More than Just a Rating discussion

Do you ever add a comment to inaccurate reviews of novels?

I'm talking about reviews that say something inaccurate about what is written in the book. In the past I tended to comment on inaccuracies but recently I have not because commenting never seemed to do any good. No reviews changed. One reviewer responded to my and other's comments. They doubled down, making things seem even worse. At that point I decided they were probably troll stirring up trouble for their own amusement.

I've seen reviews where the reviewer confused or conflated two different characters, got the time period wrong, stated wrong profession for major character, and other inaccuracies. The reviewer often uses this mistaken information as basis to say negative things about the book.

Different sites allow various responses such as comment, down vote, block or ignore. Just because I no longer comment doesn't mean I always do nothing. While I respond positively to particularly helpful reviews I no longer feel as obligated to respond to unhelpful inaccurate reviews. Depending on platform I may do nothing.

As a reviewer, do you respond to (genuine not spam, trolls, etc.) comments on your reviews? I did and had some fun conversations that started with comment.

I would definitely welcome more (authentic, respectful) comments on my reviews. And I do comment on Friends' and Followers.' (If we're not connected yet, and it seems that we're not, we should be, sorry.)

If the review is blatantly about the wrong book, I let them know. If it's a book that doesn't have a lot of reviews, I'll give them a chance to fix it, and if they don't, I'll flag.

But usually I add a preface to my own review: "In another review, the reader said X, but the book actually said Y." And then I make sure that review goes out in my feed.

Ooh, I love this question. Here are my thoughts:
I respond to comments on my reviews, whether from trolls or not. I can usually tell if someone is trying to actually engage in a discussion or if they are just being a turd, and respond in kind.

I have changed/updated a review based on a comment when I was factually (and unfairly) wrong, but it's rare that I do so. Not because I'm not ever wrong, but because unless the comment is left pretty much immediately, and is from a friend or someone I already know and who knows me, I likely don't remember enough of the details to confirm, or it wouldn't change my opinion, or I just don't care that much. Usually if a stranger comments with something like "OMG you are completely wrong because blah blah blah!" I tell them to write their own review with the "right" info instead of trying to "correct" mine. Most of these comments are left on my negative reviews, and probably 99.9375% are from people who just don't AGREE with my opinion.

I am MUCH more likely to change my own review (or at least edit it to add an addendum note or something) if I later discover I was wrong myself and want to clarify a point. Usually a factual error isn't going to change my overall opinion though, so while I may add a note about it, that's about all I will do.

I can't think of a specific instance when I have ever commented on someone else's review to correct them, but I don't think I can say I never have. I usually just shrug it off the same way that I do with people who hated books I loved and vice versa. Their experience is their experience.

I recently read a book that had pretty dismal ratings and a lot of reviews mentioned that it was confusing and the framing of the multiple character narratives was bad and didn't make sense and they couldn't figure out what happened, etc etc. When I read the book, I didn't have the same experience at all, so I mentioned this and countered some of the common themes from other reviews with my own perspective in my own review. But I didn't comment on anyone else's review.

If they found it confusing and thought that X did Y in the book, when it was really A who did Z, it's unlikely that them knowing that would make them feel differently about the whole book. Maybe they are a lazy reader, or they were distracted, or this book is outside of their comfort zone, or their comprehension is just generally low... but I don't know and wouldn't assume. Maybe they forced themselves to keep turning pages out of some sense of obligation because they don't like DNF'ing, or because they were assigned the book for a class.

Whatever it is... The book didn't work for them. It didn't interest or compel them to care enough to track the details and so they got some of them wrong... For me, their experience (and opinion based on it) is still valid, and so I just shrug and move on.

I don't use any other site for reviews but this one, so I'll like a review that I agree with or find interesting, or even one I disagree with if the reviewer made good points, or maybe was funny or unique, etc. But I wouldn't downvote or anything. I figure that readers can make their own determination of what to trust or not when it comes to bookpage reviews.

The only time I'm ever strongly compelled to comment on a stranger's review is if they are "wrong" is on social issue or political books - though even then I usually restrain myself from doing so, because I know it's ultimately futile. They are unlikely to change their stance based on comments from strangers. Just as I am.

