Is it ever okay to condemn a book without even attempting to read it?

[Terisa de morgan]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

The listing has to be added to the person's library, marked as read, and have a read date past the release date.

If it's found that people are cheating, they get banned.

Remember ARC, Jon. I've read books before the release date.

Enviado desde mi MI 5 mediante Tapatalk

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Terisa de morgan

Remember ARC, Jon. I've read books before the release date.

Enviado desde mi MI 5 mediante Tapatalk

Then there can be an option to allow ARCs.

[latepaul]

You still have no way of verifying that someone is "cheating".

[DrNefario]

I think it's perfectly fine to trust other people's opinions and form your own views without reading/seeing something - otherwise you'd never be able to make any decisions about what to read/see.

I have opinions about, say Twilight and 50 Shades of Grey which I haven't read, and because of my received opinions don't want to read. I even have opinions about the healthiness of the relationships they propound, which is maybe shakier ground, but I'd probably bring it up in some circumstances.

What is never correct is mob-based abusive action. Probably not even if it is justified by the facts and you have read the book.

[GlenBarrington]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

It's also not realistic. You do not get men running around with no shirts looking for women to fall for them.

I do that all the time, but I'm beginning to think that my "dad bod" is holding me back.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by darryl

You're a braver man than I, even with the Big Grins!

My first thought.
Apparently he's never read Fritz Lieber's acclaimed CONJURE WIFE.
Bat things are coming to his bananas.

(Surprisingly, even the 50's witchhunters knew to leave it alone. Something their modern counterparts haven't figured out. The author's reputation may be shot but so far the book is selling like... Well, like bananas at a Minion convention.)

[Alohamora]

I have no idea if minions like bananas or hate them, but the whole flap makes me want to buy the book to support an author daring to write something different.

I was about to say something very derogatory about Twitter, but then I remembered that the world had witch hunts and McCarthyism even before the internet.

[Cinisajoy]

Not surprised. Lynch mobs and books/movies have been happening since long before the Internet and Harry Potter.
How about "The Exorcist"? People were in an uproar over that one. In rare cases, the uptights attempted to take the children of readers of that book. Come to think of it, my mother did tell me that I couldn't read that one until I was in at least 7th grade. Having later read the book, I think that decree was because she knew I was curious and had access to fathers and nuns at the time. I was going to a Catholic School.

To the OP: yes people can be idiots at times when it comes to anything that goes against their beliefs.

[gbm]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

The listing has to be added to the person's library, marked as read, and have a read date past the release date.

If it's found that people are cheating, they get banned.

Originally Posted by Terisa de morgan

Remember ARC, Jon. I've read books before the release date.

Enviado desde mi MI 5 mediante Tapatalk

Don't forget about manuscripts I have read a number of manuscripts that later became best sellers.

bernie

[gbm]

Originally Posted by latepaul

You still have no way of verifying that someone is "cheating".

bernie

[gbm]

Originally Posted by Alohamora

I have no idea if minions like bananas or hate them, but the whole flap makes me want to buy the book to support an author daring to write something different.

I was about to say something very derogatory about Twitter, but then I remembered that the world had witch hunts and McCarthyism even before the internet.

From the review, it sounds like it is just a fictionalize history of the United States.

bernie

[gbm]

Sarah Hoyt does true justice to this issue.

https://accordingtohoyt.com/2017/08/10/being-free/

Looks like I should have been reading books and author web sites yesterday for enjoyment instead of happy spending hours reading court filing.*

bernie

*
Lawyers write some of the best fiction in court filings.

[crich70]

I think it depends on if the book really has redeeming value. For example there was a book pulled from Amazon some time back about how to molest kids. Obviously a person shouldn't need to read it before denouncing such a book.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by crich70

I think it depends on if the book really has redeeming value. For example there was a book pulled from Amazon some time back about how to molest kids. Obviously a person shouldn't need to read it before denouncing such a book.

The danger comes when you go from "I don't want to read that book" to "nobody else should be allowed to read it either".

If a book breaks the law, which a book containing instructions for child molestation certainly would (in the UK, anyway), the bookseller would be breaking the law in selling it. If a book merely offends you (as some books seem to offend some religious nuts), then that's a perfectly valid reason not to buy it yourself, but no reason at all to think that you have the right to let your morals dictate what other people should or should not be allowed to read.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by crich70

I think it depends on if the book really has redeeming value. For example there was a book pulled from Amazon some time back about how to molest kids. Obviously a person shouldn't need to read it before denouncing such a book.

There have been a few like that. The reason they are pulled has nothing to do with consumers feelings and everything to do with they violate the terms of service.
You can publish just about any subject you want. There are several subjects that you can't publish if they are for titillating purposes. (Does the subject violate the law in most states or countries? If yes, those are subjects that can't be published for titillating purposes.)