The ability to search reviews sitewide

Greets:

I find myself seeing a lot of common keywords in reviews when I;m spam hunting. Normally I just drop a site:librarything.com and the keyword into google and see what I get but I find myself missing a lot. I think it;s because the reviews are delivered via a javascript that maybe Google isn;t picking up on them.

Being able to search reviews would be helpful for finding these stray spooks floating around.

Just wanted to throw this suggestion out there.

thanks,
-drmike

I agree. As a workaround, I've used site:librarything.com/work keyword(s), which sometimes works.

#1 - I find myself seeing a lot of common keywords in reviews when I;m spam hunting.

I've just gotta know: what are some of the common phrases? I hope I don't use them in my reviews!

2) Agreed and I mentioned that but since many places those portions of the site are served via javascript and Google is notorious for having problems picking up content presented within javascripts, I don;t have much success.

3) I don;t see anything in your reviews. And I do check before marking something as spam.

1 & 3: site:librarything.com/work/*/reviews keyword(s) also works sometimes

Why do you hunt for spam? Do you think it will go unnoticed by casual users and thus unreported? Or ?

Considering I'm pulling stuff up from 2008 and earlier, um yes?

edit: Just looked at your profile page and noticed there's not a single badge on your page. So what do you do around here to help out?

>7 theapparatus: You mean, besides mckait's 200+ reviews, 1200+ catalog, with tags, and membership in a dozen groups and generally improving LT by adding their book enthusiasm to it?

>7 theapparatus: That was a bit harsh, Mike, and makes you look silly and petty.

7> It's comments like that that might make Tim remove the badge feature.

Just to say, I can see some value in having a site-wide search for reviews besides searching for spam. I'm not sure searching for spam in and of itself would be enough to warrant a new feature (though I know how useful it would be; so would a search of terms on profiles). But it might be interesting to be able to search reviews for other non-spam terms, too.

As a rule, I like all data to be as searchable as possible. Because you never know when it will become vitally important to ascertain how many times the word "lyrical" is used in a book review.

> 12

Or "luminous prose".

7> i would rather have a hundred spammers than one user with that attitude.

Interesting that #7 is so touchy about a simple question?

oh and thanks to the rest of you who stepped up to be nice.. :)
much appreciated

>7 theapparatus: Wow. That was...wow. And you actually read books, "drmike", with that attitude? Doctor of what, BTW? Certainly nothing in the arts, or the humanities; or if so, give it back.

Signed, two gold badges.

Well you know what, I;m sorry if you didn't like my response. Considering he or she pretty well pissed me off with that statement and made me feel like what time I;ve put it here has been wasted and for nothing.

Sorry if I offended folks but I was highly offended with what was said to me.

edit: And thanks for seeing it from my side.

@18... I agree with the others, your remarks to mckait were uncalled for. I would guess the majority here don't give a thought to badges nor determine another member's value based on what they've done to improve the site. Membership does not entail policing others' activities.

I have seen that you've done a lot of painstaking work around here, as have many others, but lately you've become a zealot, in my opinion, when it comes to spam and are frankly absuing the process. Most of these libraries/organizations aren't doing any harm here with their non reviews.

If you want to go searching for and zapping away the aluminum siding sellers that post on here, I think that's great and will support you a hundred percent. But please, stop picking on the legitimate members that have chosen to put something else in the review field. Just because it is not a review does not make it SPAM.

19>

But please, stop picking on the legitimate members that have chosen to put something else in the review field. Just because it is not a review does not make it SPAM.

And just because it's not spam doesn't mean it's okay. Blue flags are valuable and necessary, and calling out members who mistakenly (the charitable interpretation) or deliberately abuse the review field is not "picking on" anyone, it's doing important work to keep the site healthy.

18> I don't think there was anything in the message for you to necessarily take it that way.

And just because it's not spam doesn't mean it's okay

Who decides if a review is "okay" ?

This is not a hostile question.. I am curious. I might be mistaken, but I think that
Tim has a much more relaxed attitude about what is "okay" here at LT than some users do. That is a good thing in my opinion. It makes for a very user friendly site for most users, I think?

> 22

Who decides if a review is "okay" ?

Well, some things are pretty obvious. "I haven't read this yet," or "on my wishlist", cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be considered reviews. And I have seen both! Gets a blue flag.

Cutting-and-pasting a review from the NYT is not okay, either. That's a copyright/TOS violation. Gets a red flag.

It's things like reviews that say, in their entirety, "No"*, or give just plot summaries, that are a grey area. Personally, I don't flag anything that expresses an opinion or gives information about the book, however minimal it may be. "Awesome!" is, in my view, a review. Not a very good or useful one, perhaps, but a review just the same.

*That's one of Tim's reviews!

@19 Oh please, in these instances it's blatant abuse. Blue flags are basically worthless, you said so yourself in the past week. I agree and wholeheartedly support getting true spammers off the site as they are a nuisance to all. Those that want to spend their time blue flagging because an LT organization put a link to their library or a collector puts a price in the review field are free to do so but they shouldn't expect kudos for it. That's not to mention those that abuse the red flags because of the same.

I do remember the "NO" review :)
I not only write reviews, but read a lot of them.
I thought it was pretty amusing, to be honest.

Awesome.. I agree with you.. and I agree with the rest as well. I have
blue flagged a review or two myself that was a copy.paste.

I also flag and report the aluminum siding spammers..
I just had no idea that people spent time searching out "spam"
Fascinating, that. And I had no idea that there were member reading though reviews just to find some that they do not feel are okay..rather than for information or pleasure.

But then, I am just an ignorant member with no medals or badges or whatever, so that may account for my ignorance on the subject.

Thanks lilithcat

:)

22> In broad terms, whether a review is "okay" is determined by the users of the site collectively.

If I find a review that is commercial spam or abusive, I'll flag it red as an "abuse of the terms of service". If it's not a review, I'll flag it blue ("not a review"). If I see a review that has been flagged by (an) other user(s), but I think it's fine, I'll counter-flag it. If the review receives a certain number of red flags, then the review is hidden, but if you're curious, you can still see what it said by clicking on 'show'. I'm not certain the blue flags actually do anything, however, I'm guessing if Tim thought the review box was a free-for-all and you could put anything you like in it, he wouldn't have made it possible for users to flag entries that aren't a review.

I actually think it is a problem that libraries are using the review field for things other than reviews. I quite often look at reviews when deciding what to read next, but when I find that they're populated with things that aren't reviews, I find it frustrating. I think one of the best things LT has going for it is quality of data (it's not perfect but still better than the other options). There are other fields that can be used for that sort of information (comments, private comments, tags, etc). I really don't think it's that much to ask that people use the review field to post reviews only.

7> As someone who also spends some time looking for spam, I'll also answer your question. The reason that I do so is to keep the site as free from spam as possible and to get rid of spam as quickly as it's added to the site. The more spam that enters the system without being appropriately and efficiently dealt with, the more incentive there is for the spammers to add more spam. If you're interested in spam fighting and why it's done, why not check out the Spam Fighters! group?

