# A suggested strategy for dealing with anonymous online bullying



## KBoards Admin (Nov 27, 2007)

I've been thinking about the one-star reviews, upvoting negative reviews, and other examples of online bullying that have been discussed here.

Of course, we ban and IP-block any member who engages in that. But as you know, these bullying actions take place outside of KB, and are done anonymously. So... what can we do?

Well... there *is* something we can do. Stop feeding their egos.

Imagine your typical person who would engage in this bullying. They're unhappy with themselves, and bitter about the success or happiness of others. They get some kind of satisfaction out of hurting others. Doing so gives them a sense of power and control. So they leave one-star reviews, or do other kinds of anonymous online attacks.

Now: for such a person, what would be the ultimate satisfaction? The ultimate encouragement to do more bullying?

Answer: to see it having an effect. To see an author -- maybe even a noted author -- bring public attention to it. To see how much their actions hurt. Maybe even to see that author publicly withdraw from a forum like this, or other social sites. Suddenly the bully has power... and confirmation that his hurtful actions are having the desired effect. He's in control.

Contrast that with another scenario: The bully does his abuse. The author notices it, but doesn't reinforce it by drawing attention to it. The bully hopes that he's having an effect, and may keep at it for some time... but never gets confirmation or positive reinforcement. Eventually, the thrill goes away because there's no visible effect.

So... I'm suggesting that we consider a strategy where we stop feeding the bullies.

In no way do I mean this as a criticism of those who have posted here about one-star reviews. They have done us all a service by bringing this bullying to our attention. But I do propose the don't-feed-the-bullies strategy as something for us to consider going forward.

As always, I appreciate your thoughts.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Wise words Harvey.


----------



## Going Incognito (Oct 13, 2013)

I like it. If they don't get the reactions they're looking for, they'll look elsewhere. 
Now aren't you supposed to be anniversary-ing?


----------



## Going Incognito (Oct 13, 2013)

Cin how is it I always follow you? Great minds think alike?


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Wondering which anniversary?


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

I think it's sound advice. I erred towards nonchalance myself, which is about the halfway point between saying nothing and being upset. I'll definitely follow your advice in the future.

Off-topic, happy 4000th post, Cin


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

I agree entirely (although it's easy for me to say, obviously, being anonymous). But as they say: do not feed the troll.


----------



## GUTMAN (Dec 22, 2011)

I think it is an attractive notion, that if one doesn't feed bullies then one removes their power.

However, as a practical matter, I'm not sure that's what happened. The big guns, like Elle, and others, certainly did not feed _anybody_ --except people here looking for help who were the beneficiaries of their kindness. That in turned got them attacked offsite.

I think bullies empower themselves by posting those negative attacks. And while it's true that they may feel really good when we talk about them, that may be icing on their cake.

I'm really not sure that strategy would prevent the kind of retaliation we are talking about, because it was not what caused the attack in the first place...


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

I agree with Harvey and hope that people here who are trying to be helpful by down-voting reviews will realize that they are in fact, feeding the trolls.  

Be supportive of our fellow kbers by commiserating with them, but doing anything on another site may actually make things worse.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

While I would disagree that any of that really constitutes true bullying, I very much agree with the approach.

One should always remember the Streisand Effect: ignore something online and it will be forgotten quickly.  Complain to everyone who will listen and all you're doing is shining a spotlight on something that others would most likely never notice.  

Take the high road.


----------



## AngryGames (Jul 28, 2013)

Effective against trolls:

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/54613/just_don_t_look/

(from The Simpsons: Treehouse of Horror VI)

(FINALLY! Do you know how hard it is to find Simpsons clips on the internet outside of pirate sites?)


----------



## Guest (Apr 12, 2014)

I'm still going to strip my sig line when I start publishing my books, but wise words, Harvey.

Question: Why are you posting?  You're supposed to be celebrating your anniversary.  Get away from this place!!!!


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

cinisajoy said:


> Wondering which anniversary?


Their 18th anniversary. 

Betsy


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

"Drive-bys? <shrug> Dunno. I don't really pay attention to reviews."
"Drive-bys? Hell no. All my one-stars are from genuinely offended readers. It's a point of pride."
"Drive-bys? Please. There are 900 hundred reviews on that book. How should I know?"
"Drive-bys? Haters gonna hate -- who cares."
"Drive-bys? Never really thought about it. I really only pay attention to sales."
"'Drive-bys?' I don't really like that term. Whatever people want to say in reviews is fine by me."
"Drive-bys? <laugh> You know how many one-stars it takes to budge the needle when you have 2,000 reviews?"
"Drive-bys? Meh. Talking about reviews is boring."
"Drive-bys? You talkin' to me? You talkin' to me? You talkin' to me? Then who the hell else are you talking ... you talking to me? Well I'm the only one here. Who the fuck do you think you're asking about drive-bys?"

Oh, hello. I was just preparing my troll-slimming program, for when I become rich and famous.


----------



## ElHawk (Aug 13, 2012)

I agree, Harvey. The best way to deal with stuff like this is to never show that it affects you (if it even does...personally, I couldn't care less.) Displaying your consternation over it is just giving your troll what he/she wants.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

I'll see your not complaining about reviews suggestion and raise you deleting any and all threads that do it.


----------



## Colin (Aug 6, 2011)

Very wise words, Harvey.


----------



## LeeBee (Feb 19, 2014)

Thanks for posting this, Harvey. I've been thinking the last few days that chances are, every time a big name talks about the fact that they received a bunch of bad reviews right after a heated discussion or a how-I-did-it thread or a sales milestone announcement, they are rewarding the perpetrators with both publicity and acknowledgment that their tactic had the desired effect. And if the ensuing sense of betrayal and accusation directed at the forum in general ("It happened the very next day after I [insert whatever you did] on KB!") is probably another thing the perpetrators are after.


----------



## Matt Ryan (Nov 16, 2012)

In an online world where self-replication is possible, a single person can do a lot of harm. They infect and pollute the once clean waters until nobody wants to swim. This is what they live for.


----------



## BillSmithBooksDotCom (Nov 4, 2012)

Wise words!

First rule of the Internet: DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!

There's no point in trolling if you don't get a rise out of people. I would think a good strategy might be to deflect criticism gracefully and politely --

For example: I write space opera filled with aliens, blasters, and many of the other common tropes of the genre -- if you don't like Star Wars, Babylon 5, etc. you're probably not going to have a good time reading my books. 

So if people criticize my books for being unoriginal, too predictable, etc., I try to bring up the "big tent" theory of speculative fiction: 

Science fiction and fantasy is such a broad and amazing field that there is room for everyone and every type of story. Think of the awesome stuff our field has -- Tolkien, Terry Brooks and Sanderson, Saladin Ahmed and Elizabeth Bear, Bradbury, Asimov, Gaiman, Mike Stackpole and Timothy Zahn, Jim Butcher, Andre Norton, Leigh Brackett and Edmund Hamilton, D&D, Marvel & DC comics, Star Wars and Star Trek and Babylon 5 and the Whedon-verses, video games and RPGs, anime and manga, even mythology fits in. There are so many incredible authors out there to read and enjoy!

This approach generally works because 1) I genuinely believe it, 2) If somebody is going to bother to criticize my stories, they probably have an interest in my genre -- so once I find common ground and appreciation, there is at least a basis to have a meaningful discussion and "agree to disagree" on the merits of my stories, 3) It gives me a chance to recommend really deserving stories by other writers, 4) if you show that you can politely handle criticism and not let it get to you, it discourages trolls and more reasonable people will respect you for conducting yourself with tact and dignity.

It really is good karma all the way around.


----------



## vrabinec (May 19, 2011)

Not me. I'm going after them. I'm gonna break into "Zon headquarters, get names and addys, and then...say hello to my little friend!


----------



## Guest (Apr 12, 2014)

vrabinec said:


> Not me. I'm going after them. I'm gonna break into "Zon headquarters, get names and addys, and then...say hello to my little friend!


This is PERFECT for the zombie apocalypse. (Until the ammo runs out, of course.) #zombies


----------



## ElaStein (Feb 8, 2014)

As they say... the best revenge is living well.


----------



## sandarr (Mar 8, 2014)

I haven’t been here long, but one thing I do know from years on the internet and working online as a writer for attorneys is you do not battle with trolls or the unknown person. There is no way to stop them except for not letting them know their actions have any effect. This kind of person waits for the reaction, the actual deed means nothing it is all about the reaction the person has that they have gone after. 

