To think this author is unreasonable?

[shumway]

I have been using the Goodreads website since 2008 with no problems and have rated 1282 books in that time. I use it mostly as I like to keep a record of what I have read. I use the star rating system so 1 means did not like it, 2 stars means it was ok, 3 I liked it, 4 really liked it, 5 stars it was amazing. Obviously it's down to personal taste and I probably rate most books as 2 or 3 stars with some 4 stars and an occasional 1 or 5.
I have received a message from an author of a book I rated recently that says "You have given my book a 2 star review. TAKE YOUR REVIEW DOWN NOW. You have no idea what this does to published authors."

Yes report.

I agree with jesapey, leave your rating and report to GR. Did you write a review or just leave a rating?

I use GR primarily as a log for my books. I use the GR explanations for star ratings and a 2, as many other posters have said, is OK.

I'd never in a million years use the average rating score as a way of choosing books to read though. Jane Eyre has an average rating of 4.11, while Justin Bieber: Just Getting Started by Justin Bieber has a rating of 4.61 Using the rating system as a means of assessing quality is nonsense. For this reason I won’t rate classics anymore. I read The Tenant of Wildfell Hall a few months ago and hated the ending so much I mentally lopped off a star. The audacity of actually rating it on GR though! Snort. Imagine the withering look Ms Brontë would give me for only giving her four stars. A Brontë! “Yeah, I thought it was great until you fucked up the end Ann.” Or giving Oedipus Rex three stars because Sophocles mate it’s all a bit unbelievable and OTT isn’t it? Average ratings scores tell me absolutely nothing.

I will read reviews though, particularly of posters whose opinions I value.
The fifty books in a year thread on here is by far the best way of getting decent book recommendations. Book Tube is great to, so long as you follow people whose opinions you generally agree with.

I don't review books I don't enjoy, simple as that. If I can't give it at least 3-stars, why bother?

Agree, that's what I do now. Plus any 2 star book will probably be a DNF. Those I just put on my DNF shelf, and don't give a rating to.

The official Goodreads system might mean that a 2 is good, but in a world where a 4* review can get an Uber driver or Airbnb host fired, I think that most people seeing it will assume it means it was rubbish.

Author still v unreasonable - but I wouldn't leave a 2* review.

The official Goodreads system might mean that a 2 is good, but in a world where a 4 review can get an Uber driver or Airbnb host fired, I think that most people seeing it will assume it means it was rubbish. Author still v unreasonable - but I wouldn't leave a 2 review.

What is the point of having a 5 star system then? Why not just 2 stars meaning good or brilliant. In fact why not just give all the books equal numbers of nice gold stars because they are all great?

I don't review books I don't enjoy, simple as that. If I can't give it at least 3-stars, why bother?
Only takes a second so it’s no bother and it improves recommendations based on your ratings, giving accurate ratings rather then just positive ones improves the things that get recommended to you.

On Goodreads, I only take notice of reviewers who have books on their list that I’ve read and rated similarly. If we like similar books, their review is likely to be more relevant for me.

YANBU Goodreads is supposed to be an independent review site, and you have a right to state your opinion, the only guidelines you shouldn't cross are slagging off an author personally - and it doesn't sound as if you did that. Unless a book is a non-fiction one that is wildly inaccurate, reviews of books are personal responses, you simply stated yours. Even in the case of a non-fiction piece that's accurate you might find it hard to follow, unclear etc...Leave the review, flag the message and report, block the sender...

Juells... um, ok?

I had a feeling a lot of people weren't leaving negative reviews. It's a shame because particularly with highly publicised books, there's clearly a lot of people thinking "that was shite" but not wanting to say so.

I think it would be a real shame if books only had positive reviews. Everything would look good. And some things work for some readers and not others. I’m quite honest in saying ‘the writing was good but the story didn’t work for me so three stars’ whereas someone else might give the literary writing five stars.

I get a lot of books for free via netgalley so have to review those whether I like them or not.

I’m never mean, though.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect ?