Rating books

cynic

The other day, an author on Twitter lamented the fact that readers do not review books (on Goodreads) and just post a star rating. Do you think it is unfair of readers to not post reviews?

What is your criteria for rating a book 1-5? Do you use the Goodreads suggestion (I feel it is a bit harsh), or have your own rating system?

1 star: didn't like it
2 star: it was okay
3 star: liked it
4 star: really liked it
5 star: it was awesome

Personally, I feel giving a 3 star to a book I liked is too low. And I would not bother with a 1 star. If I did not like it, I probably would not have finished it.

Do share your thoughts?

Slit69

One of the challenges of a book rating system that is based solely on "liking" the book is that people like different things in books. Also a minor point, but I don't think there is nearly as much differentiation between 'liked it' and 'it was awesome' as there is between 'didn't like it' and 'liked it'.

Jhsurti's approach with specific descriptors of each anchor point makes a ton of sense to me.

Mousetrap

For me, 5 star is for a really good book that exceeds my expectations. 4 stars is for a decently good one. 3 stars is for a book that was mildly enjoyable but predictable or interesting but with an average narrative style. I generally finish a book even if I don't like it - maybe I gain some sadistic pleasure out of it! ;)

I don't know how to use 2 stars rating for a book. 3 is okay and 1 is bad. So what's 2?

1 star is easy - poor plot/story/narrative style.

And yes, I agree that it's a shame that some readers award a book stars but don't review it. That way I wouldn't know why a book deserved those stars and I'll not be able to decide whether or not I agree with the reviewer's criteria regarding the book's rating.

pgalmora

For me:
* Poor
** Tolerable
***Average
**** Good but could have been better
***** Excellent and must read

jhsurti

* This book did not hold my interest at all. But somehow I must have finished it though I seldom force myself these days. Would not rate a book if I do not finish it
***** This book was excellent in terms of writing style, plot, flow of events, characterisations, couldn't find a fault.

That leaves me with the others:
** At least it holds interest to some extent. Plot is good but writing style and narrative are poor.
*** Good plot, good characterisations, good flow but writing could be improved. The end missed something or was not convincing.
**** Much better than ***. The end plausible. Convincing. Author has a good narrative style that interests you but lost grip occasionally.

cynic

Mousetrap 29-5-2018 03:14 PM
For me, 5 star is for a really good book that exceeds my expectations. 4 stars is for a decently goo ...

How about "not too bad" Jokes apart, every reviewer has a different criteria for rating. Without a review, it is tough to decipher if the reader followed the Goodreads format or otherwise.

cynic

jhsurti 29-5-2018 08:08 PM
* This book did not hold my interest at all. But somehow I must have finished it though I seldom for ...

Now this is a rating system I can totally get behind.

rentpeproperty

I would assume that if the book was really poor, below a 3 I would assume, I would much rather put it down and save my time for a better book. Having said that, I research my books well before I begin reading them, and therefore will pretty much end up enjoy reading the book. Its always going to be a 3 and above!

jayyogeswarusa

Actually I agree with that author. Some time what happened that people rate the book law because they are not agree with authors thought but the story line language is very good. So it is unfair to rate book with some prejudice.

cynic

jayyogeswarusa 31-5-2018 04:44 AM
Actually I agree with that author. Some time what happened that people rate the book law because the ...

That is generally what occurs. The new rule of ratings/reviews appears to be "If you have something good to say, say nothing at all." And it does not just apply to books.