Is a difference of opinion a good enough reason to give bad reviews?

#1
As the title said, is this a good enough reason to give a bad review to a title you read.

[th_096_K.gif]

EXAMPLE A:

MC's family massacred by the bad guy, but in the explosive climax when the MC is holding the bad guy's life in his hand, he decided to take the high road and forgive the bad guy and walked away, completely enlightened.

The following day, Author received a .5 star from a reader because MC is a pathetic pussy and reader believes that majority of people will kill the bad guy in that situation, making the story not believable.

EXAMPLE B:

The army of light marched toward the evil MC's castle to destroy him. MC came out and showed his power by killing half of the army. Seeing this, the rest of the army and the noble general that commands them decided to surrender to the MC. But MC just laughed at them and decided to kill the rest of the army because he consider them weak and he wanted people to fear him even more.

The following day, the author received a 1 star because the reader believes that a hero should not behave like the MC and serves as a bad role model for other people.


EXAMPLE C:

A russian MC used a time machine to return back in time to rigged the election and make sure Trump will win because he believes that he will be the salvation of the country.

The following day, the author received two reviews:

review 1:  5 STARS

"finally an author who believe in America first! keep up the good work!"

review 2: 0.5 STARS

"WTF?! Why the hell would you want to empower that man?"
Check my fictions
"Invincible"
"Gamer of the Dead"
And the newest  "Slam No Basuke"

RE: Is a difference of opinion a good enough reason to give bad reviews?

#2
Scenario A is a sorry result of the BS that the readers on rrl have been fed for so long. It's a consequence of all the xianxia and some LNs so don't take it too badly. Remember a lot of angsty kids read this stuff too, and morals don't sit well with them sometimes.
Scenario B makes no sense. You're obviously going for an anti-hero with that route so who cares about being a role-model?
Scenario C politics can be testy. The author should have known what they were getting into by going with that route although I still think that's a dumb reason to rate a story.

The ratings system on rrl is whacky. Personally, I advocate an end to anonymous voting and stricter guidelines on what a review should entail, but I doubt it's high on the devs agenda (and rightly so tbh) and stricter guidelines would be harder to enforce without a larger mod team.
https://goo.gl/tHnDsL
A proud member of Writers to The End - We finish our fictions!
[My Website
]

RE: Is a difference of opinion a good enough reason to give bad reviews?

#3
I feel like a lot of people here misconceive the purpose of reviews. When a review is posted on a fiction page, it isn't there to give authors feedback. Rather, it is to show potential readers what those who already read a story think of the work. In other words, the core purpose of reviews is precisely so readers can share their opinions with others. Regardless of what the author or other readers may think, a reviewer's opinion alone is sufficient justification for any rating they may give. It doesn't matter if the reviewer has a difference in opinion with others. In fact, I'd argue that presenting a different opinion is more valuable to potential readers than echoing the masses who have already spoken.

That isn't to say authors shouldn't be annoyed or disagree with poor reviews. However, it is critical to recognize that there will be people out there who don't share the same opinions and will leave ratings accordingly. From there, it's up to the individual to decide if said opinion is trustworthy or valid.

Anyway, there's my two cents.
Phantasmal Architect and Author of Tidal Lock - A SciFi VR Fiction
Support your Authors

RE: Is a difference of opinion a good enough reason to give bad reviews?

#4
I think ResonantIce has it down. In the end a review is a reader opinion on the work and serves as a warning for the content of the story. It's why I get annoyed seeing reviews that just comment on how much they like the story. Cool, they liked the story but what parts of it did they not like? What do have have to watch out for? What might I not like about this story and can you give me any hints on what that may be?

I for one vehemently hate mind control and brainwashing and always have a very sever instant reaction when I stumble upon this in a story. I stop reading and delete the story from my bookmarks. A would give a story like that half a star because I find that it is often in poor taste a ruins a story for me. But that's just my opinion and it's my opinion that matters in the end in regards to a review.

What matters is whether or not the person reviewing your story actually matters to you. Like if it's someone you respect or if it's another author with more experience under their belt; or if there are a lot of reviews complaining about the same things then you might have a problem.
<"No love, just hate.">

RE: Is a difference of opinion a good enough reason to give bad reviews?

#5
You bring up a very thought-provoking topic, batotit. Thank you.

A quick answer to the question that you have at the start...
Although everyone in the world is pretty much free to do as they please unless there is some sort of rule on RRL or elsewhere that prevents it, well... Anyone can leave a good or bad review based on whatever criteria they want, really. That having been said, my personal stance on the issue is... No.

