[neilmarr]

That's the way to do it, Patrick. Good on you.

The star system is a lazy option to careful and detailed reviewing, of course, but those who use it should award stars comparing the book they've just read with everything else they have ever experienced. If you give a mate's *Invasion of the Gay Zombies from Plant Zogg* five stars, what have you left to register your admiration of a Steinbeck or an Attwood work?

This is one of those situations where honesty can break perceived friendships, where friends in favour are unworthy sycophants or, out of favour, those who offer sincere opinion from the heart in your own interest.

I've often chosen not to review books from friends of mine (and some bargain basement indie authors whose books I have picked up on here at MR, Smashwords and elsewhere) when I find the work under par ... and I admit, even that 'no comment' is a cop-out. But at least I can't be accused of sour grapes.

Reviews are there for the POTENTIAL READER first, the author second -- readers should be well guided by honest opinion (though admitedly and unavoidably subjective -- that's understood if it's honest), and authors should be encouraged by the positive and learn from the negative.

Those who can't take that fact on the chin are 'writers' who deserve no future and 'friends' who don't merit your handshake. And unwary readers have every right to view a faux reviewer with contempt.

Neil