|
I dunno; I’m going to go contrarian here. If the basic philosophy of GR is that members adapt it to be most useful to them, I can see why people would review unreleased books and even give them five stars. Then they’ll float to the top of their lists and it’s a way of keeping tabs on them. In addition, it’s a way of touching base with people with similar interests. I can also see that in the ordinary course of events, once a book has been released and the member reads it, a review and its rating will be adjusted to reflect that. It’s the books that never happen that cause these kerfuffles and what’s the percentage in the grand scheme?
All of that said, I admit that the reviews that are most helpful to me are the two-star reviews; if I’m looking, it’s already because I expect to like a book and I want to see reviews that dislike it for reasons that resonate with me. Ergo, I’m not at all likely to care about stellar reviews from people I don’t know; the only stellar reviews that interest me are by those with similar tastes who are my friends.
Essentially, I don’t care. Have at it, people who are holding their breath and surely must have turned blue by now waiting on a book announced a decade ago. You do your Goodreads and I’ll do mine.
|