Goodreads ratings are less than useless

JSWolf · 08-01-2016, 04:53 AM

I just went to Goodreads to have a look at the ratings for Harry Potter and the Cursed Child. Many many people have rated it before having even read it. So the rating it has is worthless. It's mostly rated by people who have rated it before reading it.

Goodreads needs to make it so you cannot rate a book unless you've either marked it as read when it's before the release date (in case you have an advanced copy) or marked it as having read it after the release date. This allowing people to rate books that they have not read is wrong. It means that the ratings on new books is garbage. Goodreads staff don't give a damn about the reliability of the ratings.

pwalker8 · 08-01-2016, 05:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I just went to Goodreads to have a look at the ratings for Harry Potter and the Cursed Child. Many many people have rated it before having even read it. So the rating it has is worthless. It's mostly rated by people who have rated it before reading it.

Goodreads needs to make it so you cannot rate a book unless you've either marked it as read when it's before the release date (in case you have an advanced copy) or marked it as having read it after the release date. This allowing people to rate books that they have not read is wrong. It means that the ratings on new books is garbage. Goodreads staff don't give a damn about the reliability of the ratings.

That is, of course, the issue with crowd sourcing such things. You are going to have a percentage of ratings that are bogus. Plus you get a lot of people who use the anonymous nature of the internet to vent their spleen. Generally, I try reading some of the reviews and see what people actually say.

meeera · 08-01-2016, 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pwalker8

That is, of course, the issue with crowd sourcing such things. You are going to have a percentage of ratings that are bogus. Plus you get a lot of people who use the anonymous nature of the internet to vent their spleen. Generally, I try reading some of the reviews and see what people actually say.

Goodreads is useful for me largely because I've friended a number of people whose taste (at least in some things) I share. Overall star ratings are the least useful feature of Goodreads. Reviews and responses from friends are the most useful, and my major source of book info/recs.

JSWolf · 08-01-2016, 07:32 AM

All the programmers have to do is make sure the book has been marked as read before allowing anyone to rate and that the book has been released and that the dates fall within the release date. That would solve most of the problem. Sure people could cheat the system, but they would have to wait until after the book was released.

Plus, to go read reviews now, you get a lot of pre-release crap instead of a real review.

DiapDealer · 08-01-2016, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Sure people could cheat the system, but they would have to wait until after the book was released

And that would be better, how? Later uselessness is somehow better than early uselessness?

Just face the fact that anonymous reviews are always going to be fairly useless. Learn to rely on the reviews of people whose tastes and opinions you're familiar with and move on.

Phogg · 08-01-2016, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pwalker8

That is, of course, the issue with crowd sourcing such things. You are going to have a percentage of ratings that are bogus. Plus you get a lot of people who use the anonymous nature of the internet to vent their spleen. Generally, I try reading some of the reviews and see what people actually say.

It was also an issue with paid reviewers. Newspapers never made sure their reviewers read the books and movies they reviewed. Most did, but some had no qualms of any sort about whipping something vague (or plagerized) out when they didn't want to bother with work.

JSWolf · 08-01-2016, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

And that would be better, how? Later uselessness is somehow better than early uselessness?

Just face the fact that anonymous reviews are always going to be fairly useless. Learn to rely on the reviews of people whose tastes and opinions you're familiar with and move on.

But, if people had to put in that they've read the book and only after release date, then I do think most people would not bother. I don't think you'd get the "I'm so looking forward to this" with 4 or 5 stars and I also doubt you'd get the "this is going to be crap" with 1 or 2 stars.

People would have to put in that they've read it in order to rate/review it. I think you'd get a lot less people wanting to do this.

kennyc · 08-01-2016, 08:27 AM

DiapDealer · 08-01-2016, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But, if people had to put in that they've read the book and only after release date, then I do think most people would not bother.

Why not? It's no trouble for them early, and it'll be no trouble for them later.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I don't think you'd get the "I'm so looking forward to this" with 4 or 5 stars and I also doubt you'd get the "this is going to be crap" with 1 or 2 stars.

You're probably right. But then it would probably coincide with a one-to-one spike in "I loved this so much!" 4 or five star reviews and "This was crap" 1 or 2 star reviews, sooo...

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSWolf

People would have to put in that they've read it in order to rate/review it. I think you'd get a lot less people wanting to do this.

Yes. Because a checkbox would discourage so many of the people you hope will be discouraged.

meeera · 08-01-2016, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSWolf

All the programmers have to do is make sure the book has been marked as read before allowing anyone to rate and that the book has been released and that the dates fall within the release date. That would solve most of the problem. Sure people could cheat the system, but they would have to wait until after the book was released.

This has been done to death in the Goodreads feedback forums, and it's not going to change. Goodreads' stance has always been that the user alone gets to decide how and why they use stars. In addition, many many people on Goodreads read and review ARCs (I'm one of them), and stopping us from reviewing until after the release date would put a giant spanner in the works.

Bottom line is - why do you care? If you don't like a particular rating, or don't find it to be useful for your purposes, ignore it.

DiapDealer · 08-01-2016, 09:03 AM

A much simpler approach (if you're unable to self-filter the arc-reviews from the dross) would be to NOT seek out the opinions/reviews of Average Jo(e) readers until such time as you're thinking about reading the book (which common-sense dictates will generally occur sometime after a book is available for purchase).

You can't make silk out of sow's ear, Jon.

jhowell · 08-01-2016, 09:32 AM

It seems to me the most useful thing would be a rating for "how much would I like this book". Impossible to get exactly right, but could be approximated by finding others who have rated books the same as you in the past and combining only their ratings for the new book.

JSWolf · 08-01-2016, 10:30 AM

There could be too sets of ratings. One for those who want to say how much they are looking forward to the book and one from those that have read it.

tubemonkey · 08-01-2016, 11:26 AM

I don't pay attention to ratings for books. They have no impact on my purchases.

Atunah · 08-01-2016, 11:41 AM

That is not how goodreads works. Its not just like amazon reviews. Its a place where you can find other like readers and so you see their comments, their ratings, their shelving in the feed. I can't tell you how many times I have seen someone write something about a book that isn't out yet, upcoming, and that is the way I found out about it and I put it then on my upcoming shelf.

The feed is from folks you follow and friend. I don't care if they read a book, if they want to say something about it.

Overall it is still so much more truthful than the amazon reviews at this point. Authors tend to concentrate getting their street teams and friends and family to review on Amazon. So you end up with 100's or rah rah reviews out the gate, but no actual reader reviews.

On goodreads you control what you see. You follow folks you like their reviews and comments. Once you have a certain amount, you really never have to go down the the other reviews again. Although I still do that. I don't really have a huge issue with that kind of stuff. Just use the sort options to drill down a bit better.

Its folks talking about books, any way they want to. Readers mostly.

I like that they aren't trying to turn it into some overly controlled thing. Its what makes the site more real for readers. I can trust those reviews, ratings and comments more.

Also, folks are allowed to use the ratings any way they want. Some use them to not get recommendations based on some books, others use it for who knows what system they have in place. Its like a huge database of books where you get to log books and casually talk about them.

08-01-2016, 04:53 AM	#1
JSWolf Resident Curmudgeon Posts: 74,304 Karma: 129333566 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Roslindale, Massachusetts Device: Kobo Libra 2, Kobo Aura H2O, PRS-650, PRS-T1, nook STR, PW3	Goodreads ratings are less than useless I just went to Goodreads to have a look at the ratings for Harry Potter and the Cursed Child. Many many people have rated it before having even read it. So the rating it has is worthless. It's mostly rated by people who have rated it before reading it. Goodreads needs to make it so you cannot rate a book unless you've either marked it as read when it's before the release date (in case you have an advanced copy) or marked it as having read it after the release date. This allowing people to rate books that they have not read is wrong. It means that the ratings on new books is garbage. Goodreads staff don't give a damn about the reliability of the ratings.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Goodreads Ratings Then and Now	Fbone	General Discussions	53	07-10-2014 09:41 PM
GoodReads decimal ratings	Hattie	Plugins	5	09-29-2013 03:58 PM
Plugin for downloading Numerical ratings from Goodreads and Amazon	Japes	Plugins	1	09-29-2013 03:56 PM
GoodReads Ratings AND Number of Reviews	JohnnyRocks	Plugins	10	05-14-2011 06:34 PM
Sony includes goodreads ratings?	Todd Young	Writers' Corner	0	05-10-2011 02:32 AM

