[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 34 KB, 1200x628, goodreads_wide-e23f6858b6bf20dcaf8493237a214a0e.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21877838 No.21877838 [Reply] [Original]

why is this site so fucking shit?
even imdb or rym is better than this garbage

>> No.21877845

>>21877838
everything amazon touches becomes soulless or dies. see: book depository.

>> No.21877856

>>21877838
Is this site the closest we get to being the Letterboxd of books?

>> No.21877863

>>21877856
probably but even letterboxd is 100000 better than goodreads

>> No.21877872

>>21877838
>why is this site so fucking shit?
Apart from being full of middle-aged women competing with each other to write the snarkiest/quirky reviews, it's owned by Amazon.

>> No.21877876

>>21877838
In terms of site functionality it's not bad. I enjoy cataloguing my reads on there and writing little reviews. In terms of ratings... I have no idea how one would go about improving it.

>> No.21877880
File: 64 KB, 500x534, dracula book review vampire.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21877880

>>21877838
>goodreads

>> No.21877881

I ignore the "community" and reviews.
I mainly just use it for description of books and list of books related to a theme I am interested in.

Even things that are mostly bad can have their uses.

>> No.21877888
File: 181 KB, 1155x527, 54324545.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21877888

>> No.21877891
File: 135 KB, 960x640, 1671605199402422.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21877891

>>21877880
>Written mostly in "old English language"
Somehow that one is more egregious to me than the people talking about Twilight

>> No.21877928

>>21877838
Feels good to have made the switch to being an Excelchad last year.

>> No.21877949
File: 311 KB, 300x182, 1637352636196.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21877949

>>21877880
>Dracula
>Old English

>> No.21877960

I only use it as a catalogue of what I've read

For that it's very good.

Social media is for queers and women

>> No.21877966

>>21877838
>imdb
boomers
>rym
LGBT hipsters
>goodreads
normie women

>> No.21877973

>>21877966
>4chan
Retards

>> No.21877979

>>21877876
Add half stars for one. Chick lit will still dominate but at least the ratings in general would be more nuanced.

>> No.21877980

>>21877973
Be that as it may, I'll still take that over the other three things

>> No.21877990

>>21877881
This, and thanks to shit like >>21877888 I use the average rating as a sort of inverse metric. The best classics are usually around 3.7 average, and with the exception of maybe the Count of Monte Cristo, anything above a 4 is usually dross.

>> No.21877998

>>21877980
>>21877980
Fair. I use RYM and goodreads because I'm too lazy to use Excel

>> No.21878004
File: 10 KB, 250x222, 1673002647681415s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21878004

>>21877990
Pride and Prejudice has a 4.28

>> No.21878022

>>21877966
>letterboxd
Yuppies pretending that they can relate to dramas about the lower-class
>MAL
Literal children and their gender-nonconforming groomers
>forums in general
Washed up millennials / Gen-Xrs hiding from their responsibilities in echo chambers

4chan(nel) is the last bastion of sincerity in art discussion.

>> No.21878103

it's fine. what would you even do to improve it?

every rating system on every website is trash because of a combination of people being bad at reviewing things, people defining their lives by the shit they consume and thus have no concept of being critical and thus overinflating everything, and marketers and influencers taking over

to correct way to use goodreads and websites like it is to take advantage of its really good database to organize your shit and only do reviews for your own purposes. *maybe* pay attention to reviews of people or groups you trust.

>> No.21878105
File: 7 KB, 255x159, 1653972652834.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21878105

>>21878022
>4chan(nel) is the last bastion of sincerity in art discussion.

>> No.21878129
File: 3 KB, 166x191, OK.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21878129

>>21878103
>mfw random people complained to me I was giving most books three stars when they "clearly deserved higher scores"

>> No.21878141

>>21878129
I had a guy from here ask why I gave those books shilled here a shitty score

>> No.21878149

>>21878141
>those books
Those F Scott Gardner ones, I mean

>> No.21878151

>>21877838
Its way better as a catalogue than imdb and arguably about the same in terms of functionality when it comes to rym. Insane reviews and weird ratings exist on all three sites but rym is no doubt the worst for rating autism/manipulation.

>> No.21878158

>>21878141
A better question would be why anyone is rating Gardner's books above 1 star to begin with. I could open a random webnovel/fan fiction and the prose would probably be better than Gardner's

>> No.21878252
File: 28 KB, 647x456, 9-11.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21878252

>> No.21879606

>>21878105
It's true. Not because 4chan is good but because everything else is much worse.

>> No.21879637

>>21877838
I dunno I don’t pay attention to internet drama

>> No.21879737

>>21878105
>>21879606
It's true, but it's also in rapid decline. Give a few years and all the sincere discussion will have been stamped out. Everything will be dumb quippy letterboxd type comments but with the words faggot and retard.

>> No.21879753

>>2187786
Why even? Letterboxd is an amazing site

>> No.21879759

Obviously you idiots don't read non-fiction. I found many new books thanks to this site

>> No.21879766

>>21877880
There is really no hope for us at all

>> No.21879982

>>21877966
There are so many trannies on RYM it's unbelievable

>> No.21881167

Rating art on a numerical scale is for brainlets and any website built on that system is bound to represent the opinions of the lowest common denominator. /lit/'s way of handling top 100 books is only slightly better.

>> No.21881334

>>21877838
It’s honestly dreadful. Been using the app for a while mainly to track my progress and goals but when trying to find new reads it’s the worst. The ratings are so harsh and people rate books before they’ve even been fucking released.
I’ve heard storygraph is better but I’m not holding my breath

>> No.21881363

>>21879982
It's getting more out of control by the minute
Every other profile is troon shit now

>> No.21881376

>>21877838
I really don't get why people hate it so much. Yeah dumb YA novels are rated extremely high but it's pretty obvious they're rated in camparison to other YA novels and not to actual literature. A lot of more academic books are rated really fairly and there are a lot of genuinely good reviews on there.

>> No.21881564

>>21877838
that site is AIDS

>> No.21881572

>2023
>there still isn't a good alternative to goodreads
why the FUCK is this allowed, it's so fucking barebones and ugly

>> No.21881575

>>21877838
It really does suck so much ass

>> No.21881837

I love when there are a ton of reviews warning about of their time language.

>> No.21881844
File: 384 KB, 1080x1625, -205706_Firefox.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21881844

I only use it to catalog what I read and find similar stuff. Reading the extremely negative reviews is good for a laugh sometimes

>> No.21881897

>>21877876
It's simple. Go to the reviews, and ignore each female one.

>> No.21881904

>>21877838
I think it's good to catalog your books.
Of course the ratings are full of normies, because normies are the majority. That said, I like the reviews system, you just have to avoid 1 and 5 stars ratings (1 stars are radical haters, 5 stars are fanboys. Both of them are biased)

>> No.21881958
File: 108 KB, 890x520, dante update.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21881958

>> No.21882873

>>21878022
>4chan(nel) is the last bastion of sincerity in art discussion.
you dont believe this why did you type it
the only way to discuss anything is with friends
>but im only friends with people who agree with me
stop using reddit

>> No.21883747

>>21882873
>discussing art with friends instead of hanging out and drinking together
I seriously hope you guys don't do this