[ Rules ] [ ot / g / m ] [ pt / snow / w ] [ meta ] [ Server Status ]

/ot/ - off-topic

Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File(20 MB max)
Video
Password (For post deletion)
The site maintenance is completed but lingering issues are expected, please report any bugs here

File: 1629224379503.jpeg (23.22 KB, 793x387, B15EB606-AF63-4606-88A3-92D2AC…)

No. 884090

Discuss the cringe, calamity, and chaos that can be Goodreads, like reviews, certain users, tags, lists, rating systems, website design etc.

No. 884100

I love reading the reviews on controversial books, especially the ones either by wignats or 70s feminists that are still pissing people off.

No. 884109

>>884100
If you combine those ideologies you roughly make Zardoz

No. 884120

Wow, I was just thinking how much I fucking hate goodreads. The interface is so outdated, ugly and counterintuitive and the lists are so shit.

No. 884130

File: 1629227183702.jpeg (106.74 KB, 502x617, EE2F3DC7-03BC-4D33-89B2-C6641D…)

The reader q&a section is always full of the most easily offended, self righteous people that give twittertards a run for their money (probably a decent crossover to be fair). Pic rel, an Indian lady was obviously asking if she got a misprinted copy of an English language book because it contained some Spanish without translation. Instead of explaining that it was written for an American audience who would typically understand a small amount of Spanish, most users got offended and didn’t answer the question. She seems to have deleted her account anyway.

For a website based on reading, most users suck at comprehension.

No. 884264

I was thinking of starting this thread too, thanks anon. It's ridiculous that goodreads allows people to review books that haven't even been released, people rate them 1 or 5 stars depending on whether they agree or disagree with just the premise of the book.

No. 884272

File: 1629235631070.jpg (226.77 KB, 575x1740, 837362626262627.jpg)

Does this count as cringe? Every year this woman edits her review to waahhhhh about the fact that there are commenters who disagree with her extremely shallow take on The Metamorphosis. Girl just log the fuck out. Damn.

No. 884303

>>884120
People think that Amazon keeps the site outdated and ugly on purpose in an attempt to retain a facade of its original, small business charm. After almost 10 years of ownership you would think they would have modernised it by now but nope, so I’ll embrace that tinfoil.

I don’t know anything about tech but find it strange how often the search function breaks and tells you to read a book and come back later. This is such a rare issue with every other website I use. I don’t hate the design - though it would be nice to see it modernised - but I hate how it regularly fails.

No. 884335

>>884272
her review is so retarded
>Apparently the bug thing is a metaphor I mean, maybe? I guess that could be what the book means…?

No. 884402

>>884272
I started this like "yeah, some people do have a stick up their asses and want to look smart by reading classics" then I realised she was updating the thing every year. Girl, that isn't an accomplishment.

No. 884437

>>884109

OT I guess but anon you'd love movie night at my house

No. 884562

I used to hate it when people would use tons of reaction gifs in their review but I've come to appreciate it now because it's a dead giveaway that they have nothing of value to say. So I know now not to bother with their review at all.

No. 885602

Fun fact, Goodreads is owned by Amazon.

No. 886760

I genuinely feel amazed when I find a review that was written well, because for some reason nobody can write one to save their lives. They write three lazy paragraphs only saying that they enjoyed the book and they like this character and they read it in six days, then all the comments say stuff like "wow awesome review!" "great review, I wanna read the book now." Lmao you'd think with a website dedicated to the wonders of words and language people would actually use them to make decent review.

Also, maybe it's a nitpicking on my part, but the app is shockingly slow and laggy. Every time you type something into the search bar it glitches out and takes forever to show the book title you wrote, if it shows it at all. And when you add something to your wishlist, it takes a good ten seconds for it to go through. It's incredibly irritating

No. 886800

I use Letterboxd too at the moment and although that has its problems, it really brings out the worst in Goodreads.
Why can't you make a proper book list for yourself like you can with films on LB, where you can actually look at the covers in large size instead of seeing tiny thumbnails (they're designed to promote and sum up each book, where's the logic of making them so small?), sort by name/year published/length/genre etc, and not have some idiot voting to add their own self-published YA to the end? And also without it being a personal 'shelf', which is difficult for others to find?

Speaking of YA - why is it so prevalent and totally accepted on this site among grown adults? On Douban (a Chinese rating site for all kinds of media) the front page of most popular books and new releases will be almost 100% adult literary fiction. When GR does anything similar it's dominated by 'diverse' YA. Bizarre

No. 886804

File: 1629446165996.png (177.4 KB, 1080x1170, Screenshot_2020-09-08-15-02-34…)

An old screenshot so I forgot the entire details, IIRC she's the cockygate author. GR enabling users to review books that aren't out yet sucks, but author's reaction is pure cringe.

