Sci-fi and Heroic Fantasy discussion

Hello everybody, reading the interesting discussion about changes in Goodreads giveaway policy, I started thinking about what changes the site might had gone through since it was launched and by far the major event in that must've been it's acquisition by Amazon. Then I googled a bit on the subject and found out it was HUGELY controversial at the time, with many authors and readers extremely concerned. Now that so many years had passed, it would be interesting to see what the members that were here before and are still here, have to tell us about it. What changes it provoked, for good and for bad. Don’t you think?

For me, it was a non-issue. Because I use a Kindle device, I've picked up over 17,000 free books from Amazon. I get "giveaways" every day. :)

Personally, I like it better now, because my Kindle device is linked to GoodReads. Not only can I use my GoodReads shelves, but it automatically moves a book to my "Currently Reading" shelf when I start it, and when I rate the book at the end, it copies my rating to GoodReads and moves the book to my "Read" shelf.

I haven't noticed any difference. If you were hoping Amazon would spend more money on Goodreads, they don't appear to have done so; the feature wishlist hasn't changed noticeably. If you feared it would become an Amazon shill, that hasn't happened either.

Goodreads fared better than Shelfari, a similar site (with snazzier graphics) which Amazon also bought but then "merged" into Goodreads (i.e., they closed it and told people to move their data.)

Randy wrote: "For me, it was a non-issue. Because I use a Kindle device, I've picked up over 17,000 free books from Amazon. I get "giveaways" every day. :)

Personally, I like it better now, because my Kindle de..."
Interesting, I haven't linked my kindle with Goodreads, yet. be sure to do it.

G33z3r wrote: "I haven't noticed any difference. If you were hoping Amazon would spend more money on Goodreads, they don't appear to have done so; the feature wishlist hasn't changed noticeably. If you feared it ..."

"Goodreads fared better than Shelfari, a similar site (with snazzier graphics) which Amazon also bought but then "merged" into Goodreads"
I didn't know that. Got curious about that site.

G33z3r wrote: "I haven't noticed any difference. If you were hoping Amazon would spend more money on Goodreads, they don't appear to have done so; the feature wishlist hasn't changed noticeably. If you feared it ..."

So I guess it wasn't the "end of the world" like some thought at the time, eh?
One Goodread member at the time said, "As a general rule I like Amazon, but unless they take an entirely 100% hands-off attitude toward Goodreads I find it hard to believe this will be in the best interest for the readers. There are simply too many ways they can interfere with the neutral Goodreads experience and/or try to profit from the strictly volunteer efforts of Goodreads users."
Do you think they had interfered too much with the site?

There have been changes, but there is no way of knowing whether they were Amazon-driven and there was nothing drastic enough to justify the "sky is falling" fears. Authors got particularly exercised about the changes to giveaways when they started charging for them, but it has cut down on the number of self published books so it has actually improved the giveaways for me.

I see. You mean, because there's a lot of self-published crap? :)

As a Canadian I was mad at the giveaway thing since they took them away entirely for about a year. It's been back a while now, but I used to go through maybe a dozen pages of giveaway to cover one week's worth. Now I have a total of 3-4 pages and it covers a couple months+ worth, so it hasn't recovered at all.

And because of the handful of giveaways the chance of winning anything dropped dramatically and I've won nothing for a very long time now. They don't seem to do any Canada only giveaways (I had decent luck with Penguin Canada books that would do that)

Also, I really liked some of the self published books I won. There were crap ones too but some were amazing. But that's where I read the reviews before entering. After all, its the indie-publishers/authors that NEED the giveaways more to attract interest. The big publishers already have big marketing engines and the GR giveaways and reviews are peanuts to them, and clearly some like Penguin and Kensington have decided its not worth paying what Amazon is charging, at least not for Canadian readers (do they still have US giveaways?).

I suspect I joined GR after Amazon had already purchased it, other than the change in giveaway rules I haven't noticed any dramatic changes in the site.

Lupon wrote: "I see. You mean, because there's a lot of self-published crap? :)"

The nice thing about getting self-published books free is they are easy to discard if the author isn't a good match for you personally.

There are so many free things available, it's easy to build a library just on highly-rated items (with many reviewers). But just because others like it doesn't mean I will.