Apologies for the long post!

Thank you for your explanation..

I don't think that I implied that Tim thinks the review field is a "free for all".

I agree that the field should be used for reviews, and had no idea that
anyone / libraries put inappropriate things there.

I agree that LT has that, and many other things going for it.

I did look at that group actually... after seeing this thread this morning. Frankly...I am here to catalog my books and enjoy the company of others, and I have no desire ( or time) to police what other people post. If spam shows up in a thread, I flag it.. I am a member who plays by the rules, I think? And to be honest, I don't lose any sleep over not having any medals on my profile.. or over what other people ( most likely with no negative intent, for the most part) put in a text box. That group looked a little.. too serious, for my taste. Just an opinion..and personal taste.

Thanks for the suggestion though :)

22>

Here are things that are not a review:

A price.

A list of tags.

The letter "n".

A link to the book in a library catalog.

I've seen, and flagged, all of those. Generally I also leave a profile comment (especially for tags, since there was a bug for a while that the bulk-upload could put tags in the review field.)

Here are some things that are a review:

"I liked it."

"Couldn't finish."

"No."

Does that help clarify things?

actually, lilithcat did a wonderful ( an friendly) job of explaining ..several posts ago.. but thank you for your input.

27> I get the impression that you may have thought I may have been 'having a go' at you and I sincerely apologise if that's the way it came across. Really, the comment about what libraries are doing with the review field should have been directed at comment 18.

To clarify, I don't think it's necessary to have any medals on your profile to make a positive contribution to this site and I'm sure many others here feel the same way.

Thanks for the clarification :)
I guess I am feeling a bit .. vulnerable here..

I appreciate your coming back to be so nice, sorry I wasn't sure earlier.

30>

To clarify, I don't think it's necessary to have any medals on your profile to make a positive contribution to this site and I'm sure many others here feel the same way.

I agree 100%.

31> It's ok, I'd probably be feeling the same if I were you. I genuinely feel that some of the comments directed at you in this thread were unwarranted.

23 and 28 both both have guidelines I certainly agree with as regards to what should/shouldn't be blue flagged. While mckait is new to this puzzlement over policing for spam, I've noticed over the past year an increase in talk threads started by the same certain members for the sole reason to gather a gang up to go flag these accounts.

Maybe I should clarify something--the members/actions I am disagreeing with are in regards to non- reviews and non-SPAM being red flagged. The action of flagging a price in the review field with a red flag is what gets me everytime.

Again, I do think most members follow the guidelines and help get rid of tons of the commercial crap. I shudder to think what this place would be like without your efforts and I wouldn't want to deter anyone from such laudible work. I would just like to see it not be abused, even if claimed for the greater good.

34> I completely agree that those reviews should never be red flagged, although it would be nice if eventually the blue flags led to a review being hidden from the work page (and I think that this should definately require a higher threshold than for spam/red flag reviews).

If I see a non review flagged as spam, I'll counter flag it straight away. I will, however, flag it as not a review.

Tim sets these guidelines for a reason and I, for one, am happy to work within them.

As someone who has had a lot of my reviews blue-flagged because I bash away at peoples' sacred cows in them (specifically, I insult "Twilight" as a terrible example to offer young women, and Christianity as an idiotic mis-syncretic myth-mash, with some regularity), I don't really feel this system of flagging things has much to offer that I want. For this same reason, I loathe the idea of people being able to comment on reviews.

@35, I agree that it would be nice if there were a more tangible result for blue flags. As I've proposed before, I think that flagging should be updated. I do agree with Tim's looseness of the situation most of the time, but the issue of non-data reviews increases in relation to member growth and there needs to be a more acceptable way to deal with it. I think that would greatly cut down the abuse of the red flags. At the very least the system should notify a member when a review is flagged.

Where's _Zoe_ ? There should be polls:)

@36 I agree whole-heartedly. Unfortunately there are always going to be those that abuse the privilege and the number one reason there should never be comments allowed on reviews. Too many juvenile delinquents around to even consider such adult responsibilty.

I put a lot of reviews on Amazon, as well...There are a lot of people there who
will "flag" a review by clicking not helpful. They also post unfriendly comments.. if they disagree with your review. This is something I have never understood. I may disagree totally with a review, but that is not a reason to flag or make it unhelpful. I imagine there is some crossover between there and here when it comes to those who flag reviews in the manner #36 mentions.

I use reader reviews all the time to make reading, purchase or request for Vine decisions. I put a lot more stock in reader reviews than I do professional ones.
And readers are not necessarily writers, so reviews are sometimes a bit sketchy...including my own I am sure. This doesn't matter to me. What matters is the opinions stated in reviews. That is, after all what a review is. It is an opinion of a particular reader. Sadly, our society today does not seem to allow for differing opinions or lively discussions. Such things often attract hateful actions. Just turn on the news.. What happens here and at Amazon is just a very tiny symptom of it. imo

"Too many juvenile delinquents around to even consider such adult responsibilty" .. all too true.

I too, loathe the idea of people being able to comment on reviews. I believe it will cause hard feelings. I know someone here who had a perfectly wonderful review flagged for no apparent reason.. and it put her off of reviewing for quite some time.

Speaking of loathing.. I loathe polls! ugh! They never give a true picture of opinions, they only show the opinions of those who happen on the thread or who follow the polling threads. No one speaks for me either politically.. or just here on LT.

Once again, Tim's hands off, relaxed manner of management sure works for me.

>38 mckait: "I put a lot more stock in reader reviews than I do professional ones. "

Just curious-- why?

38> Speaking of loathing.. I loathe polls! ugh! They never give a true picture of opinions, they only show the opinions of those who happen on the thread or who follow the polling threads.

Yet you say that you follow reader reviews to make purchase decisions (I'm presuming for a library?). How many reviews do you read to get a fair sample? And doesn't the fact that you're only looking at the opinions of those willing to review a book skew your sample?

ETA: In other words, aren't reviews just another kind of poll?

40> In other words, aren't reviews just another kind of poll?

That seems such an oversimplification of the differences that you'd have to intentionally blindfold yourself to get there.

40>

In other words, aren't reviews just another kind of poll?

No.

Take a look at my most-thumbed review, and the rest of the reviews for that book. You can certainly glean "This is not a very good book" from them, but it's selling the reviews ridiculously short to pretend that that's all they are. And that's a case where almost all of the reviews agree; in most cases, where reviews are divided, it's even less of a "poll" situation.

The polls comment was just an attempt at humor that missed :)

I don't think of reviews as polls, but I do see where @40 could perceive it as such. A very, very unscientific one, but reviews could be construed at the basic level as Yea, Nay and Undecided.

Personally, I don't use reviews on LT or Amazon prior to deciding what to read or purchase. There are way too many that give too much of the contents away, and that's not counting the ones that give everything away. Some reviews, especially on LT make me contemplate whether I should just add the book to my catalog and mark it read. The reviewer left nothing for me to get excited about. I read reviews only after I post my own, and that's just because I have an annoying need to see where my grasp of the material landed.

