, I would think it highly likely you read it at least once. That is different from padding your statistics by posting an info-rich rating and review. The latter is known as "sandbagging". The temptation to put your own review next to your book on Amazon is irresistible when the alternative is that damned "Be the first to review..." link that tells the world what a noob you are. But giving in to the siren's call merely calls attention to your new status as an uber-noob.

I still have a ways to go with my own books and short stories. They have been downloaded hundreds of times by old classmates, friends, and family members who have sworn blood oaths to write scads of reviews praising my hard work. And you know what? Bupkus (bupkis?).

I'm open to trying new stuff. Donating the book to a high school creative writing course might work (if I can dredge up some dirt on the teacher). Following the Ruth Nestvold checklist may or may not work (I'm still testing it).

It's a labor of love. Just avoid the trap of hysterical narcissism.

Jon Etheredge

I didn't rate my own book. While I think having confidence in your work is important, I also believe self promotion is a very slippery slope.

Jon, I now have to read one of your books. If they are even half as entertaining as your posts here I know I won't be disappointed. :)

Lanie wrote: "I didn't rate my own book. While I think having confidence in your work is important, I also believe self promotion is a very slippery slope.

Jon, I now have to read one of your books. If they ar..."

Let me know if I'm any good. %^}

An additional word of caution about self-rating. Amazon's review policy says they will remove reviews that include sentiments by or on behalf of a person or company with a financial interest in the product or a directly competing product (including reviews by authors, artists, publishers, manufacturers, or third-party merchants selling the product)

I may be paranoid, but I think they mean us.

Jon Etheredge

Jon wrote: "An additional word of caution about self-rating. Amazon's review policy says they will remove reviews that include sentiments by or on behalf of a person or company with a financial interest in th..."

That's really helpful -- there's our answer. Don't do it.

You know, yesterday a guy gave me a 3, which brought my overall rating down a bit. I was kind of tempted to give myself a 5 just to bump my rating back up!

LOL well thanks for all your help. I kinda think it is tacky to review it because obviously you are biased. But I do rate them!

Steven wrote: "Jon wrote: "An additional word of caution about self-rating. Amazon's review policy says they will remove reviews that include sentiments by or on behalf of a person or company with a financial in..."

I don't worry about a "3". I worry about straight 5's. I don't want Amazon's rating system to go the way of eBay's feedback ratings, where a 98% score is mediocre.

That said, a 3 in GR is not the same as a 3 in Amazon. In GR, I interpret a 3 as a wake-up call, and it forces me back to the editing table for the next edition of that book. By the way, every reader that left me a "3" here on GR left me great notes, far beyond the "This guy sucks" I usually get. If they review the next release and want to white out their previous rating, I'll be the one standing the door refusing to allow the change, pen in one hand and rolled oilskin manuscript gripped firmly in the other, fists thrusting toward the sky in divine defiance, pointing my finger at the reviewer and with my hands on my hips telling them "Nay, go ye back, thou foul, indecisive reviewer," and swelling my bronzed, sculpted bare upper torso, sling my long, manly blonde curls from their resting place atop my powerful shoulder muscles and, pointing in the direction of the stables, tighten my sash and silently give them leave to return the way they came, and atop the same steed.

On the other hand, a "3" on Amazon earns the cat a swift kick.

Jon Etheredge

No, he left a 3 with no comment. As far as I'm concerned, the book is done. it's been reviewed, it even won a couple of awards. So it's not going through revisions. Some people love it, some people won't. But I'd still prefer they all love it!

And by the way, that's what I'd recommend to anyone. Once we publish a book, it belongs to the world to do what they will with it. For us, it's On to the next. I mentioned the "3" just because it gave me a momentary itch to rate myself a "5" (which was the original topic here)

Your books look interesting by the way. I'd hope you wouldn't rewrite them if I read them and gave them 3's ....