I've found a number of new favorite authors from a free book I picked up. Then I pick up everything I can from that author.

I don't know. If I'm honest, no, my experience hasn't changed too much. But I'm one of those people that doesn't trust corporations, period. I read somewhere that in 1983 something like 50 corporations controlled all of our media, books, movies, TV, the radio, everything. Now, it's six. Whether or not the specifics of that are true, I think everybody would agree the trend is one that we have all witnessed. We are watching our democratic institutions be dismantled on the daily, yet very little of my day to day life actually seems to be affected. For now. But one day, and from what I can tell, sooner than we'd like, all those chickens will come home to roost. The corporate take over of our nation and our society, while they keep us doped up on our creature comforts is a real thing that we're paying for even as we have this discussion, both in ways that we can see, that make the headlines every day, and in ways that don't.

You guys need to read more science fiction. ;-)

Faith wrote: "There have been changes, but there is no way of knowing whether they were Amazon-driven and there was nothing drastic enough to justify the "sky is falling" fears. Authors got particularly exercise..."

Have you actually won a giveaway? I haven't won s@*%! I gotta be due by now. Hook a brother up!

Bobby wrote: "Faith wrote: "There have been changes, but there is no way of knowing whether they were Amazon-driven and there was nothing drastic enough to justify the "sky is falling" fears. Authors got particu..."


When I joined in 2013 I won frequently, but in those days they gave you credit for writing reviews. Now winners are selected randomly and it is much harder to win. Since they made it mandatory that you shelve the book as want to read in order to enter the giveaways I no longer enter because I don't want books forced onto my shelves.

Faith wrote: "Bobby wrote: "Faith wrote: "There have been changes, but there is no way of knowing whether they were Amazon-driven and there was nothing drastic enough to justify the "sky is falling" fears. Autho..."

Ah ha! See, I don't even know the rules. Come to think of it, I only ever get giveaway notices on books I've shelved so that makes sense.

Andrea wrote: "As a Canadian I was mad at the giveaway thing since they took them away entirely for about a year. It's been back a while now, but I used to go through maybe a dozen pages of giveaway to cover one ..."
Hi Andrea, I think the acquisition went on in 2013.
"After all, it's the indie-publishers/authors that NEED the giveaways more to attract interest."
You're right about that. The only bad thing about giveaways is that it's random. Say you wrote a book on religion and then an atheist gets your book, you know?

Bobby wrote: "I don't know. If I'm honest, no, my experience hasn't changed too much. But I'm one of those people that doesn't trust corporations, period. I read somewhere that in 1983 something like 50 corporat..."

"You guys need to read more science fiction. ;-)"
I feel you! recently I read a report from an old server at the UN and he said that the Corporations global domination is now a fact, not sci-fi anymore.

"I read somewhere that in 1983 something like 50 corporations controlled all of our media, books, movies, TV, the radio, everything. Now, it's six."
This is REALLY disturbing. Get's you thinking of when it comes to only one.

Faith wrote: "Now winners are selected randomly and it is much harder to win."
You see, that's the bad thing for authors too, cause reaching your actual audience is a matter of chance.

Faith wrote: "hey made it mandatory that you shelve the book as want to read in order to enter the giveaways I no longer enter because I don't want books forced onto my shelves.

That's not good either.

Bobby wrote: "Have you actually won a giveaway? I haven't won s@*%! I gotta be due by now. Hook a brother up!"

Since fall 2011 I won 72 books (that surprises me too even taking into account some came in pairs) but the last one I won was in March last year. I used to win more than one a month. In fact I joined GR in the first point since my friend told me about the giveaways. But being a book lover I got addicted overall, especially after joining this group!

Of course there were probably fewer people on GR in general, fewer that knew about the giveaway, as I mentioned above there were a LOT more books being given away, and yes, more indie books. And since I did give reviews to the books maybe that did indeed help my chances?

I don't mind the mandatory shelving, I mean it just ends up on your to-read (I've created a real "read-soon" shelf for the things I am actually reading soon) and every now and then I do a cleanup and delete the books I don't win. If that's what I need to "pay" (along with the review) to get a free book, one can't complain though I kind of freaked out the first time I noticed my to-read shelf being invaded :)

Lupon wrote: "You're right about that. The only bad thing about giveaways is that it's random. Say you wrote a book on religion and then an atheist gets your book, you know?"

Well, it's not like it's random across all users of the site, someone had to actually enter your giveaway and if they are too lazy to be bothered to read the blurb to figure out if the book is something that will even interest them, then that's unfortunate but then the winner also "loses" by being stuck with a book they don't want. I always felt honour bound to read a giveaway all the way through even if I didn't like it (fortunately there were only maybe 4 or 5 of those out of those 72 I won...I do read the blurbs and reviews before entering something that caught my eye). Plus maybe his bad review will make other atheist avoid your book (which would otherwise result in more bad reviews) and will attract more religious enthusiasts...or maybe that atheists will really love your book and then you can win over both groups!

No, the worse case scenario is someone wins your book and doesn't give a review or even a rating, then that's wasted money shipping that book to that person. Would have been cheaper to just toss the copy into the trash for all the benefit the author got for their efforts.

In fact GR should put back the requirement that people actually review the books they win, didn't realize that had been removed! After all, what are the people running the giveaways paying for anyway if not to get reviews and ratings? And for self-published authors it can be valuable feedback they lacked without an editor and will help them improve their next books.

"In fact GR should put back the requirement that people actually review the books they win"
That's an interesting thing you're saying, after all it's not that much trouble, right?
"Well, it's not like it's random across all users of the site, someone had to actually enter your giveaway"
I have to confess I didn't know that! stupid of mine, but I haven't made any giveaway yet, so I don't know the workings of it in full.

Bobby wrote: "You guys need to read more science fiction. ;-) ..."

All the scifi Amazon has put on my Kindle hilite benevolent corporatocracies who provide utopia for their customers despite apocalyptic threats... hang on, Alexa just sent me some new orders....

Lupon wrote: "I have to confess I didn't know that! stupid of mine, but I haven't made any giveaway yet, so I don't know the workings of it in full. "

Well, you'll have to admit it would be weird if an author puts up a book for giveaway and some random site user gets picked. I would find it really weird (and expect it to be a scam) if I was told I was going to get a free book out of the blue if I didn't sign up for it :) However the author has no control over who, out of those who sign up, will win the book

Also, you need to have your address already hooked up with your profile, otherwise they won't let you enter (how else will they mail you the book?).

Finally, there is an agreement you need to check to say you understand the rules if you enter the giveaway, like you can't sue GR if your book doesn't arrive as it's not their responsibility, they just provide the platform to hook up author and reader...and yes, I've had a few books never get to me, though most got sorted out after GR notified the sender...but there were 3 that just never came

"Well, you'll have to admit it would be weird if an author puts up a book for giveaway and some random site user gets picked."
You're absolutely right. It's just that I haven't really gotten into the specifics of it. To tell you the truth, I didn't think people would be interested in reading something from an unknown writer with no recommendations. I for once, hate reading books that I don't like; I never do it. In bookstores, I always read the first two pages and if it doesn't hook me, it's over. With Kindle, I go for the sample and do the same.
So, I actually kind of forgot a bit about my book and started enjoying other things around, especially after I found out about the creative writing section. Got a lot of short stories kept in the drawer, you know? Also, I've never been much of a social media fan, but Goodreads is turning out to be a very pleasant surprise. Never really had anyone to talk about books or write reviews to, or discuss interesting and related topics. Like I said to someone here, it's social media with substance.

Sadly the giveaways are now only for America and I can't enter any more. I won a couple of books from Irish /UK publishers and individual writers, and reviewed them promptly. The Irish people benefited by keeping their books to a potential reviewer who was near them, would spread the word.

I like the Groups here on GR, such as this one and the Green Group. I used to participate in Linked In forums, especially an SF one, but since Microsoft took over they have destroyed the forums. They just drive traffic to their running series of posts by everyone, and that is full of ads. Nobody much communicates and makes friends any more.

Lupon wrote: ""I read somewhere that in 1983 something like 50 corporations controlled all of our media, books, movies, TV, the radio, everything. Now, it's six."
This is REALLY disturbing. Get's you thinking of..."

The trouble with a small number is that they cease competing and operate a cartel. They sell one another information. They co-operate on pricing and raw material supplies. My husband noted a year ago that when he Googled some item for the first time, within an hour Amazon was advertising it to him. A few days ago, he found this happened within a minute.
So essentially the firms are separate but for operating purposes, or for customer experience, they might as well be one firm. Already.