The other thought that comes to mind is these types of attacks, rather than being from any self publisher may be from people who are attempting to get traditionally published. It could be people, who may feel that self publishing is a short-cut or unfair to them.


----------



## Guest (Apr 13, 2014)

I became the target of a small horde of trolls several months ago. The first thing to do is to NOT engage directly with them. It's like Brae'r Rabbit punching the ******** - just more aggravation. The second thing you do is to wage guerrilla warfare against them. Complain incessantly to Goodreads and Amazon when you come under attack. Eventually, they pay attention. I managed to get several trolls removed from GR and other sites for misbehavior. The final thing to keep in mind is that several trolls have hung out at WC, and may still. They love identifying people who speak up against them and then organize attacks against authors. So, beware KBers. You may be targeted. What's worse is one or two fellow traveler authors who, brainwashed, deluded, or whatever, aid and abet the trolls. Stop the GR Bullies managed to pressure Amazon to clean up GR finally. Unfortunately, these kind of low-self-esteem folks are a sad but real fact of the internet. But there are ways to fight back.


----------



## A.A (Mar 30, 2012)

Wise words as always, Harvey.

There is another dimension to this, which is that these people are actually trying to hurt your sales or ranking. Which is a big deal, and they don't need to see your reaction to know it's having an effect. Late last year, I had a bunch of such reviews within 2 days after posting on a controversial thread here - two of which Amazon removed, but the rest remain. And it was an eye-opener. Disagreeing with someone on a forum is one thing - but wanting to hurt their livelihood in a totally different category, going towards the criminal. Or maybe it is criminal. In that way, these people can be more than just 'trolls'. In my case, for that particular book, the attack was pretty quickly absorbed. But in the case that a person had only a few reviews on a book, that many 1-stars all at once could be devastating.

On the other hand, being a member of the WC often has a positive effect on sales and exposure (and your sanity in connecting with other writers  ), and in the end, I'm sure the positive outweighs the negative. At the moment, I'm doing an anthology with other writers from WC, which is a fun thing to be involved in. So, yes, my stance is there's always going to be the negative, but the positive outweighs the negative.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Right on, Harvey (and Happy Anniversary!)

I'd just like to add something else -- *They aren't paying rent on your head.*

Seriously. Even if ignoring them doesn't get them to stop, learning to evict them from your mind will save your sanity. Do you realize how much energy you expend when you start having paranoid thoughts about whether those reviews are genuine? Do you realize how much happier you would be if you weren't worrying about defending yourself all the time?

It isn't just a matter of keeping your mouth shut. Learn to evict them from your head altogether.

Because they aren't paying rent, and they are lousy, destructive tenants.

Camille


----------



## Mandy (Dec 27, 2009)

Agreed, Harvey. It reminds me of some behaviors I see in the classroom... a child constantly exhibits disruptive behaviors in hopes of getting some kind of reaction from others - anger, frustration, helplessness, pleading, bribing, etc. But when no reaction is given, the child gets bored and moves on. Sure, there may be a child or two who persists with the negative behaviors anyway, but the majority of the children will move on if they can't the reactions they thrive on. 

Eta: Happy Anniversary! October 15th will make 18 years for me, too.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

It might balm the injury to believe that ignoring trolls somehow diminishes them, but at no point in the history of the internet has 'don't feed the trolls' actually worked. Mostly because bringing up the notion of not feeding the trolls is a prime example of feeding trolls.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

Apsara said:


> What's worse is one or two fellow traveler authors who, brainwashed, deluded, or whatever, aid and abet the trolls. Stop the GR Bullies managed to pressure Amazon to clean up GR finally. Unfortunately, these kind of low-self-esteem folks are a sad but real fact of the internet. But there are ways to fight back.


Uh huh. That's nice - spreading uncertainly and doubt to help bolster the reputation of a site that's known for posting real names, highly edited screenshots of online conversations, and maintaining lists of people who speak out against them (of which I'm one).

Harvey's advice is sound. Joining up with that website, not so much.

Anyone who is thinking of doing so would be wise to do their homework before making any such decisions.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

Vaalingrade said:


> It might balm the injury to believe that ignoring trolls somehow diminishes them, but at no point in the history of the internet has 'don't feed the trolls' actually worked. Mostly because bringing up the notion of not feeding the trolls is a prime example of feeding trolls.


Still a good strategy to not engage with them. When one engages, emotions can run high and people can say things that could come back to haunt them / be used against them. Why give someone who's out to get you that kind of ammunition?


----------



## S. Elliot Brandis (Dec 9, 2013)

AngryGames said:


> Effective against trolls:
> 
> http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/54613/just_don_t_look/
> 
> ...


This was the first thing I thought of too!

Just don't look, just don't look.


----------



## unkownwriter (Jun 22, 2011)

Cherise Kelley said:


> I'll see your not complaining about reviews suggestion and raise you deleting any and all threads that do it.


I agree with this. One thing I'd like to see changed here is a rule against discussing reviews other than how/where to get them.


----------



## Joe_Nobody (Oct 23, 2012)

I don't think they do it to impact the author so much as to impact other readers.

While we may, or may not agree with Harvey's strategy, there's no way we can guide readers to do the same.

I've posted more than my share of griping, complaining and protests against "fake" reviews. I'm talking about those reviews that are clearly not motivated by a reader's opinion of a book, but created for some other nefarious purpose. Despite what many might think, I really care less about the actual person posting the review. What angers me is that they can impact other customers with complete falsehoods, inaccurate information and outright lies. What they think of me or my book is irrelevant.

By hey - I'm retiring anyway, so it's all behind me now. I'll be happy leave that entire fecal-storm for all the newcomers.
Since I made my decision to stop writing, I haven't read a single review. It feels so good not to care.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Vaalingrade said:


> It might balm the injury to believe that ignoring trolls somehow diminishes them, but at no point in the history of the internet has 'don't feed the trolls' actually worked. Mostly because bringing up the notion of not feeding the trolls is a prime example of feeding trolls.


I disagree. I've seen it work.

Yes, it's true that AFTER the trolls get fat on all the food given them, people will say "Don't feed the trolls -- Ignore them" and the trolls (like all abusers and control freaks) will have a short term of frenzy.

But the fact is, the more low key you keep the response to them, the less they do it.

And yes, we can't control how other people react, but we can stop feeding and rewarding overreactions.

I always liked what Seth Godin has to say about righteous indignation. It makes us feel powerful, just as trolling makes the trolls feel powerful. But in the end, it does nothing but waste time.

The truth is, the trolls don't hurt the readers. (If they did, Amazon would shut it down in a second.) Readers are more savvy than we think. For the most part, they are WAY less dependent on reviews than we think, and more important: Readers are not as invested in our books as we are. If they miss out on our book, they'll find another one.

And if we didn't invest so much social importance in reviews -- if we stopped worrying about them and stopped flogging for them and bragging about them and hanging everything on them -- the trolls never would bother with them.

Camille


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Vaalingrade said:


> It might balm the injury to believe that ignoring trolls somehow diminishes them, but at no point in the history of the internet has 'don't feed the trolls' actually worked. Mostly because bringing up the notion of not feeding the trolls is a prime example of feeding trolls.


But in this case, the refusal to feed would happen quietly, behind the scenes. It'd take the form of noticing you'd received a drive-by review, or some weird up/down-voting, or some other form of backlash, and then just not reacting in any way. Not coming on KB to express anger or sadness, not pulling back from participation in the forum, not even admitting it _is_ a drive-by.

Obviously, ignoring drive-bys would be much easier for highly successful authors. If you only have four reviews, getting a one-star will have a big impact on your average. It'd take you from a 4.2 to a 3.6, for instance. Your book would go from looking like it had four stars to looking like it had three and a half. It'd go from qualifying for many promotional venues to not qualifying.

But if you have 600 reviews with a 4.2 average, it'd take a dozen one-stars in a row to knock you down to 4.1. For books that have been reviewed this many times, knocking down the number of little yellow star symbols from four to three and a half would be nearly impossible. You'd need several hundred dummy accounts.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Wants to read that book just from the search words.

Now i can't say for sure but I would bet money that two or three reviews I have written have been downvoted.  So I get where you are coming from but people are entitled to their opinions and their votes.


----------



## Nymirra (Mar 15, 2014)

As I'm sure everyone else has, I've been online for well over a decade. I've even willingly spent time in places like 4Chan, and from that I can say that ignoring trolls won't make them stop, but it will stop them from enjoying what they do sooner or later. But even if they didn't stop, so what? I'm an adult. I can handle being called names on the internet. That, however, isn't the point here. And it wasn't the point in Russell Blake's recent thread, either.

When it comes to book reviews, whoever has decided to mess with you isn't just messing with you. For some people, they're messing with your livelihood. When that's the case, I fully understand why people withdraw from a place that's generating these nonsensical, vindictive 1-stars.

Of course, that's not to say that all 1-star reviews is someone out to get you, but I don't think many people here believe they are. Right?


----------



## LeeBee (Feb 19, 2014)

Drew Smith, the problem with your self-censorship strategy is that there is no evidence that it protects you. We've seen people say that they believed they were targeted after merely asking a question. Simply being visible can make you a target. And there are a lot of people who seem to have no issues even though they routinely express harsh opinions in aggressive language. So there's no real reason to think that keeping your head down makes you safe. Might as well be yourself rather than cower in hopes that no meanies will come after you.


----------



## williamvw (Mar 12, 2012)

Having no significant sales yet to speak of, my perception on this may be very skewed and unrealistic. But I have to wonder: Just how much impact do these trolls have on sales? I recognize that there's probably no way to measure it, but, as mentioned earlier, the impact of a few one-stars may be inconsequential. I think that most readers understand that many if not most one-stars can be discarded out of hand. I don't think I've ever given much credence to the amount of voting on comments. I look at the language of reviews, and it's usually obvious in the first five seconds if someone is perceptive and objective or unfairly biased one way or the other.

Don't get me wrong. I despise the concept of trolling. But if we did as Harvey suggests and just ignored it, setting all egos aside, how much real world impact would there be? I honestly don't know the answer, but I find myself increasingly wondering if most of what we have to fear is fear itself.


----------



## Colin (Aug 6, 2011)

williamvw said:


> the impact of a few one-stars may be inconsequential.


If a book has many 4 and 5 star reviews, a few 1 stars won't do much damage. But I have seen newly published books pick up several suspicious 1 star reviews in a very short time, which have effectively strangled the books at birth.

This means thousands of hours of work by the author, editor, cover designer and publisher have been for nothing.

Some books have recovered from these setbacks, and eventually the good reviews have restored the balance, but it can take a very long time. This is not just a matter of people exercising their rights to give an opinion, it can be willful online vandalism which is commercially devastating. It is something that in the 'real world' would get the perpetrators in trouble, but on the net it appears they can get away with it.

Closer monitoring of suspicious reviewing patterns by Amazon or a tightening up of their reviewing guidelines might help.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

I think probably the best solution, if you're really worried, is to post under a different name with no links to your books. If anyone asks for specific references, offer to provide through PM.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Drew Smith said:


> I agree that none of this really matters if you're EL James and have sold a gazillion books. If you have a bazillion reviews already, a few one stars won't make much difference. But if you're a newbie a few bad reviews can put you so deep in a hole that it could take months to dig yourself out of it. The worst part of it all is that there doesn't seem to be any way to defend yourself from the attacks.
> 
> Personally, I say the best way to deal with it all is either censor yourself severely when interacting online or don't claim your books so you can say what you want.


I think this is right -- new authors and authors still struggling to get established are the ones really at risk. For those folks, full or partial anonymity might be the best bet. But the flip-side of the coin is also worth noting: for big-name authors who are selling tons of books and have a large number of reviews (meaning, in the multiple hundreds per book), I struggle to see how the occasional drive-by one-star would have a noticeable impact. Those folks seem better positioned to implement Harvey's suggestion.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Becca Mills said:


> But in this case, the refusal to feed would happen quietly, behind the scenes. It'd take the form of noticing you'd received a drive-by review, or some weird up/down-voting, or some other form of backlash, and then just not reacting in any way.


Here's why that is never and will never work:

1) Even if every single person here takes this stance, it is less than a fraction of a percent of the viable targets who will. If attention is all a given troll craves, they will be fed no matter what because there is no way you're going to convince literally everyone or even a decent percentage to hide their heads in the sand.

2) Ignoring this behavior does not, contrary to popular belief, discourage trolling. It actually encourages *escalation*. Like a child tantruming will get louder if ignored, an attention-focused troll will only get worse and more malignant if ignored.

3) By hiding our heads in the sand and becoming passive targets, we create a consequence-free environment for such behavior.

4) And this is incredibly important: *Not all trolls are attention-focuses*, especially not things like drive-bys. Think about it: the drive-bys and targeted downvoting are all anonymous actions. There's no real attention to be had.

Not only that, but since such behavior is exterior to this site in general, it's unlikely they would even notice you posting about it here. If it is coming from here, it's likely to be more like petty revenge than attention-whoring.

The specific 'trolling' we're talking about here isn't even actual trolling. It's low-scale economic terrorism. Sinking reviews isn't about hurting your feelings, it's about damaging your averages to lock you out of advertising opportunities and discouraging people from buying your product. The point isn't to 'get a rise' from you, it's the do you financial harm.

Calling this kind of stuff trolling is like calling SWATing trolling. Yes, it's a thing jackasses on the internet do, but they're kind of not the same as just plain being obnoxious on purpose.


----------



## komura 420 (Aug 25, 2013)

I don't consider a 1 star review to be bullying.  Peoples opinions of me are none of my business.  More important things to do.

The world is full of petty m/f (males/females).  Not wired their way and wouldn't enjoy it.

Identify them, ignore them.  And should their IP address fall into my hands...well late nights ARE for madness.  
The problem is that most of them don't realize they are that way.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

williamvw said:


> But I have to wonder: Just how much impact do these trolls have on sales?


Enough to make someone like Russel Blake notice and decide to stop posting here.

And I don't doubt Russel's math.


----------



## BillSmithBooksDotCom (Nov 4, 2012)

Here's why I suggest ignoring the trolls --

You can't DO anything* about them. You can't stop them, you can't silence them...and the worst thing you can do is to let them get under your skin, affect your mood and mindset, waste your time and mental energy worrying, getting angry and obsessing over their opinions. That's exactly what they want.

* Okay, you can if you are willing to put all your mental energy and effort into "troll hunting"...but that becomes fighting the "somebody on the Internet is wrong" Whack-A-Mole. One gets knocked down, ten more spring up. It is exhausting. It takes a LOT of time. It is like trying to "win" a political or religious argument -- it does not change anything except get you irritated and angry.

The best way to deal with trolling is to simply BE HAPPY and ignore them. Go out and write a GREAT story and then another and another and put them up. Talk about all the awesome things you are excited about. Be sincere and enthusiastic -- don't even mention the trolling, just focus on the stories you are telling. Point people towards other great stories things that other awesome people are doing.

You WILL get more readers if you do this and readers will weigh in with their honest opinions in reviews. You can't silence the trolls...but you can drown them out.

I also liked one author who took the one-star vote snark comments and then prominently featured them on his blog posts as if they were good reviews, with his own running addendum and commentary. I think it was Konrath. Freaking hysterical. And completely undermined the intent of the trolls.

Have fun at the expense of the little Frellers (Farscape reference).

Sure, one-star review brigades and other forms of trolling do cause economic harm and emotional distress, etc. The best way to overcome that is to get more GREAT stuff out there, be positive and upbeat, get other people to read your stuff and enjoy and review it and recommend it to their friends. 

That is the only thing YOU can do about trolling when you are a victim of it. That and going in and posting a positive review of a book you like when you see some troll is trying to tear down an author.


----------



## Mandy (Dec 27, 2009)

Drew Smith said:


> I bet you're right that you've been hit, too, for things you've said here. I agree that people are entitled to their opinions. About the books. And about the other reviews. I don't think it's right that they can post reviews based on something completely unrelated to the book in question. But there's no way to stop it, of course.


There's also a flip-side to this. I wrote a negative review and when the author came here to complain, other authors immediately flocked to my review and down-voted it. I think I ended up with somewhere around 30 down-votes and I watched it all go down. It's water under the bridge now and I've made amends with the author, but my point is that while authors want to stamp out the review trolls, they should also practice what they preach.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

Mandy said:


> There's also a flip-side to this...they should also practice what they preach.


Very much agreed. Stalking and actual bullying does occur, but I see far too many throw around the B word way too casually for my liking.

A low star review is an opinion, not an automatic indication of persecution.


----------



## A.C. Scott (Mar 25, 2014)

I agree with the OP, and most of the comments: Ignoring trolls and bullies is the best strategy we've got.

However, and this is just a nitpick, I do have a problem with this line, "They're unhappy with themselves, and bitter about the success or happiness of others."

I think it's fairly arrogant and self-aggrandizing to think that people hate you because of how awesome you are. This is the same nonsense we heard after 9/11 when we were told that terrorists hate us because of our freedom and success. I do agree that they are trying to empower themselves, but I don't think it's fair to assume they are jealous of _you_, the target of their attacks. I think it's more likely that the have built up a generalized sense of angst and bitterness because their life hasn't turned out the way they wanted and they take it out on otherwise innocent people who just happen to be in the line of sight during an outburst. Shaving hairs perhaps, but it always bothers me when people say things like, "they just hate me because I"m successful and they aren't", because the hidden message in there is, "I'm awesome and deserve everything I have and if they were awesome like me and didn't squander their life they wouldn't be bullies."

I"m angry right now, so I'm going to take it out on you because you are making me angry right now.


----------



## Weirdling (Jun 25, 2011)

I understand Harvey's point.  Basically it comes down to the helpfulness of your actions in response to this troll.  Is posting here that you were a victim going to change anything?  Or will it make your situation worse by encouraging the troll?

I do think it was helpful for some posters to inform us that the problem exists, but subsequent posts I think may hurt the posters more than help.

That being said, doing something like withdrawing from the forums might be helpful--unless that troll has latched onto you.  In that case, you may find that posting anything anywhere, even on your own blog, might cause the troll to act up.  So maybe leaving a public place might be helpful, but only if it truly protects you.

I think Harvey is right in his suggestion.  But maybe we can come up with a list of helpful actions for those targeted by trolls.  Some already mentioned things like complaining to Amazon and the like.  That's probably the best bet.  Putting the responsibility on the vendor to do something about it, if the vendor can.  After all, the trolls are playing badly in their playground.  If enough red flags are raised about a certain name, then maybe Amazon or whatever vendor will have enough evidence to do something about it.

Just some thoughts.

Jodi

PS Happy anniversary.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Mandy said:


> There's also a flip-side to this. I wrote a negative review and when the author came here to complain, other authors immediately flocked to my review and down-voted it. I think I ended up with somewhere around 30 down-votes and I watched it all go down. It's water under the bridge now and I've made amends with the author, but my point is that while authors want to stamp out the review trolls, they should also practice what they preach.


This


Rick Gualtieri said:


> Very much agreed. Stalking and actual bullying does occur, but I see far too many throw around the B word way too casually for my liking.
> 
> A low star review is an opinion, not an automatic indication of persecution.


And this.

I have to say that as a reader, this thread makes me a bit uncomfortable and unsafe. Harvey started it I am sure with good intentions, but it has already taken on the tone of: 
1 star rater equals bully and troll.

We have someone from one of the most despicable sites come and latch on right in this thread. Another talking about what to do when getting the IP of a reviewer. The tone of this thread is very concerning to me. And like Mandy I quoted here said, every time someone complains about a 1 star, or heck, I have seen complaints about 3 stars, they are almost always readers that just didn't like the book for whatever reasons. Very rarely are they so called "competitors" and such. 
And if they are, Amazon will take it down if it is in violation. A 1 star is not automatic violation by the way.

As someone that has been bullied for real, way back, it is insulting to suggest that lower star rating equal that.

But overall I am just disappointed with the tone of the thread. When will someone stand up for the readers, the reviewers. Even those that *gasp dare to post their 1 stars they fully believe in. When will someone stand up for them when they are constantly being called names, right here in the WC in fact. When they are being belittled for their other reviews, other products they buy, what they read.

Shouldn't a thread like this encompass all?


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

You should be harnessing the power of trolls - if you get a trollish one star review put it on your blog and watch the topic fly. 

Trolls boost ratings in some cases - and I lay you odds that some people will go through and look at the book / review in question and either do the review they meant to do and forgot - or contest with the troll on your behalf - or - and get this - actually buy the book. 

Now watch the normal incredulous responses to this post by people that are far too short-sighted and thin-skinned to truly understand the concept.

Trolls create traffic.  



ps I should say there's one golden rule to this incredibly effective strategy but I'll tell you what it is later.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Drew, 
I am fairly certain that the downvotes on the reviews I am thinking of have absolutely nothing to do with anything I said here.
They came from the review itself.
I know one replier called me an overly-critical critic.  It was a non-fiction book.  That is when I turned off the notify me button.

Love that term so decided to own it.  

But yes I am sure my positive reviews have some downvotes too.  I am not exactly quiet or hidden.
Editing because I do know the difference between quite and quiet.


----------



## Krazykiwi (Oct 7, 2013)

Mandy said:


> There's also a flip-side to this. I wrote a negative review and when the author came here to complain, other authors immediately flocked to my review and down-voted it. I think I ended up with somewhere around 30 down-votes and I watched it all go down. It's water under the bridge now and I've made amends with the author, but my point is that while authors want to stamp out the review trolls, they should also practice what they preach.


This. Wrote a blog post about a book and then was pointed here by a friend, to see the author who was very upset with my too-low-for-their-liking rating rant about it. Pretty sure if that review had been on Amazon, it would have been down-voted into oblivion, based on the "oh that reviewer is obviously just stupid" follow-up comments, accusing me of being part of some cabal of trolls just waiting to pounce on poor debut authors work and destroy their livelihood. If I'm part of the cabal, someone better tell the rest of them to get with the program, as I am as far as I am aware the only person among my circle of friends who has read and reviewed that particular book.

I shake it off, I'm quite capable of fending for myself and defending my own opinions. But I know a lot of people who have stopped reviewing indie books, because they simply don't want to deal with it, or the accusations of bully that follow simply daring to have an opinion.


----------



## Claudia King (Oct 27, 2012)

This has always been my strategy ever since early high school, and it's served me remarkably well!
When you realise that your big brother is always going to kick your butt when you get into a squabble with him, you eventually come to the conclusion that the momentary frustration of putting your feelings aside is waaaay more preferable than giving him yet another excuse to thump you back. 

On the internet, much like in real life, it's the victims who respond explosively to harassment that unfortunately end up drawing attention to themselves, making them even bigger targets.
Of course, outright ignoring these people isn't always the best strategy, but if you do have to acknowledge them it should always be in a calm, detached, non-specific manner. There's no more certain way to get a bully invested in hurting you than giving them a personal reason to hate something you've said or done.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Atunah said:


> I have to say that as a reader, this thread makes me a bit uncomfortable and unsafe. Harvey started it I am sure with good intentions, but it has already taken on the tone of:
> 1 star rater equals bully and troll.


Atunah's point is really important. Harvey was not talking about _one-star reviews_. He was talking about attacks on KB members carried out by people who target them because of their activities on this forum. This could include one-star reviews, yes, but it could also include up/down-voting; harassing PMs, emails, Fb comments, or tweets; attack posts on blogs; down-voting of the reviews KB members write; and probably a number of other things. When someone uses a one-star review as a form of harassment, it doesn't have anything to do with giving an honest opinion about a book. The book is not the point. Attacking the author is the point. Thus the term "drive-by."

The big difficulty is telling when a one-star review is a drive-by and when it's the honest opinion of a person who read or started to read the book and disliked it. Maybe sometimes the review itself makes it blatantly obvious, but other times authors go by timing. They get a nasty, non-constructive one-star review and remember having said something controversial or shared a success on KB the day before. So they suspect the review is a response to the KB activity. But there's no way to be sure, based just on timing -- correlation is not cause, and all that.


----------



## Marti talbott (Apr 19, 2011)

It is not complaining about bad reviews that feed the trolls, it is being successful. I haven't publicly complained in years until last week. 

Why would readers care enough to trash books just for kicks? They wouldn't. My money is on other authors. I've even had them leave links to "a much better, more historically correct book." 

Another hint - a review that points out my historical research errors in great detail. History major or another author telling me how superior they are? Bet it's an author with books that don't sell. They think - I worked sooooo very hard and someone writing junk sells thousands? It's not fair!

And then -do some get paid by a competitor?


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

There is a huge difference between an honest review from someone who doesn't like the book and a one-star posted in retaliation or with the intent to do harm.

People are fond of saying that reviews aren't for authors, but they're also not for being used _on_ authors.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

Harvey,

I think you mean well, but your strategy isn't going to work, IMHO.

Besides, you don't practice what you preach.

