4 ms·

I wrote a book, and remember reading the first review. It was a one-star rating complaining that the book had been published late. I was in hospital at the time

I wrote a book, and remember reading the first review. It was a one-star rating complaining that the book had been published late. I was in hospital at the time recovering from a brain injury. My brother had helped get the book over the finish line with last-minute edits while I lay a few feet away in pain. I don't really care for reviews. They reduce us to our produce. They ignore the very thing that materializes the creation: the human. I take things to heart. It's not because I am "non-growth oriented" or over-sensitive. It's because I'm human.

NeoTar 3y ago
This is a big problem with feedback systems. Sure - the fact that the book was published 'late' materially affected their enjoyment, but for ... maybe 99% of people reading the review in the future that's not useful feedback. e.g. If a book I want to read was published four years late in 1984 rather than 1980 - why would I care? Its so frustrating when one reads a review on Amazon or similar and the review is nothing to do with the product, but rather the circumstances - 'fast delivery', 'great seller', 'well packaged', etc. rather than reviewing the actual product. There is a part of me which feels we could do better by having a slightly longer feedback system - first question 'what would you like the review: the product, the delivery, the seller', and the second actually asking for the review, but I suspect this wouldn't actually help.
marginalia_nu 3y ago
I think an important insight about any sort of mass communication is that there isn't a reaction to what you put out there, but a spectrum of reactions. You tell the best joke in the world and out of 100 people, fifty will laugh, thirty will smile, fifteen will not get it at all, and five will be raging mad and posting on twitter about how you should be tried for crimes against humanity for some perceived insult. It's very easy to only focus on the last group.
- stavros 3y ago
  This is an interesting viewpoint, and its corrolary is that the review says as much about your content as about the reviewer. Which means that you should take all reviews with a grain of salt, as they aren't entirely about you.
- catach 3y ago
  > It's very easy to only focus on the last group. Not just easy, pretty sure it's the default that negative feedback looms disproportionately larger in the mind. A bias one must recognize and actively work against.
_a_a_a_ 3y ago
That's whining not feedback. Good reviews are immensely valuable which is why I get really frustrated at Amazon's blatantly hijacked review system. Sorry to hear about your experience though, I hope subsequent reviews were better. > It's because I'm human. I sometimes wonder whether a minority of other people on this planet have reached that level, or ever will.
catach 3y ago
> They reduce us to our produce. They ignore the very thing that materializes the creation: the human. This viewpoint doesn't make much sense to me. When something I make is reviewed, it's that work that's being reviewed, not me. I'm not being reduced as I'm not the thing being reviewed. And as the primary purpose of a review is to inform others if the work in question is good for them, talking about the work and not the creator seems entirely the right approach.
- gymbeaux 3y ago
  This is a variant of the “you are not your code” thing, and what I said with that post is that I don’t agree with the spirit of the expression. While yes I am not literally my code, that isn’t a reason to remove all emotion from it, especially in the review process. Surely there’s a logical fallacy where one believes something to be true because it sounds logical, but in reality logic is not applicable and the fallacy is applying logic where it probably shouldn’t be applied.
  - nuancebydefault 3y ago
    "you are not your code" is what this article made me think about as well. In theory, that expression is true, but in practice every person is an emotional being. Why do programmers program? Because it pays the rent or because they like to solve problems? Well, it is a combination of both. Constructive feedback works. Feedback about subjective details usually have an adverse effect. In that sense, it is very good if you can shake off/try to ignore the 1 or 2 star reviews, and learn from the 3-4 star reviews,showing the good and what can be improved as well.
  - nextaccountic 3y ago
    But if you were to be your code, how can one possibly criticize the code without criticizing you, or even fix a bug, or redesign it to be better? Nobody wants to fix the "you" that is in the code, they don't want to redesign "you" to be better, they want to fix the code itself. This probably requires that you distance yourself from the code your produce, in order to let it go. Can this be done at all?
paulcole 3y ago
> I don't really care for reviews If you’re writing off reviews because one bozo left a useless one-star review, then that does seem like you’re both human and non-growth-oriented. Do you think any reviews are useful? Or do you think enough reviews aren’t useful so as to make reading any reviews useless? Or are you just bothered enough by negative reviews that you don’t want to look at any reviews?
- gymbeaux 3y ago
  I’m certain that they were just giving an example. I think we all know how shitty and crude people are to each other on the internet.
  - paulcole 3y ago
    Yes, but the thing that is unclear is whether the commenter I replied to has written off all reviews (which from the content of their comment, they seem to have) because of this.
ilyt 3y ago
It's a review for a product, not a creator. There is no "reduction" here of any sort, just you misunderstanding what reviews are. > I don't really care for reviews. The sheer fact that you decided to remember and write about some random 1 star review proves otherwise
- gymbeaux 3y ago
  I’m guilty of the same thing occasionally, but this comment is harsh for HN/something I expect on Reddit. We get it, you disagree.
- rescripting 3y ago
  This is a subtle distinction here, probably related to regional usages. As used here, "I don't care for" means "I do not like". You've interpreted it to be "I don't care about", meaning "it does not matter to me".
- shambulatron 3y ago
  > It's a review for a product Right, so that cuts both ways. Then review the _product_, rather than using the review as a channel for a whinge about how it didn't land in your hands as soon as you'd have liked. That misses the point of what reviews are too.
cutenewt 3y ago
I wouldn't take it personally You know the real circumstances True hurtful one-stars is a rival who's mad at your book release And got their buddies to spam the system w/ garbage reviews
naasking 3y ago
> They reduce us to our produce. They ignore the very thing that materializes the creation: the human. It sounds like you're reducing yourself to your product, and so any commentary on your product is thus taken as a commentary on you.
- padolsey 3y ago
  I think, for me, it is not a product. It is a creation. There inlies the crux i suppose...
  - marcosdumay 3y ago
    The thing is, after it's done, it's not a creation anymore. It's history, and you can't get attached to history. Your next thing is a creation. Of course, this is much easier said than done.
  - arolihas 3y ago
    If you put your creation out in the world to be consumed, it will be consumed.
throw10920 3y ago
> They reduce us to our produce. They ignore the very thing that materializes the creation: the human. This is false. You are reducing humans to their produce by claiming that a review of a product is somehow connected to the worth of the human.