I do keep a list of books mentioned in Talk threads (which has grown ridiculously larger with the more time I spend on LT), or on the radio, etc., and I have a few sites from which to check a work out further to make my decision. I find a lot of new authors this way and I discard a lot of works that "sound" interesting, but would be a waste of my time and money to pursue. At present I have several hundred selections in my bookcases and I'm sooooo trying to not add to them as often as I used to :)

43> but reviews could be construed at the basic level as Yea, Nay and Undecided

That's why my in my own personal opinion, the "Yea", "Nay" or "Undecided" aren't "reviews." For me, the word "review" and "vote" or "rating" aren't synonymous. I know they can be on LT, though. Someone's "review" can consist of "No" or "4.5". But (to me) that turns the word "review" into a meaningless word, a redundant synonym for "rating". To me, it has to have a lot more than this to be a "review."

As such, I can't agree that you could boil down a review to be a vote. It's like saying, "At the basic level, and apple is an orange, since they're both fruit."

#44 - I think you were missing what #43 is saying.

Note that Published Reviews section of a work page has little thumbs summarizing the opinion of the reviewer.

Take for example, the reviews on Going Rogue.

Christopher Hitchens review for the Sunday Times is very positive. That would be a yea.

Wall Street Journal's review is negative. That would be a nay.

The New Yorker review is mixed. That would be an undecided.

Yet surely, all of those count as reviews.

@45 thanks for putting it together with examples--exactly as I interpreted what jjwilson61 was suggesting.

@44 I agree with you that NO and 4.5 would not consistute a review for me either. Well, the NO I understood because it was Tim, but if abcgirl2 posted a NO, I couldn't be quite sure about the intent.

I do however think "awesome", "sucks" and "bleeh" are acceptable. I can grasp what they feel about the work in question. If I need more info to form an opinion, that's on me. It isn't the reviewers responsibility to get you to buy/not buy the book, it's to tell you what they thought of it after they
read it.

I guess that my point was that to use reviews in a statistically valid way, as polls were criticized for not being, you'd have to read so many that the only way to make any sense of it would be to reduce each review to a poll or rating, and even after that it still wouldn't be statistically valid.

47> But you're missing the whole point of reviews. They're not a statistical tool; they're a critical tool. They're about literary criticism. Polls are something completely different. They're about trying to present what the userbase things. As such, sample size and characteristics are one of the most crucial aspects of any poll. As such, they're quite problematic when the sample is always just he people who happen to read the thread and vote in the poll.

47> I wasn't criticizing reviews, I was criticizing mckait's use of them where she said "I use reader reviews all the time to make reading, purchase or request for Vine decisions. I put a lot more stock in reader reviews than I do professional ones." and went on to say she hated polls.

I just thought those two views don't really make sense in the same head.

what is your real name i am cami yancey.also what is your favorite book? who is your favorite author? i look foreward to a response.

*Checks for target on back*

* finds one only visible in this thread*

*returns to mundane world*

#48 I agree.
#50 I consider that a personal attack .

how did anyone survive gradeschool?

>52 mckait: Remember this thread, where the only message that got flagged was your own?

Suggesting that you might be wrong is not an offense.

@50,52,54 Or just reading more into the phrase "don't really make sense in the same head" than I do. Head can be interpreted in terms of intelligence or sanity but I prefer to just understand it as meaning that the argument is illogical, no further implications.

52> I'm sorry if I phrased that poorly. It wasn't meant as a personal attack.

@52---I don't think @50 was a personal attack. Actually, I understood more their point with that post.

I can't speak for others, but I have a LOTS of instances of that "doesn't really make sense in the same head" going on in my very own all the time :)

@54 IMO, your posting of that thread was uncalled for and petty.

>57 debavp: I don't know, I thought it was worth defending jjwilson by pointing out that some people habitually take disagreement as an attack. I really don't think highly of unfounded accusations. I consider it far worse to accuse someone of something they didn't do (saying that jjwilson was making a personal attack) than to bring to light something they actually did do.

That's amusing zoe.. considering I have posted here at LT hundreds of times...
and have felt attacked here and one other time.

eta

in 2008? lol

>59 mckait: I think RSI is a very different animal from the rest of LT. People disagree here, sometimes heatedly. That doesn't tend to happen in places like the 75 Book Challenge.

@58--Using a dormant thread from two years ago doesn't make your argument the slightest bit credible that mckait habitually takes disagreement as a personal attack.

While we both agree that offense was not intended, I understand that it was reasonable mckait might have "felt" it as a continuation of the remarks made much earlier in the thread by another.

Oh yeah, I hope you're not too hard on yourself with regards to your own unfounded accusation that you've presented here :)

Besides, you're missing the main argument here re: polls v reviews, polls are reviews, etc. I was expecting you to jump in and create some polls to fuel the debate!

>61 debavp: Well, I'd say that I've read a lot of RSI threads and I don't remember one where she's engaged in a constructive back-and-forth disagreement. Show me some other RSI threads where she's presented reasoned arguments to support her position after someone said that she was wrong, and I'll agree that the one thread I linked to is an anomaly. I'm happy to be proven wrong here, but I'd like to see the evidence. (ETA: threads where she graciously changes her position would also be good)

Okay, and now for the fun part... ;)

Polls are an efficient way of gathering data. As long as we're aware of what group we're polling, I don't see the problem. Yes, the people who answer polls in RSI are going to be the people who read RSI... so? Now we've efficiently collected data from the people who read RSI. The alternative is just to see the opinions of the people who post, which is a much lower number and still restricted to those who read RSI. How is this better?

Polls vs. reviews is a bit of a strange comparison. I think it makes more sense to look at ratings vs. reviews, since ratings are effectively polls about "Is this a good book?". I think ratings are better for finding out the opinions of people you don't know, while reviews are better for finding out the opinions of people you do know. I'd trust a review from someone who I know has similar reading taste. I use ratings as a preliminary weeding step: if LT users as a whole think the book is bad, I'm not going to waste my time investigating further. I don't understand why certain people (*cough* Tim *cough*) constantly say that ratings are meaningless.And review comments.... The first argument against it seems to be that people would get their feelings hurt. So what if the comments were opt-in? People would only get comments on their reviews if they chose to allow it. And even then, flagging could be in place to deal with abusive review comments, just like on Talk.

I don't think LT users are incapable of civil discussion. I don't think the existence of disagreements is a sign that communication is a lost cause. Look at the examples in this very thread: there was a very strong response to the comment in #7, and even to my #54. The LT community cares about maintaining certain standards. Moreover, the whole discussion started with the issue of seeking out spam to flag; even potentially out-of-the way abusive review comments could be found and flagged by diligent members.

63> Does that include "comments about reviews but not attached directly to the review on the reviews page (either visible or with a "show comments" link)"?

Because I know there's several of us who wouldn't mind comments if they're in a Review Discussion section or Work Thread something (super touchstones was part of the RSI), but not immediately connected to the reviews.

