Reviews should contain SPOILER alerts

I just looked up the reviews for a book that sounded interesting. From reading the first dozen or so I know the heroine's brother dies early in the book, that she's reunited with the father she thought dead, and that she dies at the end of the book.

It's been completely spoiled for me. Why oh why aren't reviewers advised to add Spoiler Alerts to the beginning of their reviews?

Because most of us are human. I do try to put spoiler alerts on mine, but sometimes I forget.

And, of course, what is a spoiler to one person may not be considered a spoiler to the reviewer. For example, I once saw a person complain that a statement of historical fact was a "spoiler".

I do think that there should be a guideline somewhere telling people to mark spoilers in reviews. I basically never read LT reviews of books I haven't read now because it's not worth the risk.

I've seen at least one person post a spoiler on these message boards and expressly refuse to mark it as such because, she said, the book was so bad that she didn't care about spoiling it for others. I don't think that should be acceptable.

There will always be some people who have the extreme view that absolutely everything is a spoiler, but that's the case for anything. Just because some people think everything is rude/abusive doesn't mean there should be no guidelines about good behaviour.

I try to keep mine spoiler-free as much as possible, but certainly not everyone does. To that end, I try not to read reviews of books that I think may have spoilable details that would affect my enjoyment of the book (or else I will stick to the "editorial reviews" near the top of the page on Amazon).

You might consider leaving a (polite) comment on the profile of the reviewer with the offending review - asking them to consider editing their review to add SPOILER tags so that it won't be ruined for the next person.

#5 "...leaving a (polite) comment on the profile of the reviewer..."

Unfortunately, I tried that and so far, no result. I suggest something similar to the "flag abuse" feature, so that it can be evaluated and if necessary, deleted.

I agree that there should be something similar to the "flag abuse" feature for spoilers.

I'd like to be able to "flag spoiler" in the same was as abuse, with the difference that users could set the threshold at which a flagged review is hidden. Then it wouldn't cause any inconvenience for the people who don't care about spoilers.

> 6

Do you mean delete the review? Please remember that this isn't a review site, it's a site to catalogue your own library. So when people post reviews, they are not necessarily doing so for other people; they may be doing so simply for their own reference. So to delete a review simply because someone else objects to what is said or how it is said would be wrong.

... there are a fair number of people who post reviews for their own reminders, and not (*primarily*) for everyone else to read, as per Tim's philosophy that people care most about their own data, and per the fact that this is, foremost, a cataloging site. I know a lot of people (especially the ones who are active on Talk) love the more social/ recommending aspects of LT, but the reviews are linked to an individual's catalog, which is *their own space* to do with as they will, and many people never even look beyond their own catalog. The social page is an aggregation of individuals' data, not a recommendation site.

I would *definitely* not support any sort of censorship about what people write about their own books in their own catalog, and *especially* not anything that would delete another user's private data - talking freely about books is *not* abuse of the site, and I hope it never is. If you're that sensitive about spoilers, you'll just have to avoid the social page for those books (especially since tags can also spoil, and there's no way we could, or should, spoiler-cut tags.)

On the other hand, I wouldn't mind a short note on the review-writing box just reminding people to be courteous as the reviews are shared, or a general spoiler warning on all the social pages. And I'd definitely support the ongoing effort to get the star ratings moved up above the reviews so you can at least see the ratings without having to scroll through all the reviews.

Agreed, I would be plenty pissed if my data just disappeared because some random stranger judged something as a "spoiler".

That being said, my reviews are not only for me - they are usually abbreviated versions of my own book journal entries and I hope that folks find them informative about the writing, not the story line per se. As I stated above, I try not to put so much info in them that it is pointless to read the book, but as a human I am not always robot perfect.

I agree with lilithcat & melannen that a review should never be deleted. However, there is a difference between flagging and deleting. I would really like to see flags for unmarked spoilers in review (without a delete option).