NeoTar 3y ago

This is a big problem with feedback systems. Sure - the fact that the book was published 'late' materially affected their enjoyment, but for ... maybe 99% of people reading the review in the future that's not useful feedback. e.g. If a book I want to read was published four years late in 1984 rather than 1980 - why would I care? Its so frustrating when one reads a review on Amazon or similar and the review is nothing to do with the product, but rather the circumstances - 'fast delivery', 'great seller', 'well packaged', etc. rather than reviewing the actual product. There is a part of me which feels we could do better by having a slightly longer feedback system - first question 'what would you like the review: the product, the delivery, the seller', and the second actually asking for the review, but I suspect this wouldn't actually help.

marginalia_nu 3y ago

I think an important insight about any sort of mass communication is that there isn't a reaction to what you put out there, but a spectrum of reactions. You tell the best joke in the world and out of 100 people, fifty will laugh, thirty will smile, fifteen will not get it at all, and five will be raging mad and posting on twitter about how you should be tried for crimes against humanity for some perceived insult. It's very easy to only focus on the last group.

stavros 3y ago
This is an interesting viewpoint, and its corrolary is that the review says as much about your content as about the reviewer. Which means that you should take all reviews with a grain of salt, as they aren't entirely about you.
catach 3y ago
> It's very easy to only focus on the last group. Not just easy, pretty sure it's the default that negative feedback looms disproportionately larger in the mind. A bias one must recognize and actively work against.