A simple difference of opinion about something in a story isn't really a good basis to give a good or bad review on a story. At the very least, for myself, it isn't. I try to treat reviews as something professional from one person to another. It's my job as someone who is leaving a review for another's work, to give that work a full shot. I have to read it from beginning to end (or latest chapter for ongoing works). I have to think about it not just in my own frame of mind, but in other people's as well. I have to use a modicum of empathy and awareness to curb my personal biases. After all, I may hate the work vehemently and want to smack the author upside the head for some seriously bad stuff in it. Yet, I have to curb myself and say, "Well, I hated it, but what if everyone else on the planet enjoys it? What use would my review be for -other- readers if I just include my own biases in a spray of shit on a screen and walk away like an immature asshole? I might as well at least -try- to see what is good about this work."

Comments on a story are for where you can 'have at' the author. Actually, that's a better place to do it. You can give an author relevant input with things, like saying "Yeah, this chapter sucks ass. Here's how it sucks ass, you might want to fix it." This can start conversations between the readers and the author on what works or doesn't work about a story right at the part that needs attention. Simply blanket-spamming an entire work with a review. Especially an anon 0.5 star that doesn't say anything other than "I'm having a bad day, so F*CK YOU!" doesn't serve anything more than the social-media-addicted itch to put people down for momentary lulz.

I'll jump further into this kind of stuff in a bit.



Example A: 
Not a problem as far as story goes. The author chose to explore a different angle with the story. Provided the author knows what they're doing and how they're going about it, there really isn't a reason to drop the 0.5 nuke on their heads other than someone forgot to jerk off that day and now feels grumpy.

If you honestly want to feel the MC is a pathetic pussy, great! Honestly, they probably are. Say so in the comments. Start up a conversation with the author (provided they aren't a moody, 'artisté' who can actually handle conversations and critique about their work), and mention your viewpoints on how the MC is such a sniveling little limpdick.

Something to take into account though, is just because a reader would do something different doesn't mean the author needs an MC to do the same. The author might be telling a different kind of story than the cliché, trope-filled, vengeance story that gets wannabe emo kids all riled up. (I enjoy revenge as much as the next person, but it can get old sometimes.) Maybe it really is a typical xianxia or LN novel that needs the main character to be a pussy-ass and enlighten their way up to some heavenly realm of whiny dipshits. *shrug*

If the story is written smartly and the plot-line seems cohesive and well done, then a whiny reviewer needs to stow their shit for a bit when they're about to leave a review. It's perfectly fine to crap out a 1 or 2 star and say "Well, it's a decent story. I didn't agree with the end, really ruined the whole thing. Up until it hit a wall of shit at Mach 21, it was pretty decent." The whole moody "Whaaaah! I didn't get what I want! F*KK U! 0.5 STAR!" reaction is best saved for places like Tumblr where they blend in, or Facebook where -someone- you know on there might actually give a crap what you think when you're whining.

Honestly, if you liked the story and then thought the author should have taken a different direction, how about this... Instead of whining pointlessly to an author who shouldn't give a shit.. Get up off your ass and write the story you'd rather see. Write a fan-fic where things go differently. Write a revenge-laden opera of the ages where every chapter is a gore-filled, moody, climax. That is what writing is -supposed- to do after all. Inspire you. Even if it's just to inspire you to write a better story than the shit-filled one you just barfed your way through.



Example B:
Anti-hero stories are anti-hero stories. Asking them not to be what they are is like punching a brick wall and yelling at it for not being a door. The best thing about an anti-hero... They really don't give two sloppy f*cks if you don't like them or not. Don't like anti-heroes, don't read stories with anti-heroes in them.

An author writes what the author wants to write. They're sharing their daydreams and fantasies with their readers. Sometimes readers pick up on that and have those same kinds of daydreams and fantasies. That's great. Others aren't into that kind of stuff and rather read about fluffy clouds getting pounded in the ass by unicorns. Different strokes. That being said, unless you want some anti-hero loving dude with a mohawk walking into your cloud-clop party and head-butting the shit out of everyone while yelling "I have the power of Greyskull!" You really have no right walking into a party filled to the brim with bikers, leather-clad shit-disturbers and hepatitis-C-laden punks, and telling them they need to be nice and care about your "fee-fees." Know the pile of shit you're about to step into and plan accordingly. That's what a blurb for a fiction is there for, and the tags, and the reviews, and the ability to talk to the author in comments or PMs. Don't like the scene... Leave. Don't try to make the scene into what you want it to be, lest the people you alienate come into your scene and do the exact same.

A reader has no right to tell an author what to daydream or fantasize about, otherwise that author with completely different sensibilities to you can do the same when you write your stuff. Then, everyone loses. You have a choice to vote with your presence. Don't like something, don't read it. Spend your precious time reading things you enjoy and having conversations with people you like. Hitting your head on a brick wall and screaming "Why aren't you a door! 0.5 stars!" just makes you look like a total idiot.



Example C:
Authors fault, honestly. Don't write fiction with charged political shit attached to it unless you're willing to get the heat. Just as I ragged above about some readers needing to own up to their shit, the same goes for authors and this is a good example of that. Just as an author is allowed to write what they want, sharing their own daydreams and fantasies with people, you still have to be vigilant in -what kinds- of daydreams and fantasies you pump out there and who might react to them.

Sure, the author really might want to explore Russian time-travelers messing with Trump politics. Fine. Take that into account and choose your audience accordingly.

Bringing up politics, religion, ethnic/racial, and sexual stuff, is always an issue. Sometimes it works, with things like 1984 or Brave New World. Sometimes you can be covert with it like Lord of the Rings. Ultimately, unless you're savvy, skilled, and lucky enough to approach those kinds of things in a sensible way, just save yourself the headache by covering yourself in barbecue sauce, fresh-blood, and then jumping into the shark tank. It may be fun to poke the alligator with a stick, but more often than not it's going to get pissed and you're not going to be quick enough to get away.

Darwin Awards; it's for this kind of crap.



I agree with some of what WhoCares has said in their response. Although, I do rankle at the idea of stricter guidelines on reviews, while at the same time wanting some. Normally, I am all for anonymity on stuff, but I can see the value in curbing it a bit when it comes to reviews on RRL. People should be allowed to leave their own opinions on a story, and that should be what comments are used for. Reviews, since you already have to be logged in to leave one anyway, the least you can do is let an author see who, when, and where all the reviews are coming from.

I understand this can be abused. There will be someone stopping by a story and leaving a 0.5 review with "Holy shit, this sucks and you suck for writing it!" kind of review, and then an author can't take the salt and then goes berserk, follows the account back and goes on a flame-spree, vengeance reviews, or whatever else. That is a perfectly valid concern.

But, it also forces the reviewer to have a spine. If they have to log in, be seen, and commit to at least 80 characters just to have a review pop up. You get rid of the trolls and shit-posters. You curb the people that like to leave shit reviews that don't help other readers or the author in any way. Anon reviews really don't help anyone. They only serve to either let an author get away with having an invisible army of drones constantly upvote their work in ratings, or a bunch of whiny assholes trying to knock a fiction down the ratings because someone pissed someone off somehow.

The whole system needs some heavy tweaking so that it can be used as a proper tool to help readers and authors, rather than not.

You don't really need super-strict guidelines. You just need to tweak a few details. Already we have the system that allows for reviews, anon or otherwise, and if you want to do a comprehensive review, you have to put in 200+ characters or so. All you have to do is change it that a person leaving a review must post at least 60-80 characters. Then as part of the Author Premium services, allow authors access to read who is leaving them reviews in detail as part of their analytics data. Mods and Admins already have access to this info anyway in the case of people needing to get rid of attack 0.5 stars, now you give a bit of power to the authors. They can see the reviews. Maybe even a tagging system so authors can send the review to a mod or admin to look at eventually if they feel it's unnecessarily malicious. Or if people see people spamming ridiculous good reviews on someone's shit fiction.



I agree with Reso's points a fair deal as well. A review should be from one reader to other readers. It should actually be a -review- of the story. Someone who took the time to get into the story, read it to some degree, and then report back their views on it. Comments are where readers can interact with the author directly and bring up key points and feedback. Comments are necessary, and a lot of people just use them for "Thanks for the chapter" empty filler, or trying to get their account mentioned elsewhere hoping for traffic to filter back to them. Authors need a lot more than "Thanks for breathing dude. You now have permission to do so for a few minutes longer." Comments are where you can engage with the author of the story you're reading. You can change things. You can bring up points, good or bad. You can show the author where they fucked up, or sprinkle them with dripping gobs of joy if you really like what they did.

What I don't agree with, is the open justification clause that Reso put on reviews. Different views and opinions are great. That's the point, and I agree there. What I would like to bring attention to is what I mentioned far above... A reviewer needs some measure of professionalism in their review. Well, okay, screw professionalism. The reviewer needs to produce a review that actually helps people and isn't just a screed of shit smacked on a screen. Whether the review is good or bad, it has to be -relevant-. Before posting, take a deep breath, wank one out, calm the fuck down and re-read what you're posting. Chances are it's permanent on that fiction and although you might hope to make the author look like a total jack-ass with your review, there's also a good chance you'll just be making a jack-ass out of yourself for some shitty, biased review.