There is nothing wrong with including a spoiler in a review. Many of the best and most enlightening reviews include spoilers as an essential part of their content. But, they should be marked, if not by the reviewer, then by other users. I don’t think it’s a bid deal to mark a spoiler. But, I have had an experience similar to that described by waterlily (#6) and _Zoe_ (#4) where a user simply refused to mark their spoiler. It seems this is a somewhat common occurrence. These unmarked spoilers in reviews are really frustrating because LT has become a wonderful source of short, quick reviews. Currently I'm afraid to read them if I haven't read the book. So, I feel they’ve lost much of their value.

There are two major problems with marking reviews. One is that LT users may go flag happy and mark every review as a spoiler. Based on flags in Talk, I personally think this is unlikely. As a safety of sorts, LT could simply require multiple flags before the spoiler warning shows up. Also, the flags could be counted. Two flags might serve as a soft warning, whereas five would clearly indicate Read the book first.

The other problem with the flag idea is how to handle updated reviews. For example, if a flag method went into practice a user with a flagged review would likely be inspired to edit the review. So, how to get rid of the flag?

It would be nice if reviews tagged as containing spoilers could be hidden (like messages identified as offensive in a discussion thread) with a link to display the review if desired. I know I often can't resist a quick glance at something I know contains something I don't want to know. Calling up a hiddent review would require a more positive action.

> 11 how to handle updated reviews

Perhaps the only way to remove the flag would be to delete and recreate the review. With copy and paste this wouldn' be too much effort.

> 12

As long as it is hidden only to you. I don't see why one person's opinion as to what constitutes a spoiler should be forced on everyone else. So you could set your options to say "hide spoiler tagged reviews", while others could choose not to do so.

Once again, it is wrong to delete information in someone else's catalogue. I fail to see why I should have to re-create a review that I wrote months ago (and probably don't have a copy of elsewhere to "copy and paste") just because someone wanders in and thinks it has a spoiler.

> 13

As long as it is hidden only to you

absolutely

it is wrong to delete information in someone else's catalogue

I didn't think I recommended otherwise. In fact, I agree strongly. Reviews are "owned" by the members who wrote them and should only be deleted or modified by that member. I was merely suggesting, in lieu of a mechanism for determining whether a member's update to their own review should or should not reset a spoiler flag, the member could always delete and recreate the review once they have removed spoiler information. The assumption here is that they were already changing their review.

just because someone wanders in and thinks it has a spoiler

This is a different issue and should be handled, perhaps, by only hiding a review if it has been marked with a spoiler flag by three (?) different members. Maybe hidden reviews could also be "un-hidden" if a certain number of these flags are removed by other members (I don't know if this is a good idea or not). Once again, I am assuming that any member can display a hidden review by clicking on a link.

Sorry to upset you, lilithcat -- I don't think that we disagree in principle. A member's own data must be preserved and there definitely would need to be some method of protection against spoiler-happy ingenues.

> 13

Sorry. I misread your comment about "the only way to remove the flag would be to delete and recreate the review". Reading it again, it's obvious you meant that it would be the reviewing member who would delete the review. Guess my eyes weren't focusing (too much reading, probably!).

I also think there should be a way to flag spoiler. Then at the top of a review it would say in red something like:

This message has been marked SPOILER by x number of people!

That way the review could remain visible, just marked so people would know not to read it if they didn't want to know what happened, similar to how people currently mark their own posts with spoiler warnings at the top.

I also like the idea of being able to set your own spoiler threshhold of say, 3 flags or 5 flags or view all, but this seems far harder to code (not that I know anything about coding).

With the new % thing Tim is planning on ordering the reviews by those who match up best with your library, this might have some interesting side effects...

> 15

No problem, lilithcat -- in fact, I'm glad that you always state your opinion in no uncertain terms. I tend to think of you as one of LT's resident protector's of intellectual property, authorities on combining consensus and advocates of bibliographic accuracy. Definitely no offense taken.

I am glad that this has sparked a lot of interest. Hopefully this issue will receive attention by those in charge.

I was not aware that there are people who post reviews for their own use, so allow me to start by apologizing for making an erroneous assumption. I am not in favor of censorship. However, if flagging is not possible, then I think such spoiler-laden reviews would be best kept hidden--much as the catalog can be made private.

It has been suggested that they be hidden only from view of those who object to spoilers. If the flag system can make this work, then fine. I would be all in favor of flagging for spoilers instead of deleting. What I am really looking for is a WARNING. But those who refuse to be considerate of others should not have free reign to literally spoil the enjoyment of a book by someone else. Perhaps you have heard of the expression, "Your right to swing your fist ends at my nose." These reviews are posted where the public is given access, whether the writer considers them for his or her own use or not. People do use LT for the reviews. Asking them to stop just because of the rude behavior of a few is letting a tiny minority spoil it for the rest.

Some have objected to allowing reviews to be at the mercy of one random person. As far as I can tell, no one has suggested anything of the kind. If spoilers were treated the same as abuse, then it would take at least 4 flags.

And... would it kill these people just to type ***SPOILER WARNING*** at the top of their review?

#19 the problem lies in that there is no definition of what does or does not constitute a spoiler. You can't even lay a guideline such as "giving away the ending" because if someone tells you Romeo dies, this is still not a spoiler for Romeo and Juliet even though it is the ending. New users wouldn't know of the "LTiquette" to type spoiler, many people would forget in any case.
Having every review so marked would be just as useless as having none.

I'm not against some kind of flagging mechanism, as long as the owner can always access the review, but I think I'd prefer to see how the "percentile" grading alters things first.

#20 Would you please explain why telling that a main character dies at the end of "Romeo and Juliet" is not a spoiler? If I had never read it nor seen the play, it would definitely be a spoiler for me.

There may be gray areas for the application of 'what is a spoiler', but it would still be very useful to flag obvious cases. Wikipedia defines spoiler (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/spoiler) basically as giving away the ending or a plot twist. It works for them, why not for LT?

If four people flag something a spoiler, it should at least have some kind of warning. There is a Persian proverb that says, in part, "...if three men call you a horse, buy a saddle."

waterlily, there is no right to get something you want for free, either. If you want something done to a particular standard, then you should expect to pay, or at least get it from somewhere where someone is being paid to do it..

If any of this is really upsetting to people, why do they go and read about a book if finding out about it ruins things for them? That is behaviour I don't understand.

I have also seen a bunch recently 'I will review this when I have read it', or 'haven't read it yet'.

How would this work, if the person changes their review? Will all the spoiler flags be magically removed? Are you going to volunteer to recheck all changed reviews? Sounds very unworkable to me.

#22 bluetyson If any of this is really upsetting to people, why do they go and read about a book if finding out about it ruins things for them? That is behaviour I don't understand.

How do you decide what books to read?

LT Suggester? :) Wander around a library. Forums. Tags. Mailing lists, newsletters. Used book shops. Authors you are familiar with. Books online.

There are millions and millions of books out there, this is simple.

I have thousands of books I know of and would like to read, easily.

For something new, all I need to know is what it is about. Ask someone, like on a forum if it is any good if I am a bit unsure. LT has ratings, so that is also useful.

Now, given these are two things reviews written by people who get paid to do it very often do not do, lots of them are useless to me. A review someone has been paid to do that tells you nothing about what a book is about is an abject failure. As is one that won't say how good it is for commercial reasons.

What it is about, and rating, that is it.

So, come to think of it, perhaps people that hate this could have an account function that has 'hide all reviews', as a default. Then only switch it on if they are sure they want to look, if some of them are compulsive about looking. Onus is on them to do the work then, not other people.

#24 bluetyson

Good answer. The point I wanted to make is that there is a big difference between learning about a book to determine whether to read it and learning info that spoils the book. When I'm trying to decide whether or not to read a book, the kind of info I want from a review are things like genre, quality, feel, maybe setting and general plot, strengths/weaknesses, significance. This info doesn't spoil the book. A review only spoils when it gives information that ruins the story, or ruins the suspense, or gives away anything that drives the book by remaining unknown.

I agree with #25. There are lots of useful reviews that help me decide whether a book looks good or not, and there can be perfect reviews without having spoilers. And the thing is that people aren't asking for spoiler reviews to go away, they just want a way of warning others that the spoiler exists if the reviewer won't do so themself. I wouldn't want to 'hide all reviews' as bluetyson suggests, because 95% of reviews aren't spoilers, its the 5% that is I want to be warned about.
And as for "New users wouldn't know of the "LTiquette" to type spoiler" I thought this was fairly common ettiqette in most places. Don't ruin books for people by telling them a secret plot twist... I know in real life my friends would have been furious had I told them the ending to the latest Harry Potter before they read it.

Why not ask Tim to implement a 'flag spoiler' link like the 'flag abuse' one, four clicks and the review is hidden unless you choose to click the 'show review' link?

I think, GreyHead, because it's much more subjective than the flag abuse decision. For that we have some pretty specific traits that a post could display, but a spoiler can really get stretched depending on the imagination of the flagger.

I agree, personally I have trouble remembering spoilers long enough for them to spoil the book for me - the pleasure is more in the travelling than the arriving. For people like me, perhaps you'd make the hiding optional - a profile setting. That way more spoiler sensitive people can have them hidden if they like.

I suppose that could work, or sensitive readers could just avoid the review sections and concentrate on the ratings only.

The problem with concentrating on the ratings only is that they are below the reviews, which tend to be lengthy, so to look for a quick opinion of a book through rating you have to scroll past all the reviews.... Which in itself is a separate problem I suppose...

Spoilers are subjective to a certain extent, but I still think that we should be able to flag reviews as spoilers and then choose to hide reviews with X spoiler flags. It wouldn't do any harm and might make some people happy.

How about a useless review flag?

For the 'haven't read it' or 'don't remember anything but I think I liked it' type things, or 'best book ever'?

:)

> 33

I think we need a contest/forum for "most useless reviews".

How about this one: "It is Shakespeare."

Or this: "I hate when I buy a book and it happens to have the Oprah seal on it", and this: "I finished this book in like, two or three days".

On the other hand, there are one-word reviews that say a lot, such as this one for Christopher Moore's Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood Pal: Hysterical!!!".

>31 Kira: Just as an FYI, you don't need to scroll past the reviews.

Near the top of the page you will see:
tags | recommendations | reviews (X) | member ratings | members (XX) | elsewhere

Just click on "member ratings" and you'll be taken right to the ratings.

That sounds like fun, lc.

:)

I absolutely DETEST spoilers. Anything that allows me to avoid spoliers would be A Good Thing.

#20 reading_fox
Giving away the ending of Romeo and Juliet isn't a spoiler!?! I can't think of anything more spolierish!! Imagine seeing Romeo and Juliet and knowing the ending in advance!!

Just because a book is relatively well known, it doesn't follow that people who haven't read it know the whole plot.

#37 I maintain that knowing how Romeo and Juliet ends still isn't a spoiler - a) for such a famous work very very few people won't already know.
b) far more importatly, Romeo and Juliet isn't about the plot, it is a trite love story the ending is obvious: however it is a work of merit by how that ending is achieved.

#26 "fairly common ettiqette in most places" for younger generation net savy users possably. LT users are a far wider spectrum, for some of whom LT is thier first messge board - you can't assume they'll know anything of net ettiquette.

This discussion IS the point, there are too many interpretations and sensitivity levels: all of which are equally valid!

I'm in favour of some kind of multiple flag system, masking the review on the social page - not on the users page

"Imagine seeing Romeo and Juliet and knowing the ending in advance!!"

Uh ... unless one was 7 years old, you'd have to wonder about their education if they haven't "culturally" picked up the gist of Romeo & Juliet before they've seen an actual stage production of it or read the play!