Clare wrote: "Lupon wrote: ""I read somewhere that in 1983 something like 50 corporations controlled all of our media, books, movies, TV, the radio, everything. Now, it's six."
This is REALLY disturbing. Get's y..."

Did you used to post on imdb.com? What do you think about Amazon shutting the forums?

Never heard of it, sorry.

Clare wrote: "Sadly the giveaways are now only for America and I can't enter any more. I won a couple of books from Irish /UK publishers and individual writers, and reviewed them promptly. The Irish people benef..."

Well, thats a shame. Should be worldwide since Amazon is worldwide.

Clare wrote: "I like the Groups here on GR, such as this one and the Green Group. I used to participate in Linked In forums, especially an SF one, but since Microsoft took over they have destroyed the forums. Th..."
Cant stand the adds...
Luckily Amazon seems smarter than that and Goodreads, by all accounts, remains fairly unchanged.

But adds are everywhere else now. There's even a blog I follow I have too switch to text only, lest I can't see anything so big are the adds. Of course, they're making money, so it's good for them.

AdBlock Plus. Currently blocking 5 ads on this page. Some media sites, it's blocking 15. Pages load faster, no popups, or very few; no annoying moving things, no risk of downloading ad viruses and spyware.
Free. And you can choose to whitelist a favourite news site, say, if you want to support them.

"annoying moving things" :)
they really are. Thanks for the tip!

Since imdb.com removed the forums I don't visit very much.

Having to add the books for the giveaways to your want-to-read list it makes mine irrelevant. Just because I'm interested enough to enter for a free copy it doesn't mean I'm interested enough to actually buy it.

I also think it makes the book on the giveaway more popular than it really is. Now they can say: look at all the people who have this book listed as one they want to read!

nx74defiant wrote: "I also think it makes the book on the giveaway more popular than it really is. Now they can say: look at all the people who have this book listed as one they want to read! "

It's publicity, and that's what GR is charging for now. And for what it's worth, while I wouldn't buy them either (well some of them I do end up buying) I don't mind temporarily saying I would read them if I won them.

I just created a different shelf to put the book I'm actually going to read (a "read-soon" shelf) and every now and then clear out the books I didn't win from my to-read (which is so far all of them LOL)

After all, we're getting a free book, I think the author/publisher should get something from us in return too. If my "payment" is losing one shelf for my own purposes (and just creating another one instead) that doesn't seem to be too big a cost. It's why I always also give a review if I win, even if I don't like the book and I have to force myself to finish it, it's my "payment" for the book.

Andrea wrote:.."

Personally, I think its very correct of you to commit on writing a review of the books you win. It's true, the author spent his money on it and it might well be some money he could hardly afford, specially if he's an indie author. But even more than the money, theres the expectation of getting a response and thats really something, I'll tell you. So it's very commendable of you, really.

Lupon wrote: "Andrea wrote:.."

Personally, I think its very correct of you to commit on writing a review of the books you win. It's true, the author spent his money on it and it might well be some money he coul..."

You might take a look at various threads in this group in which a lot of the authors believe that too much emphasis is placed on the reviews. Many are of the opinion that giving away free books is a form of advertising and it should not be done with the expectation of receiving reviews. It used to be an official Goodreads group, but they recently turned it over to new moderators and it has been pretty quiet since then.

https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/...

I see. Well, they're expecting something, right? Anyway, not that anything should be forced upon. By the way, if we're gonna be honest, perhaps these authors are saying that because if a person is obligated to make a review, than the ones who didn't like it will have to do it too. And that's probably not gonna be a good review, right? And after all, nobody really wants a bad review when it's public. But that's the risk you take.

Bottom line is: I think everyone is expecting a good review and trying to avoid a bad one.

Lupon wrote: "I see. Well, they're expecting something, right? Anyway, not that anything should be forced upon. By the way, if we're gonna be honest, perhaps these authors are saying that because if a person is ..."

A well written bad review gives the author feedback on how to improve. Of course a bad review that only says "this is garbage" is not useful to the author, and even if it's true, one should at least explain why one thinks that. It's not even useful to other readers since people get annoyed by different things, so one person's garbage is another person's treasure.