I agree with Korst as well. Ass-kissing in reviews doesn't help anyone, either. Ass-kissing or shit-posting are both pointless. A review actually needs to have -content- in it. Which, goes into why I mention that a review should have substance and these empty anon reviews probably should be fixed sometime in the future.

Korst, you bring up a good point about 'red-flags' in fiction. I can understand that you feel strongly about that kind of material being in stories. I know a lot of other people on here have certain things that are full-on 'nope'-outs or might just be things like pet-peeves. A person coming across material that they find objectionable has full right to walk away from the story they don't like. They also have full right to leave a review if they feel their reaction was strong enough, and warn other readers who might have an adverse reaction as well. This is where the tagging system is really important to fictions here on RRL. People need to pay attention to tags or to details that authors leave in blurbs. It might even help if you have a feeling a story might go into territory you don't want to get into, to send a PM to the author or leave a comment and ask. It's the author's responsibility to help you be comfortable or to know what you're getting into, in case you need to bail out.

However, the idea of leaving 0.5 star review on a fiction just because it deals with subject matter you don't like is pretty severe. Maybe that author is approaching that story in a mature context? Maybe that author has an adverse reaction to that particular subject and -needs- to explore it for themselves. Maybe that person really enjoys or even gets off on that subject. Is it really up to you to shit on an author just because they aren't hung up on a subject that you are? No. Would it be okay if they decide they can't handle whatever you write about, so they come over and 0.5 star you? Shit post a huge rant in your reviews. And then leave comments everywhere about how you're disgusting? Nope. Your reaction to something is yours and yours alone. The author might not even know you exist. So, send them a letter explaining where you're coming from. Walk away from the fiction, and go do something you enjoy.

Personally, I hate NTR and stories that feature rape. Not because they make me lose my mind, but because I'm not into that stuff. If someone writes a novel on here focusing on that stuff... Well, I'll keep my eyes open and avoid it where I see it. I'm not going to spam them with 0.5 anons just because they want to write stories that I may have a strong moral objection to. They do what they want in their creepy little corner of the internet, and I'll go slay dragons over in my own.

You're right in that your opinion is all that matters in the end. The only caveat is who you want to share your opinion with. If a story features things you don't like and is legitimately horrendous in all respects, share it. But, if a story just isn't your thing and has stuff you don't like. Be responsible for your own reactions and walk away. Who knows, the story might be the next blockbuster hit like 50 Shades of Gray. I wouldn't know, because I hate that shit and I didn't read it. As is my prerogative to do.

The last point Korst mentions is pure gold. This x10.

If someone with experience is coming by and saying your work sucks. You might want to pay attention to it. It might not be a troll just trying to shit-post at you. The difference between a critique and a shit-post is in the quality. If someone is actually trying to bring up points and help, LISTEN TO THEM. If a bunch of people are coming by and echoing the same sentiment while -trying- to be civil (even if you don't see it that way), then the problem might be your work and not the people you think are ganging up on you.

A troll is someone getting a rise out of you. A shit-poster is just a loser trying to make you feel bad because they're a miserable wretch with no value in their pathetic existence. Someone saying "Dude, that chapter was awful, why did you write it like that?!" is actually trying to help you.

That said... If someone says "Well, I would have done -this- differently," when they're just spouting their opinion rather than giving a critique. Or, "Your story sucks because if I was the MC, I'd have done -that-!" Then you pat them on the head and say "That's great, but I really don't give a shit. If you dig my story, keep reading. If not, kindly f*ck right off."



The author-reader relationship is a two-way street, please remember this. An author is responsible to their readers that support them, and only to those readers that support them. They need to make something that people enjoy, even if that audience is only one person. A reader needs to give input to an author if they're invested in the story and/or the author. If you're not invested and are just stopping by, you really don't matter to that relationship dynamic. Whereas, someone who regularly interacts with an author and their work, when they say something to an author, they need to be listened to. They are the ones that need to leave reviews on a story.

It's indeed kind of like a normal relationship. A family member or loved one should be able to tell you if you screwed up. Some guy on the street walking by heckling you because they have a different opinion... That's what a head-butt and the middle finger are for.



*** When I state 'you,' I mean so figuratively. Also, please don't visit violence in any form upon anyone. Usage of the words 'head-butt' aren't meant to be literal, but merely to get emotion across. Flipping people off is fair game, but only do so with great discretion, some people have really thin skin and tend to have violently allergic reactions to being called out on their stupidity. ***

https://vorrgistadt.files.wordpress.com/...banner.jpg
"If you like pie, eat pie. If you don't like pie, have cake instead." - Someone Wise

RE: Is a difference of opinion a good enough reason to give bad reviews?