Now, I read almost NO fiction, so the issue of "spoilers" is somewhat moot (I can't imagine what somebody would write that would "spoil" Art And Physics, which I'm currently reading), but it strikes me that if you're worried that something (i.e. a review) is going to ruin you enjoyment of a book don't read the review!

I mean, sure, there are books which probably deliver more "punch" if you don't know what's coming up ... Arthur C. Clark's Childhood's End comes to mind ... but if you want to avoid knowing the skinny on the Overlords beforehand, you don't go reading the Wikipedia entry on it, and stick with, say, the Amazon "editorial reviews"!

This whole discussion reminds me of people who don't want to hear "naughty" things from their TV set, yet still tune in Howard Stern ... and then complain to the FCC when they're "offended".

Uh ... unless one was 7 years old, you'd have to wonder about their education if they haven't "culturally" picked up the gist of Romeo & Juliet before they've seen an actual stage production of it or read the play!

Uh, maybe their culture is non-Western?

"Uh, maybe their culture is non-Western?"

Don't get me started on the "Internationalization" of LibraryThing ...

#39 BTIRIPP it strikes me that if you're worried that something (i.e. a review) is going to ruin you enjoyment of a book don't read the review! .

Unfortunatley, that is what we do. I can't read fiction reviews on LT unless I've read the book. The loss isn't just to the user who can't read the review, it's also a loss for the user whose review doesn't get read.

possibly dchaikin, but how do we know when ANYONE reads and/or appreciates a review? There is no mechanism to record or quantify this, so it doesn't really matter. Tim is not enthused about adding a review rating feature, so in a way adding a 'spoiler' flag could be viewed as a negative conotation and not adopted for that reason as well. It's all too subjective. If a person is constantly bothered by so called spoilers, the easiest thing is just to avoid reviews or read them and take the chance.

Tim actually did suggest adding a review feedback feature, and it was the users who weren't enthused or just couldn't agree on what they wanted from it.

Flagging abuse is also negative, but it still exists.

I really don't understand what the point is about subjectivity. There are lots of people who like the idea of hiding reviews that get a certain number of spoiler flags, regardless of the subjectivity. Flagging reviews wouldn't affect people who don't care about spoilers. So what harm would come of implementing the feature?

>So what harm would come of implementing the feature?

No harm. But it's relatively useless as it's obvious from the responses about review ratings that the majority of reviews would get hidden.

#45>
I would prefer reviews only get flagged, not hidden.

But, regardless, I really have to disagree based on the LT's flagging history in Talk. LT-users seem to be respectful enough to not to flag lighty there and abuse of flags is minimal. So, why would spoiler flags in reviews be any different?

I believe there is a big difference between flagging abuse and flagging spoilers. Tim has defined abuse pretty specifically whereas there is a large range in what people consider to be spoilers.

I got the definition below from dictionary.com, but it doesn't really help any; a spoiler is subjective.

Jargon File - Cite This Source

spoiler

n. Usenet 1. A remark which reveals important plot elements from books or movies, thus denying the reader (of the article) the proper suspense when reading the book or watching the movie.

I think letting people set the threshold at which to hide reviews would do a lot to address the subjectivity issue.

Although people don't all agree on what constitutes a spoiler, a review that gets 20 spoiler flags is clearly more spoiler-ish than one that gets only 5, provided that they're for the same work.

> 48

The first part of that definition is pretty clear. The problem is with the second. I mentioned this in another thread, but I've just seen a production of Oedipus Complex, Frank Galati's take on Sophocles' play. Of course, I knew what was coming. I expect everyone in the entire audience did, as did the audience when it was produced in Sophocles' time.

And it was knowing what was coming that kept me on the edge of my seat. Now, maybe the people who think that knowing the end of Romeo and Juliet would ruin the play for them would think the same of this. But I think it made the play more powerful.