I didn't give myself a 5 star to bump up my ratings. I did it, because I can and I religiously rate and review every book. However, I refrained from reviewing my own, which I would find tacky. Many well respected authors rate their own stuff, so I'll follow the trend. Maybe their fameousness (if that is even a word) would sprinkle on me. Jon sprinkle your fame glitter on all of us!

Damn, Hannah! Now I gotta put up with that visual stuck in my brain all day long!

Jon Etheredge

Ha! *throws hands up in victory while riding a lawn mower across a football field* Victory is mine!

Travis wrote: "LOL well thanks for all your help. I kinda think it is tacky to review it because obviously you are biased. But I do rate them!"

How is it less tacky to rate it than to review it, where you can mention that you are the author so people know?

Perhaps I missed a point, here (or here and there). Why review your own work at all? Did the author perhaps run out of space in the book's Description or Author's Info sections?

Beware unbridled eloquence that overflows into a review. People will read the reviews and bump headlong into your name...twice in close proximity ("TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD" by Harper Lee/ Review -- "HarperLee103 - I cried like a baby.") This is a visual roadblock, and whether or not it is perceived consciously, it will put the reader off-balance and they will simply skip to the next book or author in their list. And that's the best case.

If your name is unrecognizably different from your user name, you might get away with your deception for a while. But eventually the reader will discover they have been duped and they won't care about the purity of your intentions. They will just move on, returning to your self-review only to show their wrestling team roommate what they had found so that they both can point and have good laugh.

The beers they are drinking were paid for with money that could have gone into YOUR pocket, had you not tried such obvious trickery. Instead of reading your latest novel and telling his Uncle Harold about a great story he can base Brad Pitt's next movie on, your Lost Reader will careen into an abyss of booze-fueled debauchery, terminating only when he wakes up on the bathroom floor, his head resting on a white porcelain pillow filled with water, slowly realizing that the wallet floating inches away from his nose is his own, and wondering why his nightmare of a painful homosexual advance by his roommate seemed so REAL.

And it will all be your fault.


Jon Etheredge

At a writers' conference I attended years ago, editors from five of the "big" New York houses made no bones about the fact they had interns writing Amazon reviews for their books. What's the difference? Uhm ... you do know you can open an Amazon account under whatever name you want, order a book under that name (or a copy of your own book along with whatever best-selling author you're shadowing so your book appears as one that people "also bought," then post reviews under that name. You can even use your own credit card for payment.


Travis wrote: "So, what does everyone think about rating their own books? Is this something that is normally NOT done because it seems tacky, or is it something one should do?"

Hiring people to review a book is a fairly dishonest practice, I suppose, and maybe it should be banned (maybe it IS banned already, for example, bloggers who charge for reviews are banned from Amazon, so I would think paid staffers might also be banned). But I guess the question becomes how an author rating looks to potential readers, rather than the ethics issue itself. A lot of stuff authors do in this new world just seems tacky and annoying, and I think we're just trying to figure out what practices seem tacky and annoying to prospective readers. What stuff actually hurts us when we do it?

If a reader sees that my book has three ratings on Goodreads, five stars each, and then upon closer inspection sees that the reviewers are me, my co-author and my illustrator, does that make me look good or does it hurt me? Does that annoy the prospective reader? Or if my rating is just sitting there, pumping up my average a bit - does that help, because my average goes up, or does it make a reader tune out the average, since it's at least somewhat fake. I think that's the question. In my view, it doesn't help, although I know a lot of people do it.

Similarly, the example you raise, fake reviews on Amazon: When there are only three reviews for a book on Amazon, and each one over-exhalts the book("the best book I have ever read", "a must-read", and so on), and the book is the only one that any of them has ever reviewed, then you can be pretty sure that those reviewers are either the author herself or close relatives. Readers will tune those reviews out, and maybe even get a bit annoyed to have wasted their time. Readers are pretty smart in figuring out what's a fake review and what's real, so they might actually be able to tune out those paid staffers, too.