08-01-2016, 07:32 AM	#4
JSWolf Resident Curmudgeon Posts: 74,304 Karma: 129333566 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Roslindale, Massachusetts Device: Kobo Libra 2, Kobo Aura H2O, PRS-650, PRS-T1, nook STR, PW3	All the programmers have to do is make sure the book has been marked as read before allowing anyone to rate and that the book has been released and that the dates fall within the release date. That would solve most of the problem. Sure people could cheat the system, but they would have to wait until after the book was released. Plus, to go read reviews now, you get a lot of pre-release crap instead of a real review.

08-01-2016, 08:27 AM	#8
kennyc The Dank Side of the Moon Posts: 35,872 Karma: 118716293 Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Denver, CO Device: Kindle2; Kindle Fire

08-01-2016, 09:03 AM	#11
DiapDealer Grand Sorcerer Posts: 27,572 Karma: 193191846 Join Date: Jan 2010 Device: Nexus 7, Kindle Fire HD	A much simpler approach (if you're unable to self-filter the arc-reviews from the dross) would be to NOT seek out the opinions/reviews of Average Jo(e) readers until such time as you're thinking about reading the book (which common-sense dictates will generally occur sometime after a book is available for purchase). You can't make silk out of sow's ear, Jon.

08-01-2016, 09:32 AM	#12
jhowell Grand Sorcerer Posts: 6,508 Karma: 84500001 Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Tampa Bay, Florida Device: Kindles	It seems to me the most useful thing would be a rating for "how much would I like this book". Impossible to get exactly right, but could be approximated by finding others who have rated books the same as you in the past and combining only their ratings for the new book.

08-01-2016, 10:30 AM	#13
JSWolf Resident Curmudgeon Posts: 74,304 Karma: 129333566 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Roslindale, Massachusetts Device: Kobo Libra 2, Kobo Aura H2O, PRS-650, PRS-T1, nook STR, PW3	There could be too sets of ratings. One for those who want to say how much they are looking forward to the book and one from those that have read it.

08-01-2016, 11:26 AM	#14
tubemonkey monkey on the fringe Posts: 45,480 Karma: 158151390 Join Date: May 2010 Location: Seattle Metro Device: Moto E6, Echo Show	I don't pay attention to ratings for books. They have no impact on my purchases.

08-01-2016, 11:41 AM	#15
Atunah Wizard Posts: 1,817 Karma: 23400001 Join Date: May 2012 Location: USA Device: K1/K3/BasicK Voyage/Oasis1/Oasis3	That is not how goodreads works. Its not just like amazon reviews. Its a place where you can find other like readers and so you see their comments, their ratings, their shelving in the feed. I can't tell you how many times I have seen someone write something about a book that isn't out yet, upcoming, and that is the way I found out about it and I put it then on my upcoming shelf. The feed is from folks you follow and friend. I don't care if they read a book, if they want to say something about it. Overall it is still so much more truthful than the amazon reviews at this point. Authors tend to concentrate getting their street teams and friends and family to review on Amazon. So you end up with 100's or rah rah reviews out the gate, but no actual reader reviews. On goodreads you control what you see. You follow folks you like their reviews and comments. Once you have a certain amount, you really never have to go down the the other reviews again. Although I still do that. I don't really have a huge issue with that kind of stuff. Just use the sort options to drill down a bit better. Its folks talking about books, any way they want to. Readers mostly. I like that they aren't trying to turn it into some overly controlled thing. Its what makes the site more real for readers. I can trust those reviews, ratings and comments more. Also, folks are allowed to use the ratings any way they want. Some use them to not get recommendations based on some books, others use it for who knows what system they have in place. Its like a huge database of books where you get to log books and casually talk about them.

Advert

Advert