>64 keristars: I was thinking comments attached to reviews by a "show comments" link. I don't think they're really "on" the review if you can't tell by looking at the review that it has comments.

In case there was any ambiguity, I add another poll! :DActually, I'd prefer the text to say something like "X comments. Show" or just "X comments" as a link, but I thought the poll wording was complicated enough already.

62> Sorry Zoe, I respectfully disagree. Recently, I've seen too many threads in various groups, including this one, decend to a level where at least one long time member felt personally attacked (whether they genuinely were or not). For example, drmike's comment above - in my view it wasn't quite personal abuse, but I think mckait had every right to feel offended. Even if comments are genuinely abuse, flagging the comments doesn't make the offended member feel any less offended. In most cases, they've still seen the original post.

I'd rather there were dedicated book discussion threads or, if that's not going to happen (which given Tim's current position seems to be the case), 'super touchstones' or similar, where people can discuss the books & reviews, but they're not directly linked to a member's review.

>66 TineOliver: The question is, do you think the level of offense is so bad that we would be better off without Talk?

(And as an aside, I actually do feel better after seeing flags on an abusive comment directed at me.)

I definitely want to see dedicated book discussion groups (not threads, which I think would be unworkable). I also want to see super-touchstones and comments on reviews. Basically, I think anything that increases discussion around books will be a net positive.

67> No, I think talk is fine, but I think having comments attached to a member's review makes (perceived) attacks (if any) more personal. I know I put a lot more effort into a review than I do a talk post - consequently, if I felt someone were attacking me based on one of my reviews, I'd feel much more offended than I would based on a talk post.

I agree with you that anything that increases discussion around books would be a net positive - I'm just concerned that given the atmosphere in some of the groups of late that the ability to make negative comments on reviews may lead to some people reviewing less or not at all. Although, perhaps your opt-in idea may deal with this somewhat.

ETA one of the other reasons I'm reluctant about comments on reviews, is I'd rather the discussion was about the book not the member's review. I think you're far less likely to see abuse of the former than the latter. In general, I'm interested in what others thought about the same book, not whether they thought I'd written a 'good review' (whatever that means).

one of the other reasons I'm reluctant about comments on reviews, is I'd rather the discussion was about the book not the member's review.

That's why I don't like having comments attached to individual reviews. I'm sure that discussing specific facts that a reviewer may have got wrong, or specific things a reviewer mentioned would be useful, but that can just as easily happen in a thread/talk subsection attached to the work, I think. I also suspect that you might get more/better discussions if it's not attached to specific reviews - maybe people would be hesitant to reply to a comment on someone else's review, or maybe the person who wrote the review doesn't care to enter into a discussion.

But I do realize that having any kind of thread/talk section attached to works is super tricky and a coding nightmare because of combinations/separations. Particularly separations.

_Zoe_--I am sooo not going to get in a pissing contest with you over this. In this thread, there is no evidence to support your claim. If you want to go digging back in time you could find all sorts of "evidence" to prove/ disprove all sorts of claims.

Moving on--the opinion that ratings are worthless was touched on a bit earlier in the thread, and although it wasn't my positions say 5 years ago, in the last year or so I'm beginning to see why some people think that. Ratings are just too subjective to be of "true" value.

Let's say I read book A and rate it 4 stars. I read book B a year later by same author and I rate it 3.5 stars. I know what I was thinking (stop laughing) when I rated both books--but you don't(haha). Book B might have been a 4 or even 5 star, but I was in a bad mood that day and as a result I knocked off 1.5 stars because a character made me think of Dubya. See what I'm getting at??

A review, usually, gets the good, bad, or who cares point across. Yes, it's still subjective, but less so than ratings.

Comments on reviews--no way, no how, ain't gonna happen. This thread is a perfect example of why. Incorrect/inappropriate flagging is another great example of why it won't happen(see I got my peeve in as well).

Discussions of reviews EGADS BOOKS BOOKS BOOKS (geez take me to a home :)--I'd love to see it. I do think there should be an easy way to look at a book and either join in or start a discussion of it. I think it would be a great feature. Maybe reviews could be touchstoned somehow (I don't know the techy stuff)? I do think a lot of people would participate. Sure some would abuse it, but way, way less than comments on reviews would be abused.

edited to fix my lapse of sanity

70: "Facts schmacts. You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true" - Homer Simpson

Sorry debavp - I know that's not your point but I couldn't resist!

I do like your idea of touchstones for reviews - I agree that it's much less open to abuse than comments on reviews.

{T}here should be an easy way to look at a book and either join in or start a discussion of it

Agree with you 100%.

@71 --actually Homer said it better than I did :)

70> It's odd - for me, ratings tend to inch up (3.5 is _supposed_ to be good, 3 is supposed to be just readable...but an awful lot of OK books end up with 3.5. That's 'supposed to' in my own rating system, which I wrote on my profile after the Nth time I discovered I was rating everything above average...). I do notice when I rate something much higher or lower than something else similar (same author, same series). Though - I guess this supports your point - I tend to note in my review that 'somehow this didn't work for me this time', which I can't do in a rating.

Comments on reviews can be tainted by personal feelings. IMO
For instance, if one member has been blocked ( for years) by another member, the blocked member might just feel the need to denigrate the review based on personal feelings rather than the actual value of the review.

It is my personal opinion that polls ( of all kinds, in all places) are basically useless. It is also my opinion that reviews are not polls. They are random, as in no one has to happen on the place to write a review, they seek it out and give what is hopefully an honest opinion. Reviews are not yes/no options.. as has been pointed out above yes is not a review, and I assume that no would also be considered not a review.

One takes the review at face value, and then decides what to do with it.
It is a very personal choice. A poll is one person who is looking for people to either agree or disagree. I see no comparison.

Now I have to go to work.
Done.

>68 TineOliver: Yeah, I think opt-in would largely address the problem. I also think a review can be a launching point for a discussion of the book; just because the discussion began with a review doesn't mean the discussion will be solely about the review.

>69 keristars: I just don't think all the discussion that might take place on a review would be captured by a separate discussion page. People are already reading reviews and might post their thoughts as they occur, if they could do it right there. Requiring them to go to a new page and start a new topic creates a higher barrier to participation.

Also, I think the various parts of the site should be integrated as much as possible; in my opinion, the site would be more vibrant if we could have reviews and discussion in one place, rather than having one place for reading reviews and one place for talking about books. I think Tim was trying to enliven the review page with his proposal to add names to thumbs.

Book B might have been a 4 or even 5 star, but I was in a bad mood that day and as a result I knocked off 1.5 stars because a character made me think of Dubya. See what I'm getting at??

I see it, but I think you're wrong ;). The glorious thing about averages is that these minor aberrations even out in the end. You may deduct half a star on a bad day, but someone else was having a great day and added an undeserved half star, so we're back in the middle.

Comments on reviews--no way, no how, ain't gonna happen. This thread is a perfect example of why.

So you think the bad outweighs the good here and it would be better if this thread had never happened?