If less desirable behavior is detected on these boards, are we supposed to ignore it and not feed the bullies? In almost every other thread the moderators tell us not to engage, but not to ignore them either. We're supposed to report them so they can take action.

What _might_ help is reporting the drive by starring and other bullying to the authorities that be, wherever these things take place.

About three quarters of the problems would be resolved if Amazon applied its own TOS rigorously and consistently. So, I think the victims should keep complaining to KDP customer service.

For a good understanding: this is a massive compliment for how this forum is run by you and the moderators.


----------



## Pamela (Oct 6, 2010)

About a year ago I had a Bookbub ad for a free book. During 2 day promo over 30,000 were downloaded and I was thrilled, watching my book get higher and higher in the ratings.

Suddenly, I noticed the 2 one-star reviews I had on the book, within a couple of hours had about 25 new up-votes, moving those old reviews right up to the top of the product page. Even though I did have a lot of positive reviews, those 2 one-stars stood out because there were so many votes on it, letting people know that many disliked the book.

All sales stopped abruptly. I was crushed. This was a mob attack to bring my book down, *and it worked*.

Those two reviews still sit there prominently on the book's page.

Trolls can hurt us. Mob trolls? A concerted attack? It can ruin a book. This is a very sad fact.


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

I agree with Harvey to a degree but I also think that an author has to protect their interests. My work is how I pay the bills and I take attacks very seriously. My suggestion, strip all your books from your signature. Actually, I think we shouldn't even have them on here. It's just too easy for some to click through. Someone is interested in your book, let them look you up on their own. It's too much effort for someone who just wants to screw you. Kinda like the whole locking your doors bit, thieves like unlocked doors best because it's easy. It's too easy for jerks to down vote. You want to promote your book on here, there's a whole area just for that. 

I write under a pen name that I've not shared with many people. Know what I don't have to deal with? Any of this crap. I've got several reasons for having a pen but the benefit of not having it on here has been more than beneficial. Truth is, some people who are visiting this site are jerks who are aiming to knock someone down. I can only assume it's sour grapes because their own works aren't selling well. I've certainly seen enough people snip in posts on here to believe it.

To the few reviewers on here I just wanted to say, I get the concern but I just don't think we can talk about how the reviewer has been hurt by down votes when there's no money involved. This isn't about authors having their feeling hurt or being upset they aren't top dog. This is about the effect on the all mighty dollar. I don't have to believe everyone on here that's said they have been financially hurt, I can see it. I follow a number of authors book ranks on here and have seen what being public on here has cost them. Your rank falls, you aren't making as much money. It's that simple. 

So my suggestion Harvey and mods, take out all the signature stuff. Let people pick a title for under their name (editor, author, reviewer, reader, artist, alien...whatever). That's the only way I can see all this really working. Because as it is, once an author becomes successful enough, they are going to be looking elsewhere for help. Most of the big name people are leaving, which leaves those of us on the way up without the wisdom of seasoned vets. I come here for many reasons but for author help, I find myself looking elsewhere and I can't think I'm alone in this. And for those thinking this is about the "old crew" complaining, I only became an author last year. Yes, I've been on a several years but the majority of my time on here was spent differently, with different needs. I don't know. Maybe the nature of the board has changed and it's really about setting up for success but after that you go elsewhere. I don't know.


----------



## Mandy (Dec 27, 2009)

Bethany B. said:


> To the few reviewers on here I just wanted to say, I get the concern but I just don't think we can talk about how the reviewer has been hurt by down votes when there's no money involved. This isn't about authors having their feeling hurt or being upset they aren't top dog. This is about the effect on the all mighty dollar. I don't have to believe everyone on here that's said they have been financially hurt, I can see it. I follow a number of authors book ranks on here and have seen what being public on here has cost them. Your rank falls, you aren't making as much money. It's that simple.


I don't think it's that black and white. There _are_ authors who complain about bullying just because they didn't like a legitimate negative review. When I wrote my negative review and the author came here to complain, not only did many authors immediately down-vote my review, many also belittled me pretty nastily in the thread until they discovered that I was reading everything they said. Since all that went down, I've only posted maybe four or five more reviews, and those were 4* and 5* reviews. I stopped posting reviews. SP authors often talk about the importance of reviews boosting their visibility and sales, but if an author engages in retaliatory tactics when he or she simply dislikes a poor review, the reviewer becomes self-conscious about leaving other less than perfect reviews, and other authors miss out.

So again, it's not so black and white. Both author and reader should adhere by the same rules. _Neither_ party should partake in any negative behavior towards the other. And authors are not the only ones who are affected by bullyish behaviors.


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

Mandy said:


> I don't think it's that black and white. There _are_ authors who complain about bullying just because they didn't like a legitimate negative review. When I wrote my negative review and the author came here to complain, not only did many authors immediately down-vote my review, many also belittled me pretty nastily in the thread until they discovered that I was reading everything they said. Since all that went down, I've only posted maybe four or five more reviews, and those were 4* and 5* reviews. I stopped posting reviews. SP authors often talk about the importance of reviews boosting their visibility and sales, but if an author engages in retaliatory tactics when he or she simply dislikes a poor review, the reviewer becomes self-conscious about leaving other less than perfect reviews, and other authors miss out.
> 
> So again, it's not so black and white. Both author and reader should adhere by the same rules. _Neither_ party should partake in any negative behavior towards the other. And authors are not the only ones who are affected by bullyish behaviors.


Look, I know what it's like to be a reviewer. Been there, done that and you couldn't pay me to do it again. I never said there weren't authors that don't complain. Actually, I've said many times other places that authors complain entirely too much, often for stupid things. I've also seen a number of reviewers have creepy things said about them and some really scary stuff happen. I'd suggest the same thing for reviewers that I say to authors. Review under a pen name. It's the best way to keep yourself safe.

As for authors not being fair, I can't tell you this is ever going to change. You're writing a critical review of someones work. Of course the other person isn't going to like it. Of course they are going to complain. I think you aren't being realistic to think that you can post something negative about someones work and think they won't say something. Now getting a bunch of buddies is stupid and petty and I've never liked the practice but it's just not the same as what's going on with some of these authors. What did it really hurt you when this happened? Did anyone threaten you? Did you lose money from this? Comparing the down voting of your review to the impact of up voting a bad review just isn't the same. They just don't equal to the same thing. The point of putting your work out there is people will respond to it honestly but you can't expect that everyone is going to love what you have to say...on either side of the fence.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Bethany B. said:


> So my suggestion Harvey and mods, take out all the signature stuff. Let people pick a title for under their name (editor, author, reviewer, reader, artist, alien...whatever). That's the only way I can see all this really working. Because as it is, once an author becomes successful enough, they are going to be looking elsewhere for help. Most of the big name people are leaving, which leaves those of us on the way up without the wisdom of seasoned vets. I come here for many reasons but for author help, I find myself looking elsewhere and I can't think I'm alone in this. And for those thinking this is about the "old crew" complaining, I only became an author last year. Yes, I've been on a several years but the majority of my time on here was spent differently, with different needs. I don't know. Maybe the nature of the board has changed and it's really about setting up for success but after that you go elsewhere. I don't know.


You know, if you (generic 'you') don't want to have information and links in your signatures, that's certainly your right.

But, remember, kboards is, first and foremost a board for kindle fans. Lots of us who are NOT AUTHORS like having things in our signatures that show folks what we've been reading and/or what other interests we have. Some prefer not to and they don't.

I'm not Harvey but I'm 99% sure that disabling all signatures is NOT something that's going to happen.

That said, it is maybe important to remind people once again that the board -- the WHOLE BOARD -- is a PUBLIC forum. One does not need to be a member to browse freely. Anyone who posts should be aware of that and remember that What Happens On The Internet STAYS On The Internet *FOREVER*.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

Bethany B. said:


> I think you aren't being realistic to think that you can post something negative about someones work and think they won't say something.


Why isn't it realistic? Why shouldn't a customer purchasing a product expect a business to act professionally and not like a spoiled child? There are no guarantees in any business and I certainly know that any time one tries to treat me like crap, that I will be taking my hard-earned dollars elsewhere and letting others know about that experience as well.

You're correct when you say that money is at stake, but you seem to forget where that money is coming from.


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

Mandy said:


> Both author and reader should adhere by the same rules. _Neither_ party should partake in any negative behavior towards the other. And authors are not the only ones who are affected by bullyish behaviors.