Cheryl wrote: "I would definitely welcome more (authentic, respectful) comments on my reviews. And I do comment on Friends' and Followers.' (If we're not connected yet, and it seems that we're not, we should be... usually I add a preface to my own review: "In another review, the reader said X, but the book actually said Y." And then I make sure that review goes out in my feed."

Friend invite sent.

I've said something like "While others seem to think X, it seems to me that Y."

Becky wrote: "...If they found it confusing and thought that X did Y in the book, when it was really A who did Z, it's unlikely that them knowing that would make them feel differently about the whole book. ..."

Good point.

Becky wrote: "Ooh, I love this question. Here are my thoughts:
I respond to comments on my reviews, whether from trolls or not. I can usually tell if someone is trying to actually engage in a discussion or if t..."

Good points.

Reviewer based their whole review on how horrible the main male character was and nothing redeemed him because he cheated on the female main character and the female main character was wrong sort for having anything to do with him. He never cheated on her. Characters met when in their late 30s (her) to early 40s (him). Little was said about prior relationships. I commented that he never cheated on her and reviewer insisted he had. Cheryl's comment made me think maybe they confused book for another book

The other review was more recent. The reviewer conflated two quite different characters into one. One head of sort of civilian enforcement sometimes political group and the other second in command military sometimes politically connected group who become allies. Review was largely based on this misconception. I didn't comment. I could see how if they skimmed they could confuse the characters as both often responded to same emergency situations and had compatible if dissimilar viewpoints.

Hmm... I think I would probably look at that first example and think that maybe their definition of cheating is different, and because the man went to dinner with their female friend, that's "cheating" to them. Or something like that, you know what I mean?

Becky wrote: "Hmm... I think I would probably look at that first example and think that maybe their definition of cheating is different, and because the man went to dinner with their female friend, that's "cheat..."

I thought that might be it because, though he never went anywhere with a woman after they met, there was mention he'd been so busy with work he hadn't been out with anyone in, I think it was, three years but that could be indication of prior relationship.

I don't often see inaccuracies when it comes to plot or points of fact from within the book, though it's also true that it's unlikely that I'll both have read the same book, and have read it recently enough that I'd remember many of the details.

I know an author IRL and she thinks it's funny when people misinterpret or miss the point of her books. "They're entitled to their bad takes." I try to take a similar attitude.

On a more meta level, I see a lot of "this book was revolutionary/before its time," where the book was actually part of a major wave in fiction, or there are several books with similar themes written during its time or even before it. I don't dive in to correct the reviewer though--that's pretty rude. It's easy enough to internally translate "before its time" to "the first book like it, from its time period, country, etc. that I've read" to get a more accurate impression of what the reviewer actually meant. If they liked the book, maybe I'd recommend another with a similar feeling or theme to let them know there's more of [thing] to enjoy.

Beth wrote: "I don't often see inaccuracies when it comes to plot or points of fact from within the book, though it's also true that it's unlikely that I'll both have read the same book, and have read it recent..."

I sometimes read reviews just after finishing book to see what others are saying.

Good attitude from author and you. Thanks for the idea.

Reviewers saying things like "this book is before its time," are among things I dismiss. I see it too often.

Something funny for the end of the year - at least it made me laugh.
Not so much inaccurate as confusing.

Steamy Romance Novel
Moderate Heat

What?!?

I've seen steamy and I've seen heat level but not used like that. No, I didn't read or even get the book. Was just looking because it was on Stuff Your Kindle list.

Any guess what it means?

ETA: see later comment

I thought those were the same thing, but maybe not? 🤔

Maybe it's like one of those cool mist humidifiers?

Beth wrote: "I thought those were the same thing, but maybe not? 🤔"

Maybe that's they thought and used both for emphasis?

Usually I've seen heat ratings that went from low heat, to moderate heat, to steamy with steamy being the hottest. Occasionally I've seen burning hot, hot hot, or something similar for erotica but don't think I've seen it for romance.

Becky wrote: "Maybe it's like one of those cool mist humidifiers?"

LOL! Hadn't thought of that!

That is kinda funny; I thank you for sharing.

I finally had time to google it. Author, publisher, and review sites mostly list steamy as a heat level. I did find a romance site that uses term steam rating instead of heat level. Their terms do not include moderate but clearer terms like closed door or open door.