>71 TineOliver: Thanks for that post, mckait. I will partially revoke my earlier comment ;).

For instance, if one member has been blocked ( for years) by another member, the blocked member might just feel the need to denigrate the review based on personal feelings rather than the actual value of the review.

Touché! For the basic point, people who you blocked would presumably be unable to comment on your reviews. For the broader point, I really think LT should distinguish between blocking people in Talk and blocking people from leaving profile comments. Showing people who has blocked them obviously tends to create antagonism, so it should be avoided if possible.

What do you think about reviews vs. ratings? People rate independently, not at the behest of someone else, so ratings are more similar to reviews in that regard.

> 75

What do you think about reviews vs. ratings?

Love reviews, find ratings useless.

Why?

Ratings tell me nothing about why the person gave a book a particular rating, and they tell me nothing about the content of the book.

Reviews generally do.

>76 lilithcat: You don't think that people generally give a book a high rating because they think it's a good book, and give a book a low rating because they think it's a bad book? Of course individual reasons can vary, but with a high number of ratings individual differences don't matter.

ETA: for content, I use the tag cloud.

I don't understand why ratings are so hard to get or why some people here think they are misunderstood by masses of others who use them incorrectly. I mean...5 stars, 4 stars, 1 to 10, 4 bones, 3 thumbs up....aren't we used to this? Isn't this a culturally hardwired thing by now? After decades of restaurant ratings, movie, album and single ratings (frigging American Bandstand anyone???) and book ratings all in newspapers, magazines and on TV, I don't understand why this is a hurdle. A person who is internet savvy enough to manage LT in the first place must have a basic grasp on a simple star rating system...no? It boggles. Really.

Sure, there are probably a few who use them in a deliberately perverse way, but I don't think they're enough to really screw with the system. Most people will use them as a guide to their own remembrance of a book and so I think they're a pretty good reference for the suckitude of a title.

No, they're not a review nor are they intended to be one. Apples and oranges. But both are useful in different places for different reasons. For example, I'm trying out a new author and want to know which books are generally the best regarded. I don't want to wade through dozens of reviews on dozens of books to determine this, I want a quick, visual guide. Oh gee, how about a 1-5 star rating snapshot? How about sorting on this snapshot? Then once I see which are rated highest I can move on to reviews or whatever.

Something so basic as a 1-5 star systems shouldn't be made so complex.

>77 _Zoe_:

Yes, but it doesn't tell me why they think it's a good or bad book. If I don't know that, I can't judge whether or not I'd agree, whether their reasons for so judging it would affect my wanting to read it.

The number of ratings doesn't change that.

Let's say a lot of people dislike a book because of its dense, academic prose and rate it low because of that. I am interested in the subject matter and am willing to wade through that prose. If I see high number of low ratings, what, exactly, does that tell me? Does it mean that the book was poorly researched and therefore is one that I probably don't want to read? No. Does it tell me that it's the prose that's turning people off? No.

If those same folks wrote reviews giving their reasons, I'd be able to make an informed decision about reading the book. The ratings wouldn't allow me to do that.

79>

Let's say a lot of people dislike a book because of its dense, academic prose and rate it low because of that. I am interested in the subject matter and am willing to wade through that prose. If I see high number of low ratings, what, exactly, does that tell me? Does it mean that the book was poorly researched and therefore is one that I probably don't want to read? No. Does it tell me that it's the prose that's turning people off? No.


I think that people who are against the use of ratings-in-recommendations are viewing it in an extremely crude light.

Sure, if all you do is look at average ratings across the entire site, that's pretty useless. But if you look at ratings given by people who are similar to you, based on the contents of their libraries and the ratings you and they have given to books you share (generic "you" here), that becomes much more useful -- you can start to separate subject matter from quality, and even reasons for low ratings. I don't know whether LT has enough ratings to be able to do this properly, but Tim isn't even willing to do the test.

They aren't a replacement for reading reviews, obviously (not that there aren't a lot of reviews that also tell you nothing why about whether a person liked a book, reading either like a third-grade book report with summary and no synthesis or just like a one-sentence opinion), but they can be a first cut as to whether it's worth your time to read the reviews.

>79 lilithcat: You can assume that the people reading the book are mostly people who like that sort of book. If an academic tome has been given a low rating by hundreds of people, then it probably has some serious flaws qua academic tome. There's no reason to think that most people reading the book mistakenly picked it up when they were looking for a Harlequin romance.

Also, let's say there are two well-researched scholarly texts. One has good clear writing and one has overly-convoluted "academic" writing. If all other things are equal, the one with good writing will have a higher rating. Which one would you rather read?

On the other hand, in the situation you propose where one book has good writing and bad research while another has bad writing but good research, both will have ratings that take into account their flaws. In this case, you can't distinguish between them on the basis of rating alone, though you can tell that both are flawed. Depending on how low the ratings are, it may or may not be worth doing further research (i.e., via reviews) to choose one of these books to read. If they both have awful ratings, I would stop there.

I'm all for allowing comments on reviews. Even on Amazon, for the most part* comments on reviews are pretty useful/interesting or fun.

Anyway, regardless of that, we keep talking about making them 'opt in' or 'opt out'. That comes up in a good many suggestions here in this group. But I don't recall any site wide feature ever actually being introduced with opting, in or out.

*Political books aside

You are, as usual, entirely missing the point, which is that because the reasons for the rating are not disclosed, it is not helpful to me.

If it is helpful to others, fine, they can go ahead and use them. I don't care. They're entitled.

I do care that you keep insisting that I should find value in something just because you do.

83>

I'm not sure who you're addressing here, but if it's me, I do apologize. I'm not asking you to find ratings useful; all I'm saying is that for some people, being able to use them in aggregate (for instance, having them be taken into account in generating recommendations) may be useful.

> 84

No, it wasn't you.

#83 - Was it me?

Don't worry, it's clearly me who is "missing the point as usual".

I think maybe you two should consider a divorce..

What I'd really like to know is how we got from "The ability to search reviews sitewide" to "ratings vs. reviews"*.

* (Don't know why it has to be "vs.", though. Each has its place, each is useful to someone. But, like this thread, I digress.)

I think there must be something in Zoe's writing style that makes lilithcat think that Zoe is talking specifically about her when she's really talking more generally.

Making butter?

This thread continues to make my point that attached comments on reviews isn't going to happen.

Just imagine, I'll be the guinea pig here and _Zoe_ decides to comment on my review of something (I'm not stupid enough to actually put a name to it). Very positive comments I might add ;) Along comes lilithcat who says, meh, not so much. Then lorax beats me up because I didn't follow proper paragraph structure so the entire review was a waste of his/her time and throws in some snark about anyone that agrees with _Zoe_ is stupid by association. Of course, in between all of this I'm firing back and 10 others have jumped in.

We have enough of that in Talk already. Reviews will in essence become worthless objects with their only usefulness being fuel to start wars over.