No. 886818

>>886800
Idk, i think to a certain extent it's just a marketing scheme and doesn't really have a meaning. When YA started getting popular they started remarketing classic fantasy books as being YA.

No. 886841

>>886818
I don't even get why YA is considered a genre, genres are fantasy, romance, slice of life, horror… YA is a target, same with "animation" being a category at the Oscars when none of the movies have anything in common.

No. 886868

>>886841
it's considered a genre so we can easily avoid it

No. 886916

File: 1629462090477.png (313.49 KB, 1453x924, harry pottah.png)

There were quite a few one-star reviews because of Rowling's "transphobia" but this was the most unhinged one. I think this one has it all, racism, homophobia ("""queerphobia"""), discrimination against fatties etc etc… Imagine caring this much about a children's fantasy book.

No. 886917

File: 1629462116913.png (331.38 KB, 1896x933, pottah.png)

>>886916

No. 886942

>>886916
Not commenting on the review, but
>Imagine caring this much about a children's fantasy book.
This has to be some discussion fallacy. Never understood why people consider this some gotcha. It just means that you don't care. Anyway children's literature is important because it teaches them about the world, values, etc. Of course it's not the only source of education of socialization, but it affects them more than adults are moved by fiction. We shouldn't teach children to accept garbage cause they don't know any better, or give them free access to media with harmful messages when they still take everything to heart.

No. 892418

File: 1629975097114.png (70.54 KB, 798x292, the great transby.png)

I just saw this and lmao how the hell is this even a question? There is absolutely zero basis for it. Or does everyone just want any random character in classic literature to be a troon now so it's more validating or whatever

No. 1023023

File: 1641874298427.png (50.43 KB, 810x250, lol.png)

I heard of this book called love and other disasters. it's a kweer romance, I don't read romance but I looked it up anyway to find out how the characters were "queer" cause they didn't look like that to me. but I found this review and kek'd

>tw for tow sucking

No. 1023037

>>1023023
*toe

No. 1023190

File: 1641902051144.png (22.29 KB, 128x126, 013263C4-E7B2-4815-A115-E9878E…)

>>1023023
>once you get past the toe sucking, it’s a really cute book!
I’m laffin

No. 1023288

File: 1641910628496.jpeg (2.02 MB, 1200x5905, 9D6BADDF-8944-4A30-8B35-A6986C…)

Scrote reads a five page short story by a woman and goes on an 1 million word rant about how much of a man hating whore the author is. Even bringing up non related shit to defend pedophiles.

No. 1023317

>>1023288
Men really have nothing better to do.

No. 1023376

>>1023023
>major trigger warning: a toe gets sucked
Can people stop being pansies. It's gross but how does that need a warning

No. 1023393

>>1023288
I fucking hate men and how they ramble and think it makes for good writing. I haven't got past his first paragraph and I hate him sm.

No. 1023401

>>1023376
I could've used that warning for 6 Feet Under I find it fucking disgusting. I dropped the show

No. 1023418

>>1023376
I find dick sucking way more disgusting.

No. 1032884

File: 1642611917135.png (125.43 KB, 696x428, just shut the fuck.png)

reviews that nitpick word choice or creative choices like this make me fucking seethe. oh, the author invented some folklore and took liberties with existing folklore instead of doing a 1 to 1 homage of centralized folklore for the sake of your autistic sensibilities? almost always makes me discard their review of a book.

No. 1032893

>>1032884
It's always some dumbass who has their personal "stories" where they write like shit and make more basic mistakes than professional authors every will kek

No. 1032998

File: 1642616865280.png (117.69 KB, 567x589, 1ce94883db3e750cbd5222e1a5a023…)

there's this review of the secret history (i know, i know) that i never understood because this girl is so extremely aggressive but i just don't understand why? i don't get who the person she made up in her mind and that she convinced herself to be real is supposed to be kek. and wtf is tome-suh supposed to be? maybe one of you guys can enlighten me since i might just be too stupid to get her gigantic galaxy brain. here's the whole thing btw: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/689438341

No. 1036239

>>1032998
did you post this in another thread? because I swear I've read it somewhere else. anyway I like the secret history but this girl is fucking annoying and seems like she has… issues

No. 1037728

>>1032998
Honestly it gave me a hearty kek the reee is palpable, I have a soft spot for this brand of female autism.

No. 1037958

>>1032998
I think tome-suh is supposed to be tomes which would fit the pretentious intellectual straw man she's railing against.

No. 1120482

File: 1648893481426.png (95.51 KB, 638x446, harrypotterreview.png)

They read all of her books and admit they like them, but still give them 1 star anyways. They don't understand book reviewing.

No. 1120487

>>1120482
Cancel culture. I go back and forth wondering if it should exist or not. In an ideal world people are smart enough to know the difference between boycotting movies made by a child rapist like polanski and books written by an author that has said some "offensive" remarks. But we don't live in that ideal world so here we are.