But let's take this a step further. Say that when you, as a reviewer, got all those down votes and then people said to you "just don't feed the trolls." How would you feel? Because that's what this thread is about. Not feeding into the negativity. See how well not feeding the trolls works? Yeah, that's because it doesn't. I'm not pro feeding a fight but the truth is, being zen in all this isn't going to work either.



Ann in Arlington said:


> You know, if you (generic 'you') don't want to have information and links in your signatures, that's certainly your right.
> 
> But, remember, kboards is, first and foremost a board for kindle fans. Lots of us who are NOT AUTHORS like having things in our signatures that show folks what we've been reading and/or what other interests we have. Some prefer not to and they don't.
> 
> ...


Well at least we know it's not up for discussion. How many aren't authors on here? I'd really like to know because I'm going to bet that most of the recent traffic here is thanks to authors. Authors that are now moving on to other places. There's a lot I really like about this place but it seems like a blind eye is being turned on the fact that authors are being targeted on here.


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Why isn't it realistic? Why shouldn't a customer purchasing a product expect a business to act professionally and not like a spoiled child? There are no guarantees in any business and I certainly know that any time one tries to treat me like crap, that I will be taking my hard-earned dollars elsewhere and letting others know about that experience as well.
> 
> You're correct when you say that money is at stake, but you seem to forget where that money is coming from.


Name a reviewer in any capacity that doesn't get blow back. Ebert was loved and hated with equal parts.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

Bethany B. said:


> Name a reviewer in any capacity that doesn't get blow back. Ebert was loved and hated with equal parts.


Ebert was a professional. He got paid for his services, quite handily too from what I understand.


----------



## Mandy (Dec 27, 2009)

Bethany B. said:


> What did it really hurt you when this happened? Did anyone threaten you? Did you lose money from this? Comparing the down voting of your review to the impact of up voting a bad review just isn't the same. They just don't equal to the same thing.


Nobody threatened me, and the harm it did was to leave me hesitant to write anymore reviews. Not to mention many readers have a sour taste in their mouths with all the threads that seem to say, "We're authors and you're just a reader, so you can't possibly understand what we go through, and if you were bullied, it can't be compared to the times we've been bullied." I know that review trolls is a real problem that can indeed hurt sales, but I also think the majority of the complaints that pass through WC are often complaints over legitimate reviews. I'm just saying that if an author doesn't want to be attacked, they should take care not to exhibit the same behaviors.


----------



## Moist_Tissue (Dec 6, 2013)

Bethany B. said:


> So my suggestion Harvey and mods, take out all the signature stuff. Let people pick a title for under their name (editor, author, reviewer, reader, artist, alien...whatever). That's the only way I can see all this really working. Because as it is, once an author becomes successful enough, they are going to be looking elsewhere for help. Most of the big name people are leaving, which leaves those of us on the way up without the wisdom of seasoned vets. I come here for many reasons but for author help, I find myself looking elsewhere and I can't think I'm alone in this. And for those thinking this is about the "old crew" complaining, I only became an author last year. Yes, I've been on a several years but the majority of my time on here was spent differently, with different needs. I don't know. Maybe the nature of the board has changed and it's really about setting up for success but after that you go elsewhere. I don't know.


I agree with this. Posting books in your signature is a marketing technique. Other KB posters are exposed to your books and they can click through to your author pages and Twitter feeds. It seems that people enjoy that benefit.

But frequently, putting everything out there comes with a cost. Just like you want to draw in the positive attention, the negative attention is also going to follow. Remove your books, choose a new anonymous screen name and try not to share your titles. Post about your successful campaigns, complain about money lost, and share the nature of your business as you protect your online identity.


----------



## beccaprice (Oct 1, 2011)

I'm leaving my books in my sig, and in fact have the cover of my latest book as my avatar.  I'm sorry to see so many people pulling their books from their sigs, because I do find a lot of interesting books that way.  But then, I'm low-profile enough, and my sales are low enough, that I don't seem to attract the trolls.

I am trying an ad campaign this next week, however, and the stories here have made me hesitant to have a running thread about how well (or poorly) the campaign is doing, like I did last time. It's a pity, too, because there were so many folks pulling for me last time - I could really feel the love.


----------



## crebel (Jan 15, 2009)

Bethany B. said:


> Well at least we know it's not up for discussion. How many aren't authors on here? I'd really like to know because I'm going to bet that most of the recent traffic here is thanks to authors. Authors that are now moving on to other places. There's a lot I really like about this place but it seems like a blind eye is being turned on the fact that authors are being targeted on here.


"On here" as in the Writer's Café or on the whole of Kboards? Certainly in the WC almost all of the traffic is authors. The rest of KB, not so much. I admit as a reader only, it has never made sense to me to have books in a signature line as a free marketing tool and then never leave the confines of the WC ending up with author marketing to other authors who are in turn marketing to them.

One thing I have taken away from this thread and the "What a difference a year makes" thread is the consensus seems to be that the most financially hurtful negative reviews, blogs, whatever, are believed to be from other authors. That is very sad, and I do not have any good recommendations on how to stop self-published authors from cannibalizing each other.

I do think if authors remain here to continue getting and receiving advice, as some leave and others arrive, if they aren't identifiable by their signature line or name, they will find themselves as unknown as the readers-only who won't review are when they try to participate in the WC. Your words will become meaningless and irrelevant if you aren't willing to show your work or results to "prove" you know what you are talking about. Just being a reader of thousands of books across however many genres does not seem to provide any credibility in the WC forum of Kboards.

Good luck in whatever decisions each of you make. I have found hundreds of new books to read because of your signature lines. I'm sorry there are those who have apparently made that an unreasonable path for some to follow.


----------



## Sandra K. Williams (Jun 15, 2013)

Pamela said:


> About a year ago I had a Bookbub ad for a free book. During 2 day promo over 30,000 were downloaded [...] I noticed the 2 one-star reviews I had on the book, within a couple of hours had about 25 new up-votes [...] This was a mob attack to bring my book down


This is something I don't understand. How can a person know whether it was a mob attack or just a lot of readers discovering a book they downloaded was not to their taste and, instead of taking the time to write a review, up-voting another review that expressed their opinion? 25 out of 30,000 doesn't sound unreasonable to me (not that I'm any kind of statistics whiz).



Bethany B. said:


> So my suggestion Harvey and mods, take out all the signature stuff.


Seriously? The only way books get put in signatures is if the author puts them there. Take the books out of your signature if you want. No need to tell other people they can't include their books if they want to.


----------



## KBoards Admin (Nov 27, 2007)

I honestly feel that removing your books from your sig is an over-reaction... but of course you're free to do that if you choose. 

I would also point out that, every week, authors on KB sell about one thousand books from book cover links in their sig. So there's a benefit to having your books visible that shouldn't be overlooked amidst the current discussion.


----------



## Sandra K. Williams (Jun 15, 2013)

crebel said:


> Your words will become meaningless and irrelevant if you aren't willing to show your work or results to "prove" you know what you are talking about. Just being a reader of thousands of books across however many genres does not seem to provide any credibility in the WC forum of Kboards.


Agree.



crebel said:


> I have found hundreds of new books to read because of your signature lines.


I have purchased a good dozen at least, books I'd probably never have heard of or seen otherwise.

It's also fun watching the number of books each person has written rise, the images creeping across the screen at the bottom of their messages.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

jswww said:


> I have no idea what that's supposed to mean. It's not an answer at all to Bethany B.'s assertion that reviewers should expect _some_ blowback from those they criticize and even from other readers who might not agree with their views, which I happen to think is a very realistic expectation. Acting as a critic is just one of those things that will get you noticed by _somebody_. There are going to be people who don't like what you say and if you go into it thinking all people everywhere are going to thank you for that (or _especially _if you think they should be grateful to you because you took the time to criticize them), then you've got blinders on.
> 
> Businesses do complain about criticism, and lawsuits abound.


Ebert was a professional reviewer. He had stake in the game. I would consider that vastly different than a customer review.

Regardless, there's also a vast difference between a company not liking a negative review and them doing something about it. An author downvoting a negative review? Fine. Honestly, I don't see much issue with that. Anything beyond that, though, is probably crossing a line.

Someone who purchases a product should have every right to express their opinion* on that product without fear of reprisal by the company, business, or author selling said product.

ETA: outside of actual libel. Although what most people think is libel and what actually is are often two very different animals.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Sorry, no. I should not expect any blowback from criticizing someone. That is because when I write a review, I don't criticize anyone. A book is not a person, its a book. I write my own opinion of how I liked a book, or didn't like a book. That is all. I should not have the expectation of being treated horribly for stating my opinion on something I spend my hard earned money on and also spend my valuable time on. 