Find a way to make it possible to start/join a discussion from the work itself that is reasonably workable. And _Zoe_, if discussion of a review is SOOO important, having to click one or two times isn't really going to detract someone who wants to legitimately engage and is most likely going to discourage a lot of drive-by's.

Reviews will in essence become worthless objects with their only usefulness being fuel to start wars over.

It will still be possible to read reviews without looking at the comments.

And _Zoe_, if discussion of a review is SOOO important, having to click one or two times isn't really going to detract someone who wants to legitimately engage

I think this is really the crux of our disagreement. I think interesting, worthwhile, and deep discussions can develop out of more casual remarks. An individual review comment might not be so important that the commenter thinks it's worthwhile to start a discussion thread about it. But those brief remarks that they might have left unsaid could inspire someone else to go deeper into a particular issue that the second person wouldn't have thought of otherwise.

Stop being so naive _Zoe_... being able to read reviews without looking at the comments is not going to stop people from trashing reviews--what's next are you going to say that there will be a built in filter that magically prevents snarky comments from showing at all?? Perhaps Tim can make it hand out little Hershey Kisses to those who get their feelings hurt?? And lumps of coal to those that are mean?

I think interesting, worthwhile, and deep discussions can develop out of more casual remarks. I totally agree with that statement.

Here's where I think we differ... you want to make comments/discussions on REVIEWS available. I want to make comments/discussions on BOOKS available, and think it's immensely more logical that the comments/discussions aren't linked to anything but the book itself.

My idea was to give the Reviewer control over what stays and what goes like flickr does. I can't edit someone's comment about my photo, but if it's inane or I don't like it I can delete it. That seems to have gotten zero traction.

96> That's an excellent suggestion, and I think it's a shame it hasn't received more attention. Flickr and Facebook both do that on your own "personal" space. I think many of the objections to comments on reviews is that it feels like other people are invading your personal space. If reviews were treated like profile comments, I wonder if it would be less problematic. You could have the exact same functionality as profile comments: blocking, deleting, just turning them off altogether.

96/97: I would be happy to have comments on my reviews if I had the power to delete comments (either because I thought they were offensive or because they weren't contributing to the conversation) or block particular users from making comments.

However, I'd still rather that an effort was made to generate discussions about the books themselves - with comments on reviews, it's too tempting to make the discussion about the review rather than the book.

I don't understand why allowing comments on reviews will *suddenly* bring out every LT user's closet asshole-persona. Like one day I will see comments and decide to suddenly unleash my years of pent up rage at another user. I've been quietly biding my time, just waiting for Tim to decide comments were a good idea.

That currently doesn't happen in the vast majority of talk threads. And comments on reviews would likely be a much more focused thing.

The same arguments against comments on a review could be used against leaving comments on a profile or even having forums. I don't imagine many users want to get rid of those.

If some petty loser was stalking another LT member via their reviews just to dump all over them I can't imagine it would be too hard to report that person.

I think if there were a little check box with "Allow comments on this review" similar to the "Share on Facebook" one AND users had the ability to delete comments on their review, no one would have any complaints.

edit: Oh yeah. And the ability to search reviews sitewide would be nice as well.

jseger9k, I've said as much in the past and got piled on for daring to think that users were afraid of other users.

Stop being so naive _Zoe_... being able to read reviews without looking at the comments is not going to stop people from trashing reviews

Um, excuse me? Nowhere did I say that people would be unable to trash reviews. I said that the current value of reviews will not magically disappear just because some people choose to allow comments on their reviews, comments that you’re under no obligation to look at. Nothing would prevent you from continuing to use reviews exactly as you do now.

you want to make comments/discussions on REVIEWS available. I want to make comments/discussions on BOOKS available

I absolutely want comments/discussions on books as well. They’re just two different features; it’s not an either/or thing. I also want super-touchstones.

My idea was to give the Reviewer control over what stays and what goes like flickr does.

Yeah, I have no interest in that form of review comments. I trust the LT community to flag as necessary. If individual users could delete whole conversations on a whim, I wouldn't want to waste my time getting involved in a lengthy discussion via review comments unless I already knew the user whose review it was.

well that's why you're probably never gonna get your way Zoe. No control = no comments for me and it seems like a lot of other people.

102> It's not as if you actually get a vote. Tim will implement it if he feels like it would be good for LT despite what anyone has to say, although he does listen to input.

That's true and I'll play it by ear. I hope he finds other things to do with his time.

Why does any discussion touching on reviews just ends up in another one of these endless discussions of the pros and contras of comments on reviews?

You think they would be wonderful, we think they would be awful. Noone's opinion is likely to have changed.

I don't review to invite a discussion.
I don't want comments even with ability to delete comments on them, because I don't want the bother of policing my reviews.
I don't want to read bug reports: 'I wanted to make a comment on such-and-such a review. It doesn't work.'

>105 MarthaJeanne: Other people started talking about review comments here long before I did.

#105 - Why does any discussion touching on reviews just ends up in another one of these endless discussions of the pros and contras of comments on reviews?

Because a lot of people see their value and a lot of people recoil at the idea.

I don't want comments even with ability to delete comments on them, because I don't want the bother of policing my reviews.

Suppose it were a check box like I mentioned on #99? Then there wouldn't be comments on your review unless you specifically allowed them.

I don't want to read bug reports: 'I wanted to make a comment on such-and-such a review. It doesn't work.'

Then don't read them.

105> Why does any discussion touching on reviews just ends up in another one of these endless discussions of the pros and contras of comments on reviews?

Because either side will bring it up all sorts of times, and the other side MUST respond. It just escalates from there.

Near as I can tell, in this thread it started in #36:
For this same reason, I loathe the idea of people being able to comment on reviews.

Then #37 piled on:
Unfortunately there are always going to be those that abuse the privilege and the number one reason there should never be comments allowed on reviews. Too many juvenile delinquents around to even consider such adult responsibilty.

I'd say the #1 way you can avoid getting comments on reviews is... STOP BRINGING IT UP. ;)

lol, I haven't been able to post until now--finally figured out why :(

It seems to me that if the site went to the ability to have comments on reviews that could be deleted by the owner of the review that it would be a terrible waste of programming hours.

As for why this comes up so much--it's a hot topic that a lot of people will weigh in about, when they won't with regards to more complex issues. As a result of this thread there have been others started with regards to ratings and discussions. For me that's an excellent outcome!!

_Zoe_ going back a bit, we agree on some things, but I'm not sure about -- if you're pro discussions from the book pages, why you would still need to have comments on reviews? Which would you choose if you could only have one of the two?

@105--I don't want to read bug reports: 'I wanted to make a comment on such-and-such a review. It doesn't work.' I get what you mean....if there is a little tick box or the feature is disallowed by a member, many won't realize it and submit it as a bug. I could see that happening a lot, especially at the beginning. And again, having that "control" totally negates implementing the feature to begin with.

@99--do I think every member is a closet asshole as you put it? No, but there are enough already out in the open now. Look at the way some people go after non-reviews now. Give them what's essentially an open mike and be prepared to duck.

Flagging-- is a joke.