It's admittedly hard to write a bad review for someone who spent personal money to send you a free book, so I tried to include both pros and cons, since even in a bad book there's usually some positives. And that's why I take all reviews with a grain of salt. If someone has 5 reviews and they are all 5 stars I figure it's the mom, the dad, a couple friends and an uncle or two :) Doesn't mean it's not a 5-star book but one must wonder at the bias.

The weirdest practice I see on GR is the ability to rate a book before it's even published, and I'm not talking about people who get ARC's. I read somewhere that people are basically rating how badly they want to read the book, which I guess is still reflects on the book...or at least the other books by that author, but still, even in a strong series sometimes you get a dud, hard to rate in advance!

"I figure it's the mom, the dad, a couple friends and an uncle or two :)"
Lol!

"A well written bad review gives the author feedback on how to improve."
Yeah, sure. and that should be the intention. Then it's gonna be up to the writer to be mature enough to take it like that. which if he's too young or with few years on the road, he won't be at all. But hey! that's not your problem.

Andrea wrote: "The weirdest practice I see on GR is the ability to rate a book before it's even published, and I'm not talking about people who get ARC's. I read somewhere that people are basically rating how badly they want to read the book, which I guess is still reflects on the book...or at least the other books by that author, but still, even in a strong series sometimes you get a dud, hard to rate in advance!"

Agreed. The Winds of Winter has almost 400 "reviews" and more than 6500 ratings for a great, yet completely meaningless, 4.4* average. That's ridiculous and that kind of situation alone makes the rating system questionable.
Between that, eyesore GIF-infested reviews, and people who mistake a book review for amateur comedy night, I don't pay attention to the general rating and reviews.

About the topic question: I haven't noticed much change on GR since Amazon bought them. I probably would if I linked my kindle to GR but I like it fine not linked, or if I were an author using giveaways, but as it is I find the acquisition pretty unnoticeable.

Lupon wrote: ""A well written bad review gives the author feedback on how to improve."
Yeah, sure. and that should be the intention. Then it's gonna be up to the writer to be mature enough to take it like that. ..."

Very few authors should read their reviews. It turns them into manic-depressives, even some with several decades making a living in the field, & can cause them to do stupid things. I've seen it too often, even experienced it. Most authors are fairly tender, artistic souls who should concentrate on writing leaving marketing & such to other personality types. If anything, they should have someone else read reviews & let them know if there is anything that needs addressing in general terms.

I wrote about it here once. The comments are very interesting.
https://www.goodreads.com/story/show/...

Jim wrote: "Lupon wrote: ""A well written bad review gives the author feedback on how to improve."
Yeah, sure. and that should be the intention. Then it's gonna be up to the writer to be mature enough to take ..."

"Manic- depressive"
Haha! Yeah, I can see that happening very easily. Writers are also, very oftenly, big dreamers that believe 100% they'll be acclaimed world-wide and that their book is simply a master piece. If the person comes straight from his desktop into Goodreads with that kind of mentality and naivness and then gets smashed up by vicious - even if honest - reviews its gonna be pretty hard on him.
I'll check on your link, Jim

Bryan wrote: "Andrea wrote: "The weirdest practice I see on GR is the ability to rate a book before it's even published, and I'm not talking about people who get ARC's. I read somewhere that people are basically..."

"Eye sore gif-infested..." :)

Luffy wrote: "Clare wrote: "Lupon wrote: ""I read somewhere that in 1983 something like 50 corporations controlled all of our media, books, movies, TV, the radio, everything. Now, it's six."
This is REALLY distu..."

It's worse than you think. Not only are the media consolidating, but the wealth and income are as well. For a peek at the freak show, check out Inequality.org for lots of spectacular figures and graphs.

L.A. wrote: "Jim wrote: "Lupon wrote: ""A well written bad review gives the author feedback on how to improve."
Yeah, sure. and that should be the intention. Then it's gonna be up to the writer to be mature eno..."

Speaking for myself, I take reader reviews seriously. It's hard to stomach a bad review, but repeat after me... "the customer is always right, the customer is always..." Some reviews convince me to rewrite a scene or make other adjustments. Some do not.
Readers who write reviews, especially of ebooks, are doing the author a big favor.
So please, write reviews! Even a sentence or two can be useful. They encourage improvement.