The tone I am getting in this thread is very passive aggressive. Its the, low starred reviews prevent me from feeding my babies excuse. As in, reviewers should always think harder before writing a more critical review, but should of course pour on the 5 stars. Apparently as I keep finding out here, even 3 stars are somehow at fault of "destroying" authors businesses. Yet not once do I hear about how the readers have to spend their money on those same books. Do we not have to eat? Does our income mean nothing? My time is not valuable? 

I chose your (general you) out of millions of offerings and I was disappointed in the read. So now I can leave a critical review and expect to be called a troll, a hater, a competitor, a hateful person, be accused of trying to destroy someones livelihood? I guess these intimidation tactics are working somewhat. I meet many readers online that have just stopped writing reviews, especially for self published authors because of all of this. 

The tone that I am sensing is really not very friendly to readers and those readers that spend the time and trouble reviewing. Unless of course said reader does the Rah Rah Rah 5 stars reviews. Those are A-ok of course. I never hear a beep about those around these parts. I guess its because no matter how useless and iffy they might be, they are still a usable marketing strategy. Is that all we readers are now?  

As to the signatures. If someone wants to find you, they will. Not having those covers show will not make a difference. But it will make a difference to those that like looking at them and clicking through them. But anyone can just delete theirs out if they want I guess. 

Overall I am just a bit sad that Kboards is being portrayed by some as some assassination gang just waiting to pounce on someone. I have been here a long time and I just don't see that at all. Its really doing this community a disservice to be brushed like that.


----------



## KBoards Admin (Nov 27, 2007)

Atunah -- this thread has nothing to do with legitimate reviews. It's about authors choosing to ignore anonymous 1-star reviews that are done, sometimes en masse, and typically using fake accounts. Don't mis-read this thread as bring directed at readers like you that give honest reviews.


----------



## KBoards Admin (Nov 27, 2007)

Again, this thread is not about readers vs authors.


----------



## Guest (Apr 13, 2014)

Harvey said:


> I honestly feel that removing your books from your sig is an over-reaction... but of course you're free to do that if you choose.
> 
> I would also point out that, every week, authors on KB sell about one thousand books from book cover links in their sig. So there's a benefit to having your books visible that shouldn't be overlooked amidst the current discussion.


That's true. I have had a couple of people tell me, who are not members of KBoards, that they saw a post of mine at KBoards. As you know, this board is highly visible on the Internet.

I hope you enjoyed your anniversary weekend!


----------



## PhoenixS (Apr 5, 2011)

Sandra K. Williams said:


> This is something I don't understand. How can a person know whether it was a mob attack or just a lot of readers discovering a book they downloaded was not to their taste and, instead of taking the time to write a review, up-voting another review that expressed their opinion?


I can speak to one instance that tangentially addresses this. A well-respected, prolific, bestselling author and myself were on the wrong side of a debate here one day. KB was the only place we'd recently been seen in public together. On that same day, every one of our books plus a couple of books by authors with similar names got hit with 1-star reviews by the same person. Sometimes cause and effect is very clear. The reviews were eventually removed.

I no longer point to individual books in my siggy. The link takes you direct to pages on Amazon where all of SMP's titles are listed. I still share data, but I'm more apt to aggregate that data in my results or be more coy about the titles I'm discussing. Before I share numbers for a named title, I now ALWAYS look at the title and consider whether it can stand a couple of 1-star drive-by's or not.

With so many removing their books and taking on aliases and speaking only about successes in terms of generalities, I'm losing what for me was the biggest benefit of KB. What will chase me away is not the drive-by review attacks, but the lack of sharing of those hard numbers that people are more and more reticent to share because of those attacks. KB once gave me data and I gave back analysis. It was a wonderful symbiotic relationship that we were able to use as a group to build effective sales tactics off of.

TBH, if I don't know you and you tell me you saw a 100% increase in sales because of a marketing tactic, that means nothing to me until I can verify whether that means you went from selling 1 book to 2, 10 to 20, or 100 to 200. The numbers make a difference -- to me, to you, to wherever you are in the sales cycle. It's ALL important for decision-making -- I pay attention to every single piece of HARD data that I see, good or bad -- but *important* and *useful* for the level of sales you're at doesn't always mean the same. I absolutely don't want folk to jeopardize themselves by sharing publicly, though -- and that's why so many of us are fleeing to splinter groups.

It would be great to continue to have a centralized location where there are pages and pages of raw numbers to work through and segment and analyze. But the dearth of info here means most of my number-crunching takes place behind closed doors now. Which is a shame, because there's a lot of communal insight being lost.

Cinisajoy and Atunah and other reviewers here, PLEASE don't take my comments as referring to legitimate low-star reviews. I shudder at the review threads on this board and steer clear of them. But there *are* folk who clearly intend to dis the *author* (not the book at hand) through low-star ratings of their books, and those drive-byers who are acting out of a place of anger or envy or even simple herd mentality (the pile-on) hurt the image of legitimate, thoughtful reviewers like yourselves, mucking up the pool for authors and reviewers alike.


----------



## crebel (Jan 15, 2009)

Harvey said:


> Atunah -- this thread has nothing to do with legitimate reviews. It's about authors choosing to ignore anonymous 1-star reviews that are done, sometimes en masse, and typically using fake accounts. Don't mis-read this thread as bring directed at readers like you that give honest reviews.


Harvey, that may have been your intent in starting in this thread, but I don't think that has remained the tone from near the beginning of the responses.

I don't think the citizens of KB are ever going to agree on what a "legitimate" review is. The perception provided to the readers by many of the authors is that any review that is not 4 or 5 stars is the result of a mob, hater, idiot, pick-your-noun reviewer. Atunah's point, I think, is that those same "mobs" descend in large numbers to downvote a negative review when threads are started here, but many think that is only fair because negative reviews prevent authors from being able to pay their bills.

Your advice to ignore the negativity and not feed it then really becomes the "Don't respond to reviews, it never turns out well." that has been offered and hotly debated since day one.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

jswww said:


> I don't think the right to have an opinion is the same as a right to have that opinion go unchallenged. Ever.


And I don't think challenging an opinion is the same as reprisal. Just sayin'.

Folks, let's not make this an us vs them thread between reviewers and authors. As Harvey said, this thread is specifically addressing retaliation against members for their posts here (and indeed, that could be retaliation against reviewers or against authors, though the catalyst was authors. It's a symbiotic relationship--reviewers need authors to write books, authors need reviewers.

Let's be kind to each other.

Betsy


----------



## A.A (Mar 30, 2012)

I agree that less and less people are sharing hard data, and any writer who's ever downvoted/posted a negative review out of spite has really shot themselves in the foot. What Phoenix Sullivan just posted about is an unfortunate change in the forums.

I wouldn't agree that the forums should not allow authors to display their books in their signatures. It's nice to see them  Also, as far as I understand, small Amazon commissions are earned by KBoards when someone clicks through and buys - and I think it's reasonable to give something back. Running a forum costs money. And of course, commission for kboards means sales for authors.

This isn't about 1-stars. I think (I hope!) most authors expect and accept low ratings. They happen, especially if you do free runs/permafree/write a book that doesn't strictly conform to the boundaries of a genre/write on controversial topics/kill a dog (sorry, had to throw that last one in!) 
Also, your book is not some precious gem and not everyone is going to like it.
Personally, I like my 1-stars. This is my all-time favourite: "_Worst book ever read. Grotesque idea from the author. It was sick.. The only thing that mad me get to the end was the ending. No ending so it was a waste of time. Shan't read the next one_."

Only once have I personally noticed a definite attack of a group of things that happened over a couple of days, after posting on a controversial thread here. I'll totally dodge such threads in future. Not worth it. At the time, I suspected there were a lot of non-kboards-member writers who write in a particular genre who were attracted here by that particular thread.

But if I get downvotes/negative review here and there that I suspect are not genuine, I don't see that as a huge issue. To worry about that kind of stuff is paranoid, counterproductive and a total waste of time and mental energy. If my books (by some cosmic realignment of the universe) ever happened to become very popular and I started noticing frequent attacks, yes, that would make me stop and think. (But I hope I'd also remember the positive side of the forums. And also, attacks could be coming from writers and others who've never stepped foot in kboards - though sometimes the coincidences are just too compelling).