Forums and profiles can easily be dealt with. If someone attacked you through your profile, very few would probably see that. If they attacked you through your review, quite a few more would see that.

I see the need for discussions of books, I just don't see the need to comment on others reviews.

109> @105--I don't want to read bug reports: 'I wanted to make a comment on such-and-such a review. It doesn't work.' I get what you mean....if there is a little tick box or the feature is disallowed by a member, many won't realize it and submit it as a bug.

Not if Tim added a prominent line near where you would click to add a comment to a review that said something along the lines of "Comments have been blocked for this review by the owner".

108> Because either side will bring it up all sorts of times, and the other side MUST respond. It just escalates from there.

That may be true of this thread, but it's also a much-requested feature by new users, who then get more of a response than they expected.

#109 - Look at the way some people go after non-reviews now. Give them what's essentially an open mike and be prepared to duck.

I have never noticed that as a problem until it came up on this thread. Am I saying that doesn't happen? No. But it is such a tiny, little thing as to be negligible. To think it will become some sort of site wide crisis if they were allowed to leave comments on a review is to take a non-problem and blow it out of all proportion.

if there is a little tick box or the feature is disallowed by a member, many won't realize it and submit it as a bug.

The way I'm picturing it is: if a user chose to allow comments on her review, there would be a link to the left of the thumb titled 'Comment' (or, if comments were made it would say '6 Comments' for instance).

If that link is not there, you can't leave a comment. No bug reports, no muss, no fuss.

Since this would be a check box, most reviews (for instance, every review on the site up till now) would not have comments enabled by default. Not too difficult to figure out.

Again, every argument I've seen against comments could also be made about profile comments and none of these doomsday scenarios seem to happen there (or at least not enough to call for disabling profile comments). I think comments are not wanted because they are not there already and change can be scary.

>109 debavp: Oh, I agree that book discussion forums are a higher priority. I just think that review comments would be a valuable addition as well.

I'm not quite clear on the point you're making with flagging. Why wouldn't it work for review comments?

I do think that, since reviews are more personal, the flags should do more than they do elsewhere. Enough flags should actually remove the offending comment, not just hide it.

@113, but why do you think review comments would be valuable? Here are two examples of comments on a review. Which do you think is going to happen more???

a-- Oh my, what a thoughtful, well-written review. I wasn't sure about this selection but you've made up my mind for me. Thanks!
OR
b--Geezus H on a cracker, what were you thinking? Did you even read the book? Did you graduate high school?

Oh yeah--how about those one word comments? They'll be great on those one word reviews people flag away at now.

a--awesome
OR
b--sucks

see where I'm going with this--there will be more extremes, on both sides, and for no net gain.

@112--sorry, but I totally disagree with you about profile comments--getting into it with someone via profile is pretty much a private matter, doing the same through their review is very public. Will there be a majority doing so? I don't think so. Why does the percentage matter? I really don't think it's because people are scared of change, they're scared of the end result.

If this is the first time you've realized this is a hot topic, then you've missed quite a bit of discussion on it :)

>112 jseger9000: The difference with profile comments is that you have the power to delete comments on your profile page and you can turn comments off altogether.

As I said previously, I'd be ok with comments on reviews under a similar arrangement but not otherwise.

I'd still rather the focus was on how to encourage more talk about books and I'm still not convinced that comments on reviews is the most effective way to do that.

#114 - So if I understand your post, you don't want comments enabled because you don't approve of your own perception of what the quality of discussion will be?

I defend comments on reviews because for the most part*, the ones on Amazon reviews are interesting.

As for feuds, I think those will be minuscule to non-existent. How often does that happen in the groups or on people's profiles? What is it about reviews that make those so much more dangerous?

If this is the first time you've realized this is a hot topic, then you've missed quite a bit of discussion on it :)

I find that comment vaguely insulting:)

*Political books aside. If anything will be a hot-button it will be books by political pundits. Even so, comments as they're being proposed would be enabled on a review-by-review basis. No one would be forcing comments on anybody.

#115 - I'd still rather the focus was on how to encourage more talk about books and I'm still not convinced that comments on reviews is the most effective way to do that.

Now that I agree with you on. Really comments on reviews aren't a biggie for me. There's many other things I'd rather see implemented first. It's just that when that subject does come up, I haven't seen any arguments against them that hold water. Plus I've seen plenty of good comment discussions on Amazon, the source for most of our examples on what could go wrong with a feature.

And in this discussion it felt like several users were turning against one user whose opinion I agree with.

What I'd really like to see would be something like a group at the bottom of each work page, where you could start threads and respond to ones already started.

see where I'm going with this--there will be more extremes, on both sides, and for no net gain.

Jseger has already said it, but to repeat: the discussions will not all be useless. I find the Amazon discussions more helpful than not. I think comments on reviews here would be a net gain.

I'd still rather the focus was on how to encourage more talk about books and I'm still not convinced that comments on reviews is the most effective way to do that.

I agree that review comments aren't the top priority, but I do think they'll add to the site. There's a parallel discussion going on right now about other ways to promote book discussion, ways that might actually be implemented in the foreseeable future. And that's great. But I think review comments would still lead to interesting discussions that wouldn't take place otherwise.

@117 And in this discussion it felt like several users were turning against one user whose opinion I agree with. You're proving my point for me:)

>119 debavp: So you think it would be better if this discussion had never taken place?

@120 NO, I think discussions like these are what most of us are looking for overall( and are hoping to get for books)

But @117 is proving my point with their statement. They needed to "defend" you and your idea. I am not knocking that, most of us have jumped in to help someone out before in a discussion. Some have defended my opinion on this thread as well. Comments on reviews is going to elicit the same. That adds no value to the review process.

I don't agree with the few here that have stated it's making a mountain out of a mole hill, et al. I think it would be disastrous for the site and I hope it never happens. I've stated in the past, I'll go private the day it becomes available. Unfortunately, I think a lot of members wouldn't stop at going private, they'd leave LT entirely and there is no value that could be gained from the proposal that would in anyway offset the loss of members.

>121 debavp: Yeah, I jumped into this discussion to defend jjwilson, but I don't think the motivation is particularly relevant in the end. Interesting things have been said here, and I think I've contributed in some way to that.

I've stated in the past, I'll go private the day it becomes available.

I have to admit, this makes no sense to me. In an opt-in system, comments would have no impact on your reviews. How would going private help? It seems like a protest that's entirely unrelated to the feature in question.

Likewise, I don't see why a significant number of members would leave; they wouldn't have comments on their own reviews and they wouldn't have to read the comments on other people's reviews, so what's the problem? If a very high number of users really wanted to pretend that comments didn't exist, Tim might even be persuaded to offer an option to hide the feature altogether, though that seems a bit extreme.

#119 - Not a very good example. Again, you could use this example against any sort of discussion feature on LT.

How many threads were commented on on LT today? Because this one thread has a tone you don't approve of it means that a feature that many users would enjoy would be scrapped?

Would you recommend getting rid of Talk for the same reasons?