No. 1120496

>>1120482
not the fatphobia kek

No. 1120501

>>1120482
Goodreads should make the same thing steam did: not include 'off-topic' reviews in general rating and hide them under the filter.

No. 1120505

>>1120482
These people are so beyond stupid it's embarrassing. I hope Rowling never backs down to these idiots.

I hate Goodreads because they will upload any book to their database and refuse to remove it even if the writer of the book contacts them and informs them they don't want their book on there. A friend of mine uploaded one of her short stories online for free and some retard added it to Goodreads. Now she can't take it down from there even though she deleted her story and no one can access it anymore. It's just stupid.

No. 1120524

>>1120482
>>1120496
FATPHOBIA of all things!
kek wtf

No. 1120526

>>1120524
when was she even fatphobic???

No. 1120533

>>1120526
I guess with the Dursleys? And even then, there were good fat characters kek, like Hagrid, the teachers, etc. They grasp at straws to why she is a bad person. If she never came out against troons, they would be silent or deny she is 'fatbphobic'.

No. 1120621

>>1120533
I've seen a lot of people on twitter use the Dursley's as an example of her fatphobia, yet the wife is described as a bony woman with a horse face, so I guess she hates skinny people as well.

No. 1127445

File: 1649411462558.png (40.38 KB, 620x219, Immagine 2022-04-08 114911.png)

imagine being this annoying about glorified fanfiction a romance novel for teenagers (red white & royal blue)

No. 1127450

>>1127445
Reminds me of a screenshot anons shared before the /m/ wipe of the goodreads comments for the story "things have gotten worse since we last spoke" where a lesbian says something about how straight men should stop writing trauma porn about lesbians and someone comments "the author actually came out as nonbinary this morning". It's the most cringy and transparent cop-out for accusations of fetishization.

No. 1127492

>>1127445
Troons probably like it so someone should tell her she is being troonphobic kek.

No. 1127499

>>1127492
I bet op is a TIF hersef, only they care about these things

No. 1127706

File: 1649432590579.png (419.37 KB, 600x437, fae.png)

>>1127445

No. 1128190

File: 1649459238533.jpg (152.1 KB, 1045x783, by Eric LaRocca (Goodreads Aut…)

>>1127450
anon i found it

No. 1128259

>>884090
>>884562

i hate this so much, it's not fucking buzzfeed, and i obviously am capable of reading a book hence why i'm on this site so you really don't need to break up every few sentences with a distracting funny face

No. 1128381

>>1128190
kek I wanted to read that short story based on the title alone is it any good

No. 1129975

>>1128381
Some anons in the old /m/ thread actually read it, according to them there are graphic scenes of both human and animals being tortured and killed, and other overly detailed descriptions of gross shit. Also it's a lesbian relationship written by a man, so that should tell you something. The violence is over the top and the quality of the writing is apparently terrible. It's free on libgen and z library if you still want to read it, on the plus side it really is a short book

No. 1130386

I cant find the review itself rn but this one time I looked up gr reviews of Charlotte Perkins Gilman's book Herland(it's basically the first known novel about a feminist utopia). One of the reviewers was sperging about the author being a biological essentialist TERF and calling her a white feminist. Mind you, Gilman was a suffragette and she wrote Herland in 1915.

No. 1130392

>>1130386
kek

No. 1143681

What's a good alternative for Goodreads? I really need one

No. 1143703

>>1143681
an anon suggested storygraph once, I downloaded it but never got around to using it

No. 1143709

>>1129975
Anon who reviewed this steaming pile of crap over /m/ a year ago or so, I wouldn't recommend reading it since it's not even fun to hate or trashy, but enjoyable. It's fucking disgusting, fetishistic and vile. I know that it may seem worthy of reading due to morbid curiosity… but trust me, it isn't. Unless you are into lesbians desperately wanting a baby a month into online relationship and achieving it thanks to a tapeworm induced by eating overly described rotten meat crawling with maggots

No. 1143852

>>1143681
I really like storygraph. I like that I don't have to see reviews unless I specifically click on them, and you can use it just to track books and not so much like a social media app unless you want to (there's a separate tab for that sort of stuff, I've used the app for about four months now and never even looked at it). It's really neat to see the breakdown of what you read too, like how many pages/how many genres/ect and I REALLY like that you can mark that you DNF'd a book or that a book is a re-read.

No. 1233712

File: 1655812016208.jpeg (193.98 KB, 1242x403, C8C2AB5B-87A8-4BD8-A0C0-B95CC3…)

This is one of the top rated reviews for The Beauty Myth


Delete Post [ ]
[Return] [Catalog]
[ Rules ] [ ot / g / m ] [ pt / snow / w ] [ meta ] [ Server Status ]