So I think the question, again, is not necessarily what's honest - it's perfectly honest to give yourself a five star rating on Goodreads - but how the practice will seem to potential readers.

For example - it would be perfectly honest and ethical for me to end this post with a plug for my own book, but it annoys people, and since it annoys people it is counterproductive, and so the practice is banned.

Steven wrote: "For example - it would be perfectly honest and ethical for me to end this post with a plug for my own book, but it annoys people, and since it annoys people it is counterproductive, and so the practice is banned. "

And yet, here you offer a concise representation of your writing style and your ethics as a storyteller. I think I'll look up your book. I don't think I'm alone.



Jon Etheredge

Got the book -- the cheap Kindle version. So far (3% in), it's a fun read. And I must say that at least two of your 3-star reviewers could crush pennies between their butt cheeks!

I'll go ahead and commit to a review on GR when I'm finished, cross-posting to Amazon. (pocket change beware!)

Jon

Steven and Jon, I share your remarks regarding self-rating.

I wouldn't think rating your own book is a good idea and I wish it didn't give you the option. It asking me to write a review/rate it each time I see my title is rather irritating. Anyway I think it comes down to honesty.People use the rating system to see what readers of the book think, and yes you read it of course because you wrote it, however you are not unbiased. It can be tempting to color in those little stars but I say don't do it.

I do wish that those who rated the book had to actually review it as well. I just received 2 stars from someone(ouch) but they didn't say why. Now that bothers me. Not everyone will like my book and I am aware if that. The difficulty I have is that I am pigeonholed in a genre that is full of people who love books like Twilight and the Vampire diaries, so these are the people who will buy my book, but because the writing and story is SOOOOO different from these books they are used to they will not necessarily enjoy it. So knowing why someone didn't like it would have been very helpful.

I have decided to not rate my own book, here or on Amazon. For one thing, it doesn't mean anything. When I read that the author gave their own book five stars, my thought is, "Yeah, and?" I want to see the author who gives themselves three stars. That would be funny.

Having said that, I'm really upset with Goodreads. I was the target of an attack by an idiot blogger who gave me one-star reviews at GR and Amazon without even reading my book. She even admitted she hadn't read it. She was just trying to tick me off. Goodreads refused to remove the review, even after a long (and frustrating) phone conversation with Patrick. So if the rating system is just authors giving themselves five stars, and bitter little people giving them one, what does a rating system really mean, anyway?

Rating your own work falls in line with other classic but frowned upon American pastimes that people (despite feelings of guilt) clandestinely partake in. Off the top of my head, these include pigging out on Twinkies, picking your nose when you think no one is looking, secretly being into fat chicks if you're a popular jock, and of course, refusing to admit that you enjoy music from popular 90's boy bands when you've got a tough guy image to uphold.

In short: rating your own work, much like the above scenarios, is very taboo. (Would a Red Sox fan ever be caught dead cheering for the Yankees?)

We've all been guilty of those things at some point or another (my nose is permanently sewn shut now and if an Nsync song comes on, my jock buddies instantly burn the radio and slap that Twinkie out of my hand, effectively halting my twisted dreams of plus sized women draped in bed sheets).

I usually tell people this--that most of us Americans are compulsive liars trying to delude everyone around us by putting up a facade--and they wholeheartedly agree, affirming the notion that we can't help but indulge in our deepest, darkest desires...

...That is, until I'm eventually called out on all my B.S. when it's ultimately revealed that ironically enough, I'm not even a jock to begin with... or American.

Martin Reed

Martin wrote: "Rating your own work falls in line with other classic but frowned upon American pastimes that people (despite feelings of guilt) clandestinely partake in. Off the top of my head, these include pigg..."
'refusing to admit that you enjoy music from popular 90's boy bands when you've got a tough guy image to uphold.'
Hey, don't feel bad about that Martin; I'm embarrassed to say I had a huge crush on George Michael of Wham (wake me up before you go go!) Freddy Mercury and John Travolta. I sure knew how to pick 'em right? :)
Eve Rabi

I was guesting at a book club last who had read my book. One of their questions was, "Do you respond to reviewers? Where do the reviews come from?"

