2 ms·
I've been on Goodreads, but not in a while. So, take my opinions with a grain of salt. - First and foremost, protection from review trolls. Goodreads star rati
by mcdonje 3y ago
I've been on Goodreads, but not in a while. So, take my opinions with a grain of salt.
- First and foremost, protection from review trolls. Goodreads star ratings are influential, impactful, and unreliable.
- A flexible yet coherent system for grouping books. Maybe multiple systems. For instance, I have trouble finding hard sci-fi books because most sci-fi has fantasy elements and hard sci-fi isn't the most popular subgenre. Some books are genre-benders. Sometimes a "subgenre" is better characterized as an intersection. Maybe something tag based, but the tags are categorized.
- I'm not interested in popular reviewers. I'm interested in reviewers who like the things I like.
- helghardt 3y agoYeah, I agree on all three those points. And they seem like strong reasons for alternatives to exist, but wondering why it seems like a non-contested product category. Wonder what we are missing that gives it such a strong moat.
- bwb 3y agoYep, there is no money in books. It is super super hard to make this work financially, where as for Amazon the 370 people they have at Goodreads are a rounding error. If you want to support what I am doing at Shepherd I'd love some new Founding Members, that is helping me a lot but we are still not break even on monthly costs: https://forauthors.shepherd.com/membership https://forauthors.shepherd.com/membership
- bwb 3y agoI'd love to get your thoughts on this btw: https://shepherd.com/bookshelf/hard-science-fiction https://shepherd.com/bookshelf/hard-science-fiction Off the mark or what? I am pulling in BISAC data which is the industry marketing for hard science fiction. Its messy, but curious what you think.