_a_a_a_ 3y ago

That's whining not feedback. Good reviews are immensely valuable which is why I get really frustrated at Amazon's blatantly hijacked review system. Sorry to hear about your experience though, I hope subsequent reviews were better. > It's because I'm human. I sometimes wonder whether a minority of other people on this planet have reached that level, or ever will.

catach 3y ago

> They reduce us to our produce. They ignore the very thing that materializes the creation: the human. This viewpoint doesn't make much sense to me. When something I make is reviewed, it's that work that's being reviewed, not me. I'm not being reduced as I'm not the thing being reviewed. And as the primary purpose of a review is to inform others if the work in question is good for them, talking about the work and not the creator seems entirely the right approach.

gymbeaux 3y ago
This is a variant of the “you are not your code” thing, and what I said with that post is that I don’t agree with the spirit of the expression. While yes I am not literally my code, that isn’t a reason to remove all emotion from it, especially in the review process. Surely there’s a logical fallacy where one believes something to be true because it sounds logical, but in reality logic is not applicable and the fallacy is applying logic where it probably shouldn’t be applied.
- nuancebydefault 3y ago
  "you are not your code" is what this article made me think about as well. In theory, that expression is true, but in practice every person is an emotional being. Why do programmers program? Because it pays the rent or because they like to solve problems? Well, it is a combination of both. Constructive feedback works. Feedback about subjective details usually have an adverse effect. In that sense, it is very good if you can shake off/try to ignore the 1 or 2 star reviews, and learn from the 3-4 star reviews,showing the good and what can be improved as well.
- nextaccountic 3y ago
  But if you were to be your code, how can one possibly criticize the code without criticizing you, or even fix a bug, or redesign it to be better? Nobody wants to fix the "you" that is in the code, they don't want to redesign "you" to be better, they want to fix the code itself. This probably requires that you distance yourself from the code your produce, in order to let it go. Can this be done at all?

paulcole 3y ago

> I don't really care for reviews If you’re writing off reviews because one bozo left a useless one-star review, then that does seem like you’re both human and non-growth-oriented. Do you think any reviews are useful? Or do you think enough reviews aren’t useful so as to make reading any reviews useless? Or are you just bothered enough by negative reviews that you don’t want to look at any reviews?

gymbeaux 3y ago
I’m certain that they were just giving an example. I think we all know how shitty and crude people are to each other on the internet.
- paulcole 3y ago
  Yes, but the thing that is unclear is whether the commenter I replied to has written off all reviews (which from the content of their comment, they seem to have) because of this.

ilyt 3y ago

It's a review for a product, not a creator. There is no "reduction" here of any sort, just you misunderstanding what reviews are. > I don't really care for reviews. The sheer fact that you decided to remember and write about some random 1 star review proves otherwise

gymbeaux 3y ago
I’m guilty of the same thing occasionally, but this comment is harsh for HN/something I expect on Reddit. We get it, you disagree.
rescripting 3y ago
This is a subtle distinction here, probably related to regional usages. As used here, "I don't care for" means "I do not like". You've interpreted it to be "I don't care about", meaning "it does not matter to me".
shambulatron 3y ago
> It's a review for a product Right, so that cuts both ways. Then review the _product_, rather than using the review as a channel for a whinge about how it didn't land in your hands as soon as you'd have liked. That misses the point of what reviews are too.

cutenewt 3y ago

I wouldn't take it personally You know the real circumstances True hurtful one-stars is a rival who's mad at your book release And got their buddies to spam the system w/ garbage reviews

naasking 3y ago

> They reduce us to our produce. They ignore the very thing that materializes the creation: the human. It sounds like you're reducing yourself to your product, and so any commentary on your product is thus taken as a commentary on you.

padolsey 3y ago
I think, for me, it is not a product. It is a creation. There inlies the crux i suppose...
- marcosdumay 3y ago
  The thing is, after it's done, it's not a creation anymore. It's history, and you can't get attached to history. Your next thing is a creation. Of course, this is much easier said than done.
- arolihas 3y ago
  If you put your creation out in the world to be consumed, it will be consumed.

throw10920 3y ago

> They reduce us to our produce. They ignore the very thing that materializes the creation: the human. This is false. You are reducing humans to their produce by claiming that a review of a product is somehow connected to the worth of the human.