My answer was a quick, emphatic, "No. Most of the time I have no idea who these people are. I touch NOTHING." And I explained the issues of credibility of reviews online.

As someone else said, it can be a slippery slope. I'd rather a three-star stood as a genuine three star, than reviews that are coerced, manipulated or otherwise jiggered. :)

I'm finding the very facet of the book one person feels "meh" about, another reader will love. So I keep my hands off and let the readers do what they do best-- read.

It all evens out in the long run, anyway.

Eve,

No reason for embarrassment regarding your JT crush. As Vincent Vega, he enlightened us of the nuances when it came to classifying burgers across various continents. That's priceless information right there. Oh, and the guy went out like a champ, taking a fistful of bullets from John McClane. That's legendary stuff right there.

Martin Reed

Martin wrote: "Eve,

No reason for embarrassment regarding your JT crush. As Vincent Vega, he enlightened us of the nuances when it came to classifying burgers across various continents. That's priceless informat..."

Ha ha!
Well Martin, could have been worse, Martin, at least I didnt have a crush on Michael Jackson. :)

Patrick wrote: "I have decided to not rate my own book, here or on Amazon. For one thing, it doesn't mean anything. When I read that the author gave their own book five stars, my thought is, "Yeah, and?" I want to..."

Patrick, why would a blogger single you out for attack like that?

Martin wrote: "Eve,

No reason for embarrassment regarding your JT crush. As Vincent Vega, he enlightened us of the nuances when it came to classifying burgers across various continents. That's priceless informat..."

Jules was much cooler than Vincent, except for that one moment when Vincent got to stab Mia in the chest with the giant needle.

Jules stole my wallet, by the way.

Jules always was one bad [insert expletive]. Ringo would know.

So would his Honey Bunny.

@Judith: I don't know of anyone who believes that the practice of using "sock puppet" accounts is ethical. It is a technique for gaming the system, and it further erodes what little value star ratings have in the first place.

Regarding rating your own book...

Most readers seem to believe that star ratings have meaning, and they use them as a filtering mechanism when searching for new reading material. If readers know that your rating was partly based on a rating you gave your own book, how do you think that would make them feel about the value of your book's rating? If you rated your own book, how many of those other ratings are also bogus because they came from friends or family you enlisted to help you out?

The problem with rating your own book is that it destroys your credibility and the credibility of your book's rating.

I have to agree with Daniel--there may be those who gloss over who actually posts the reviews, but I notice when a book is rated/reviewed by its own author and it casts the other reviews in a suspicious light as well.

I had originally used that space (on the Goodreads listing) to place information on my books - how they came about, basic information. Then I sat down and thought things through, and I concluded that that space is for readers, not for writers. I don't have any presence in that part of my books' listing.

Pity: the information was good, but I did feel that it was uneasy-making.

Evangeline wrote: "The difficulty I have is that I am pigeonholed in a genre that is full of people who love books like Twilight and the Vampire diaries, so these are the people who will buy my book, but because the writing and story is SOOOOO different from these books they are used to they will not necessarily enjoy it."

This, this, this, this, this! You described my situation exactly.

On the topic, I don't think I'll rate or review my work, but I don't have a problem with people doing it. But honestly, with ratings anywhere I ALWAYS look at the lowest ratings first and stop at mid-level. I want to know why someone didn't like something in order to figure out whether it would bother me as well.

By the way, nice to meet everyone!

Can you unrate?

Ardin wrote: "Can you unrate?"

Yes. You'd have to remove the book from your shelves (on the review page, there's a "delete this review" link at the bottom; on your my books page, there's an X by the book). You could then add the book back to your shelves without rating it.

Thanks Patrick. Guess I was convinced by those against self-rating here! :)