Quote:
Originally Posted by Yapyap
There's definitely some element of rating and reviewing differently. I'm not sure how significant it is, or how many readers even pay attention to whether a book is self-pubbed or trad-pubbed, but it's one factor to consider.
|
I will admit, I do pay attention to whether or not a book is self- or trad-pubbed.
If it's self-published, than the author basically has had to jump through hoops for me to consider buying it. Technically, I rate them higher on average than traditionally published books because
A) I had to do more research into whether or not it was worth buying.
B) I don't acquire as many of them.
C) If it's obvious they didn't get an outside editor, I put the book down and don't bother reading past the first chapter. (Thus no review.)
----
Also, I do know that series tend to average higher in later books. I thought it was implied that most people wouldn't read an entire series if they hated the first book. ^^;
-------
As for Goodreads ratings system. It's not perfect, but I've found it to be more accurate at helping me choose books I will like compared to sites that are actually selling the books. Which is why I mentioned it.
I do think whether or not a site is making a profit from good reviews DOES have an effect on how the book is rated.
As for allowing ratings before a book is released.
I do believe goodreads official stance is or was "rating their anticipation for the book". Which is ridiculous.
But, as others have pointed out, if you get rid of it completely - you're stopping people who are reviewing eARCs from sharing their opinion.
-Although, if you look, it's really easy to tell who is actually reviewing an advance copy and who is just excited about the book.