I'm thinking about Romeo & Juliet. This seems like a case where a spolier flag would be neither helpful, nor hurtful. Actually, it would be irrelevant. Since everyone in this thread knows the story already we would just ignore any spoiler flags and carry on reading any reviews of it we like.

I guess my point is that it's irrelevant whether a Romeo & Juliet review is a spoiler or not.

I think some people have lost perspective on this. Yes, Romeo and Juliet and Oedipus are major literary works and most people will know what happens. But, revealing the death of characters is the very epitome of a spoiler. To assume the everybody knows what's going to happen is more than a bit short-sighted, IMO. Why would you make light of ruining a person's right to discover the story for themselves?

Now, the lost perspective comes in the comparison. Romeo and Juliet is a major work. That and tales like Oedipus are MUCH more likely to have been read by a large percentage of people on a site like this. However, that is NOT the same for the average book that is reviewed, I would guess. How popular would it be to go to each entry for an Agatha Christie work and reveal whodunnit? Not very. It's the same thing.

Should people read Shakespeare? Absolutely. Especially if they want to explore the origins of western writing. However, don't lose sight of the fact that most fiction here will not be of the same impact as Romeo and Juliet.

Yes, knowing the outcome of something you've read before can bring tension into the situation. But that is a different type of tension compared to that of the inital discovery of what happens in the plot, which then moves on to resolution. Again, why would you dismiss someone's right to discover that pleasure on their own? This may be a bad example, but would you really tell someone who has never seen the original Star Wars trilogy (and yes, there are people who haven't seen them) about Vader and his relationship to Luke? Why?!? Do you remember people's reactions to the different points when allegations were made, then the truth was laid out? I do. I would never be so flippant about someone's right to go through those questions in their own minds. It makes for great impact and enhances the first-timer's experience. Shoot, how many people thought the original trilogy was really about Luke?

So, just because you and a lot of people have read something does not make it right to disregard someone else's right to discover what happens for themselves.

Of course, to address #47 and all the posts above that said variants of "there is a large range in what people consider to be spoilers" and so we shouldn't bother flagging them: There is also a large range of what people consider should be combined and shouldn't be combined, this doesn't mean no combination should be done, just that people should be more carefully when combining. The same should hold true for flagging spoilers. Use some common sense, discuss if necessary, but don't just ignore doing something just because there isnt 100% agreement.

This is obviously a contentious issue. My personal take is that if I write a review it is primarily for my benefit - I have a terrible memory, so like to note down the general story and how I felt about a book. Although I don't think I've written a review which just says 'this took me two or three days to read', I can see how that might be useful to the person who wrote it. It seems to me that if we could have private reviews, that would suit me fine as an option (all the better if you could make individual reviews private rather than all or nothing, but let's not get ahead of ourselves). I don't mind other people reading what I write, and if they get something out of it, great. But I wrote it for me, not them - it's my data. As it happens, most of my reviews are in a paper journal, and I won't be hurrying to put them on LT, as I am now paranoid that my efforts will be perceived as spoiling someone else's enjoyment!
I don't envy the LT team having to try to make some kind of compromise here!

PS When I read other people's reviews I can't recalled having been 'spoiled' - but that may be because, due to aforementioned terrible memory, I forget what I've read very easily!

#54 mcnorton: I've asked for a private review option, and I'm probably not the only one. Not sure that will ever happen. The reason I want them is for my "reviews" that are just like you describe ('this took me two or three days to read'). I don't need to hide these "reviews", but they really are only valuable to me and are mostly useless to other readers. My current solution in to post them in my comments section. The summary section would also work.

On the other hand, count me as someone who actually doesn't mind one word reviews like "Awesome!" or whatever. It tells me something, more than a rating.

I will admit to having skimmed much of the conversation, but I'm in favor of allowing people to police themselves. For instance, if the reviewing system somehow supported a custom "Spoiler" tag that would allow readers to manually open the spoiler text (as in, you hit a "Spoilers" link and it drops down the text) while not hiding anything when the author of the review reads it (or when another user who has set some "show all spoilers" preference).