#6
So this is where you were for the last few months, SovereignOfAshes... now just imagine if you had written that much content for your story.

Now personally, I hate 0.5 star reviews. I also hate 5-star reviews. I think that reviews should reflect some elements of both what the story has and what it is lacking, and a review taken to one extreme or the other can't possibly hope to provide that. Even worse is when those reviews are anonymous. I mean, they have their benefits, but it's gotten to the point where I don't even pay attention to the average score but rather what comments people have made about the story and the reasonable people's scores.

Now, I believe in an impartial review which reflects the story's quality and potential, rather than how well it was written. However, humans are not perfect critics, equally interested in every possible type of dish (or, in this case, book) that may be presented to us. I will freely admit that I, often without even noticing until afterwards, give favourable reviews to books I enjoyed, and less promising reviews to books I didn't - only fully realising when I later compare reviews of the two books that I feel were similar in quality, and realising that my reviews were dispersed in score.

But then again, if I despise a book, I'll drop it ahead of time and leave it to people who are interested. I like to think that most people are capable of exercising their right - or, perhaps, responsibility - of choice, and don't end up complaining to an author for "forcing" them to read something they weren't interested in. Unfortunately, that doesn't always seem to be the case. What I do review harshly, though, is changing around the plot of a story mid-book, without warning to its readers beforehand.

But this conversation seems to have drifted away from that to whether anonymous reviews should be allowed at all. For the sake of that argument, I'll throw away my hesitation and play the devil's advocate. One of those is always useful in a divisive debate such as this. Although to an extent, this is also my view.

Anonymous reviews should stay for their benefit to the reviewing scene as a whole. Because without anonymous reviews, we would see far fewer actual worded reviews. Think back to the first time you gave a review on this site. I actually can't remember my first, but it was at least two years ago, perhaps more. And it wasn't written out, it was given without crediting my account or username.

You see, when you do give your first review, it's a daunting thing. There's a sense of being called out and held responsible for your words, especially when downvotes start rushing in, and that can destroy a reviewer's sense of self esteem. But it's not like that if you can remain anonymous.

See, the most important thing when reviewing, in my opinion, is to value your own opinions, instincts and words. And novice reviewers don't have that self-value. So they have to build it up overtime, dropping scores and a few words here and there, until they feel they are able to give out a review that won't embarrass themselves.

You see, I may not remember the first review I gave, but I do remember my most-upvoted (ironically enough, it was a quite critical review of a story which I won't name for anonymity's sake). And that was what turned me from a timid reviewer, who wrote things like "I think the style is alright - it usually keeps a constant person", to phrases more like "Readers are frequently broken from their immersion by drastic POV shifts, the sort that should be watched for when writing in first person".

So without anonymous reviews, I can't believe that there would be as many reviewers around as there are now. That step of first reviewing a novel - just giving an opinion - would be too high without it. So while the system is being misused, I think it still performs its original function.
My (Science) Fiction - Desolate Stars.
And historical - Out of the Motherland.
Go to a new fiction. Review it. Help the little guys.

RE: Is a difference of opinion a good enough reason to give bad reviews?

#7
I see many stories being given really low scores on this site all the time for inane reasoning like "the MC doesn't have a specific personality type I like" or "a single event happened that wasn't entirely to this reader-sama's tastes." Whether I like said stories or not, that's no criticism, that's just being unnecessarily picky because x or y novel didn't perfectly conform to your ideal wish fulfillment scenario of the day. Then again, far more people give muh 5/5 PERFECT STORY PEERLESS WORK reviews at the slightest whim (seems there are too many perfect stories in the world T B Q H); rating systems like these are hardly ever reliable and they never will be, so it's probably for the best to just ignore reviews and scores for the most part.

RE: Is a difference of opinion a good enough reason to give bad reviews?

#8
Ratings are subjective. To be honest, ratings are a very bad system, and a reason that prior research is always needed. Opinions will always clash with everything else, an ideal system would be capable of filtering out opinion based reviews and only accepting reviews that generalize the actual quality of a piece (however quality is also another subjective term). However, in this, certain people may find some writing styles better than others - and does not give an accurate reflection of a piece.

The closest we will have to an ideal rating system is the ability to sort out the opinions of people, and categorize their ratings to best fit the interests of the person looking for a piece of writing. Afterall, a 5 star from a person that loves harems, will be worth less to a person that hates them than a 5 star from a person with the same mindset of hating harems.
https://i.imgur.com/2LhLF05.png
You're no Hero. Nor is he.