rakioddbooks

Noooo!!!!! Curse you!!!!

Noooooooooooooo!!!!!! Book two for the Vampire Academy was just spoiled for me! Why?! WHY? Would you put the spoiler in caps? Sure you type a little “Warning spoilers” but come on! Do you not realize that at least half of your review shows up on people’s feeds on Goodreads? And it’s in caps no less! That’s the first thing people are going to read.

Use the goddamned spoiler HTML, please!

I was really looking forward to reading this book, now I have to wait YEARS  ’til I forget this f-ing spoiler!

maxresdefault

14 comments

  2. Ouch that’s harsh. Sorry to hear that. It sucks when people don’t understand how to review books. No offense, but reviewing books doesn’t mean discussing about important plot points in a review. A review is either subjective or objective, depending on the reviewer, and it should be a general overview of how the book was.

    Haha your post reminded me of a rant I have for most book reviewers on Goodreads. Either reviewers write essays on the book, or they decide to use the review to talk about every single plot point the book has to offer. Pretty much rewriting the novel in a more condense form. :/ No point of reading the novel after reading those types of reviews. The overuse of gifs bother me too. I actually ad blocked all the images and gifs on Goodreads because they contribute nothing to the review. Just on how the reviewer felt while reading the novel.

    haha opps. I got into my rant a bit. Sorry about that.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    • Seriously! I don’t really like the gifs either. I can’t take the review that seriously either. It seems childish and kind of lazy. I don’t know, maybe I’m being a snob. And yes, why must they make their posts so long. Please, just get a blog. Anyway, ranting is fun rant away!

      Like

      Reply

      • haha thanks. 😀 and yes! It does seem very childish and lazy. I mean if they’re reading novels and attempting to review, shouldn’t they understand how to articulate their emotions better?

        Why resort to catering to the human’s basic senses, sight, in order to get a reaction out of readers? Idk some people on Goodreads are pretty childish. There was this whole controversy between one book with another book and reviewers on goodreads were literally just complaining about how “similar” the books were instead of actually reviewing the novels. It was so very clear that the reviewer didn’t read it. yet guess what? their review is a top review on the goodreads page for that novel.

        So many flaws with GR that it’s baffling. their review algorithm is incredibly bias as well.

        Shame it’s literally the only decent social media site for books. I tried other things, GR just doesn’t compare to them.

        Like

      • Haha I thought of that before because I got annoyed at how GR was ran and didn’t like anything else that was offered. For sites like that you need a good foundation which is hardwork. Not only that, you have to have the community to get other people to want to join. People join sites like Goodreads because the community is already established.

        Also to compete with GR’s database of books will be very tricky. haha but I do have some ideas on how to make an improved goodreads. There are some stuff that just doesn’t make sense. Like community based Genres. Dude, if a book is horror it is horror. why do people categorize it as something different?

        Liked by 1 person

      • Ah that’s true. I think building a community and getting people to join would be the hardest part. If only we could though. Lists are such a mess too sometimes, groups, other stuff.

        Liked by 1 person

      • yeah it has a lot of improvement to be worked on. I wonder if the goodreads team even has a user experience team. they’re the ones that researches what works and doesn’t works for people on the site.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment