I know there are a lot of useless reviews scattered about the internet, but if a review has what looks like salient points, I really don't care where it is, personally. Some Amazon reviews are pretty good, as are Goodreads reviews.
That said, there have been numerous times I've gone to read all the one-star reviews and every single one has been "I didn't get this book" and/or "this looks so stupid no one should read it."
Speaking of goodreads... there was the Katheleen Hale thing (http://bibliodaze.com/2014/10/an-open-letter-to-kathleen-hale-guardian-books-stalking-is-not-okay/) where she stalked a goodreads reviewer of one of her books and confronted them at their home address, because apparently writers being psychopaths is a thing at the moment.
And frankly, if the incident had happened in say, Florida, there would been a good chance that instead of a self-serving article in the Guardian, we'd be hearing of in terms of "Judge rules self defense in stalking case", and maybe a Happier article "From Debut to Dead- a strange fatal case of obsession."
What exactly did the reviewer do that was bullying? And please provide primary sources, not claims from the Stop the Goodreads Bullies site, which has a tenuous grasp of truth and a long history of encouraging exactly the sort of stalking behavior Hale's bragging about.
You might also want to read this essay by Hale, which suggests she has a skewed perception of what "bullying" is and a history of inappropriate and disproportionate responses to slights against her:
I gave a 4/5 review on Smashwords once, with the comment, "Interesting, and disturbing." The author was displeased at both the missing star and the brevity of my review. He contacted the Smashwords support team to get my e-mail address, and ordered me to provide a more thorough analysis.
Well, obviously, you leave it at 4/5 stars, and lengthen the review to "Interesting, and disturbing, and the author contacted the Smashwords support team to get my email address so that he could order me to provide a more thorough analysis".
Dave, with a footnote that you are not actually trained in any psychiatric methods and for a REALLY thorough analysis it'll take him at least two years' worth of appointments
I fell into a Google timesuck hole last year on that Stop The Goodreads Bullies site. Someone named Eve Thomas self published a book that got a one-star review, and she lost her cookies. She also called the police and claimed the bad review was "international cyberterrorism." I also saw first-hand her harassing people on Twitter and their blogs.
She's since deleted much of it, of course. (The lady who was being harassed left her tweets up, but I don't feel like linking them publicly is a nice thing to do.)
I honestly think Hale sounds like a slightly less off-kilter version of Eve Thomas. SLIGHTLY less off-kilter.
It's even worse knowing Hale writes about the reviewer allegedly attacking a 14-year-old girl for some positive review. (I've searched for this but can't even find the review as quoted, let alone the attacks that the reviewer and her friends made on the 14-year-oold girl.) But the worst (per Hale) that happened was a random adult told the girl, "Fuck you."
Seems the peroxide incident has that beat by a mile.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Really?
That said, there have been numerous times I've gone to read all the one-star reviews and every single one has been "I didn't get this book" and/or "this looks so stupid no one should read it."
Re: Really?
Re: Really?
Re: Really?
Re: Really?
Re: Really?
You might also want to read this essay by Hale, which suggests she has a skewed perception of what "bullying" is and a history of inappropriate and disproportionate responses to slights against her:
http://thoughtcatalog.com/kathleen-hale/2013/02/169836/
Re: Really?
https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/346807
Re: Really?
Dave, with a footnote that you are not actually trained in any psychiatric methods and for a REALLY thorough analysis it'll take him at least two years' worth of appointments
Re: Really?
She's since deleted much of it, of course. (The lady who was being harassed left her tweets up, but I don't feel like linking them publicly is a nice thing to do.)
I honestly think Hale sounds like a slightly less off-kilter version of Eve Thomas. SLIGHTLY less off-kilter.
Re: Really?
Re: Really?
It's even worse knowing Hale writes about the reviewer allegedly attacking a 14-year-old girl for some positive review. (I've searched for this but can't even find the review as quoted, let alone the attacks that the reviewer and her friends made on the 14-year-oold girl.) But the worst (per Hale) that happened was a random adult told the girl, "Fuck you."
Seems the peroxide incident has that beat by a mile.