I guess it's just not about me:) If everyone that mentioned , let's say over the past year, that they were against comments on reviews didn't participate in it if implemented, and take into consideration that maybe 10% more of the silent ones also declined to participate and another 10% jumped in at the time it's implemented. Let's say against is the minority at 30%. That's 30% of reviews unavailable, and at least half of those are going to be the really good ones, so it's not improving things.

>124 debavp: I don't know, I figure any positive percentage would be better than the current zero ;)

>125 _Zoe_: It *is* possible to have a negative result, worse than zero, in the event that people take away their existing reviews and fail to contribute more because of comments; then the LibraryThing for Libraries revenue stream might be impacted. I think opinions differ on how large this group of people might be, but it's not impossible in theory.

126>

That requires that people who are against review comments are so strongly against it that the mere implementation, even if it were opt-in, would make them go private, though. Really, debavp's ultimatum notwithstanding, I think the number of people who would take their libraries private if _Zoe_ and I were allowed to leave comments on each other's reviews isn't large enough to worry about. How on earth does that affect them? Sure, the fraction who opted in might be small, but so what?

#124 - Comments as they have been discussed were always something that would be up to the reviewer. Who would be so sensitive of comments that even their availability to other users would be enough to stop reviewing?

@127,First off, it's not an ultimatum, it's a statement of fact and its not a threat, or how have I seen you put it in the past? take my toys and go home?

I've just been reading comments from some very active members in another thread that state they cringe when reading RSI threads and a lot of them don't post for fear of the backlash.

Where do you think they're going to land on this issue, wait...how many more aren't talking at all?

but so what? Well, I'd like to see the time/revenue spent on something more useful, features that don't have the potential for a negative impact.

And I'll ask you the same question I asked _Zoe_--why do you need to comment on a review?

#129 - why do you need to comment on a review?

It would be another way to increase the social side of LT. And the social side of things is what keeps LT going.

Some reviewers (myself for instance) appreciate feedback on our reviews.

There are workarounds right now. Leaving a comment on the profile page or the 'Review Discussions' group (which hasn't had any sort of nasty blow-up so far). Both of those require the reader to leave the work page though (and 'Review discussions' suffers from lack of publicity I think).

>129 debavp: The thing is, no one would have to fear a backlash in this situation. They could just not opt in.

I don't think this is development priority #1 (or even in the top 10, probably), but I do think it would result in interesting book discussions that wouldn't happen otherwise.

>130 jseger9000: Another problem with Review Discussions is that it shows discussions of just any book reviews, not necessarily those that I'm interested in. I'd read discussions on reviews that I was already looking at, but the fact that a discussion exists for some review of a book that I've never heard of doesn't automatically imply that I want to read it.

#131 - Another problem with Review Discussions is that it shows discussions of just any book reviews, not necessarily those that I'm interested in.

That too.

129>


I've just been reading comments from some very active members in another thread that state they cringe when reading RSI threads and a lot of them don't post for fear of the backlash.

I've seen a few people post that, as well. But you'll notice that the fact that RSI exists hasn't made them leave LibraryThing, or take their libraries private, or avoid Talk altogether, so I don't think the analogy is sound. You're suggesting that just having review comments exist would be enough to make people leave, or go private, or delete all their reviews, even if nobody could comment on their reviews and they didn't see comments on other people's reviews without taking specific actions. While I certainly believe you that you would do this, I don't think you've demonstrated that other people would.


And I'll ask you the same question I asked _Zoe_--why do you need to comment on a review?


Several reasons come to mind:

1. Because I think it's thought-provoking and interesting, and I want to start a conversation with the reviewer about our interpretations of the book.

2. Because I want to ask a question about something they mention that I don't understand.

3. Because I think there is a factual error in the review that I want to point out.

Sure, I could accomplish all of these via profile comments, but that's rather anti-social; only the reviewer and I would be able to participate in the conversation, rather than other people interested in discussing the book as well.

ALso to find out more information, not just from the reviewer, but from anyone else who reads the review.

What's next in the series? what came before? did they include references? was that portrayal of London accurate? are those dates real? what does saltines mean?

Very difficult to do by profile comment or talk.

> 133

I want to start a conversation with the reviewer about our interpretations of the book.

If you want to start a conversation with the reviewer, you don't need review comments.

Because I want to ask a question about something they mention that I don't understand.

If you want to ask the reviewer a question, you don't need review comments.

Because I think there is a factual error in the review that I want to point out.

As Dorothy L. Sayers says in Gaudy Night, the proper way to correct an error in a review is via a private letter to the reviewer. You don't need review comments for that.

Your final sentence suggests that what you really want is a discussion about the book, not about the review ("only the reviewer and I would be able to participate in the conversation, rather than other people interested in discussing the book as well."). But surely if you do that through comments on a review, you're confining your audience to the people who read that particular review. It seems to me that your goal would be better accomplished through a more robust book discussion method.

@131, I don't agree. For me, it doesn't have to be a huge backlash and opt in is a safeguard and if there has the be a safeguard provided, well, were back to somebody realizes the potential is there for abuse.

@133--well, @135 put it better than I ever could but I do have one thing to add. Of course those members didn't leave because simply because RSI exists, but it's a really unfortunate that they feel intimidated enough not to participate, and does that translate to also not reporting bugs, or helping out someone in Book Talk, or Talk about LT?

And for the record, I never said I'd leave LT, or my reviews, only that others have suggested they might go that far. Icertainly hope I'm wrong and that only a few would take those drastic measures.

For me, it doesn't have to be a huge backlash and opt in is a safeguard and if there has the be a safeguard provided, well, were back to somebody realizes the potential is there for abuse.

There are safeguards provided for profile comments and talk, so you can block abusive (or just annoying) members. Those safeguards are there because everyone realizes there is potential for abuse.

This is true of pretty much any social feature on any site.

135 is what I've been saying all along about review-comments. If someone wants so badly to ask me a question about my review, they can leave me a comment. But "correcting" reviews (don't agree with, think something is misrepresented or said wrong, etc) is something that should *never* be allowed, and I can't help seeing that as a very real possibility if comments were attached to them.

If someone wants so badly to ask me a question about my review, they can leave me a comment.

But then no one else will see the exchange.

Also, I have no problem with people correcting my reviews. I'd actually rather have a comment with a correction appended to my review than have someone message me individually asking me to make a correction. In the first case, I'd feel no obligation to change anything, since the correct information is now provided along with my review (this has happened to me once on Amazon). I don't want to go back and rewrite a review that I'm finished with, even if only a few words need to be changed. Of course an error should be noted, but I'd just as soon let someone else note it for me.

But then no one else will see the exchange.

Exactly. I don't *want* people to be talking about my reviews, comparing notes on how they think I'm wrong or I made a factual mistake or they don't agree with what I said. My reviews are for me, the fact that they show on the work page doesn't mean I write them for others. I don't want other people's feedback/opinions/corrections attached to my personal review.

>140 Heather19: So you wouldn't allow comments on your reviews, and I would allow comments on my reviews. What's the problem?