Hmmm.
Remember that the time you spend reviewing is the price you pay for asking others to review your work.
Precisely why I so seldom ask for reviews, but I am ever so willing to pay for some No, I DO review, a little. Just nothing like I did my first year here when I literally had no house to run and spent at least 8 hours here. Now that my brain is a bit scrambled, my reviews are few and far between, but unless it's for a friend I know pretty well, I am REALLY SERIOUS about giving a helpful review. As helpful as I can be, and if it isn't my forte, I will straight out say HEY I SUCK at reviewing fiction, but I really liked this or I wanted to mention a few things... I think as long as I can be HONEST in my reviews that I'm living up to MY OWN STANDARDS.
A completely negative review can do great damage to an author.
Ever so true. I've never given one. I've received them. But different people see the same things in different ways. We must remember we have no clue, usually what others are dealing with in their lives. They may be ill, physically and or mentally, they may be at a really sensitive part of their writing hobby or career or aspirations. They may have a grandmother with Alzheimer's that completely berates and demeans them daily for no reason but the disease. I mean, we just don't know! I always keep this in mind when I struggle to find something good to say about a piece in a review. I actually prefer to go to their port and learn something about them before even sending a review. Gee, no wonder I take forever, right
You have an ethical responsibility to prepare a well balanced, helpful review of both strengths and weaknesses of the story.
Hmmm.
Ethical = An ethical person refuses to go along because it violates honesty. ... Honesty is a moral characteristic, a virtue, and sometimes considered to equate with truthfulness yet there are differences. Honesty means you say what you sincerely believe to be true.
I like that definition. Reminds me of a piece timtuink wrote on the differences between ethics and morality. It's like I was saying, it's about an internal set of standards. I used to fluff reviews when I first joined here in 2002, of course I did, I must have. I got tired of it though, and learned to write in a review only what I feel to be true. I just did a hard review the other day, and I didn't know how it would be received, and I feel not too well and I put a lot of work into it. But that's okay, too, because my expectation was only to provide some help and some supportive comments. I accomplished that. They may not be secure in their writing enough to realize my intentions were good, they might be too hard on themselves so they saw only the negative in the review, or read it negatively I mean. But it's kind of all about me I have to feel like I was honest.
One thing I will fudge on a bit is those dang stars. I know I should rate more things three stars given my reviews, or that it is average, but my average reading experience I feel is a bit higher than most people's averages I think I get more out of average. And an average item can always be edited or rewritten to be above average Honestly, anything less than a 3.5 star review is very unlikely to happen from me. And if I've read your stuff enough to know what your best is, oh boy, you will probably get a 4.5 star when most people will give you a 5 star rating, because I know you can do a little better! Not a lot. Just a little. Higher standards for those I know and respect as great writers, and personal favorites? I guess so. Kinda opposite the norm huh... help, River!... I'm swimming upstream again It's just the truth whether I realized it before or not.
Everyone's answers are interesting. Good topic!
|