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Martitalbott said:


> It is not complaining about bad reviews that feed the trolls, it is being successful. I haven't publicly complained in years until last week.
> 
> Why would readers care enough to trash books just for kicks? They wouldn't. My money is on other authors. I've even had them leave links to "a much better, more historically correct book."
> 
> ...


Do not bet it was an author. Some readers get their noses very out of joint on historical errors. And they will tell you about it in detail.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Wants to read AA's book just from that review.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Phoenix Sullivan said:


> I no longer point to individual books in my siggy. The link takes you direct to pages on Amazon where all of SMP's titles are listed. I still share data, but I'm more apt to aggregate that data in my results or be more coy about the titles I'm discussing. Before I share numbers for a named title, I now ALWAYS look at the title and consider whether it can stand a couple of 1-star drive-by's or not.
> 
> With so many removing their books and taking on aliases and speaking only about successes in terms of generalities, I'm losing what for me was the biggest benefit of KB. What will chase me away is not the drive-by review attacks, but the lack of sharing of those hard numbers that people are more and more reticent to share because of those attacks. KB once gave me data and I gave back analysis. It was a wonderful symbiotic relationship that we were able to use as a group to build effective sales tactics off of.
> 
> ...


Ironically, it sounds like indie publishing is heading toward the same MO as traditional publishing -- keeping numbers secret due to fear of competitors. That would be a real shame. Scratch that. It could be devastating. Unlike major publishers, we're mostly lone-operators. Without access to the kind of statistical work people like Phoenix, Ed Robertson, and others do, many of us will be swimming blind in an ocean of gut reaction and anecdote.

I'm starting to think this trend is unnecessary and self-sabotaging. Phoenix says she "now ALWAYS look(s) at the title and consider whether it can stand a couple of 1-star drive-by's or not" before sharing specific numbers. The obvious flip side is that some books *can *stand a couple of 1-star drive-bys, and that she takes the calculated risk with these books.

I'd like to see more of this kind of careful weighing of the pros and cons. Yeah, if you have a small number of reviews, a single 1-star drive-by can do significant damage, and you should make conscious decisions about your levels of anonymity and sharing. But if your books have a lot of reviews, I have trouble seeing what difference a few drive-bys are going to make.

Pulling back to protect your books may seem like a no-brainer: why take _any_ risk when you don't get any reward for doing so? but Phoenix's post suggests there may be a long-term downside for all of us if we become fragmented protectors of our own little fiefdoms. Remember when she and Ed and others figured out how Amazon's popularity and best-seller lists work? I think we need that kind of knowledge. KB is how we get it.

Edited to remove random strikeout code!


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

The reviews that I've seen that I feel to be author on author hits went something like:

This book sucks. Now I'm just going to write a line to fill in the number of characters needed.



crebel said:


> "On here" as in the Writer's Cafe or on the whole of Kboards? Certainly in the WC almost all of the traffic is authors. The rest of KB, not so much.


No I was meaning on the whole. I don't believe the readers outweigh the authors on here. Although it certainly gets expressed on here that this is a readers board and authors should shut their traps, I'm willing to bet that authors are the ones generating both income and new members.



Sandra K. Williams said:


> Seriously? The only way books get put in signatures is if the author puts them there. Take the books out of your signature if you want. No need to tell other people they can't include their books if they want to.


Right so then what's the solution? I don't see anyone else offering up a real plan on this. Because as it stands, this place is going to be the place where people start out but move on from.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Being personally ready to go to war f need be, I'm not all that concerned about attacks.

What has tempted me to pull my books in my sig though has been the 'lol, I went and checked your stats and you're below X ranking so I get to imply you're an idiot' deal that's come up every once in a while here.


----------



## phildukephd (Jan 6, 2013)

I suggest that reviewers sign their reviews with their real names. AND, they should be required to buy the ebook as a prerequisite to reviewing it. AND obvious spite reviews and reviewers should be removed.

There is a natural tendency to think that if a person does not respond to repeated derogatory claims/statements, that then there may well be some truth to them.

The Internet user's anonymity is IMO its most undesirable feature.

I Post and write using my real name and degree.

Best regards to all, 

Phillip Duke Ph.D.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

cinisajoy said:


> Editing because I do know the difference between quite and quiet.


Hate it when that happens! (I know the difference between liter and litter, too!  )


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

Vaalingrade said:


> Being personally ready to go to war f need be, I'm not all that concerned about attacks.
> 
> What has tempted me to pull my books in my sig though has been the 'lol, I went and checked your stats and you're below X ranking so I get to imply you're an idiot' deal that's come up every once in a while here.


You're right. I said something to this effect and it was a jerk move. I'll admit to a certain amount of pettiness over people being rude over the past year here. However, I will hold to that if we're talking about marketing and sales, yes, numbers do count. They don't count for everything. My husband doesn't sell well and he's been the best source for me by far. So numbers matter but so does common sense. But for what it's worth, I'm sorry if my comment made you upset. I'm blunt but not typically mean.


----------



## 28612 (Dec 7, 2010)

We might need a "Beware Lumping" sign.

If a reviewer/an author does/has done/might have done something, we each need to work hard to remember it's an individual involved. Or, maybe it's even a group of individuals. Maybe it's even a horrible, rotten clique of reviewers/authors. Still. It's not all. Not even an indication of "many" or of the tendencies of the overall groups, which are large and amazingly diverse.

Seeing a lot of lumping here in all directions, and it keeps making me wince, and muttering out loud "but that's just one person/instance/event. It's not every [insert name of group here]." Dogs are getting unsettled with all the muttering.

IMO, it does a disservice to discussion (so much easier to not listen to someone who's been lumped into a "them" group), to the boards, and to sharing our love of stories.


----------



## williamvw (Mar 12, 2012)

My best friend and collaborator is a long-time librarian who struggles with the reviews now left by patrons on the system's new online library catalog. I told him about these WC threads today, and he said that the same solution was needed for Amazon as his own library: Patrons and customers alike would be vastly better served if there were two sets of reviews, one vetted and the other general. You see this on Rotten Tomatoes, right? In the library, there would be librarians whose job would be to write objective reviews, and then you'd have the usual public reviews. On Amazon, you could easily have something similar, perhaps via the Vine program. Just SOMETHING to distinguish vetted from unvetted. That's not to say that no one would read the latter. I still read the public reviews on Rotten Tomatoes...occasionally. But when I need to make a decision, I ALWAYS read the vetted, "professional" opinions first and give them the most credence.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Bethany B. said:


> However, I will hold to that if we're talking about marketing and sales, yes, numbers do count. They don't count for everything.


Not necessarily. If talking theories and experimentation, there's no need for that. Plus, you ignore that someone can know what to do and not have the resources to do it to maximum effect.


----------



## Mark E. Cooper (May 29, 2011)

Well, I briefly took my sig line down then I thought duh! I've been using my real name in forums since the dawn of time! okay...since the dawn of the Internetz. So I put it back, and pretended I was one of the brave ones


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Mark E. Cooper said:


> Well, I briefly took my sig line down then I thought duh! I've been using my real name in forums since the dawn of time! okay...since the dawn of the Internetz. So I put it back, and pretended I was one of the brave ones


Can I give you a supposedly cheeky round of applause that's actually embarrassingly heartfelt?


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Mark E. Cooper said:


> Well, I briefly took my sig line down then I thought duh! I've been using my real name in forums since the dawn of time! okay...since the dawn of the Internetz. So I put it back, and pretended I was one of the brave ones


Dang! I was just hoping that if everyone took their books out of their sigs, I would be the sole benefactor of the KB marketing prowess. Also, if everyone took their books out of their sig files, this would mean I would actually be buying 100% tradepub books again. *Gasp* I know.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

I can honestly say that I believe all my negative reviews are simply a result of people genuinely disliking the book. It would give me comfort to believe otherwise, but nope!


----------



## Sandra K. Williams (Jun 15, 2013)

It was explained to me that the way people know they've been attacked is when they get a disproportionate number of one-star reviews and up-votes of one-star reviews in a short period of time (minutes or hours vs. days or weeks) and in a disproportionate number (ratio of one-stars goes from 5% to 50%). (my made-up numbers)

This isn't a Kboards problem; it's an Amazon problem, and Amazon could fix it if they chose to. I don't think individual authors complaining will make Amazon start monitoring reviews (geez, they don't even need a human to notice that book X is getting an unusual number of one-star reviews).

It would probably be more effective if all the authors who have experienced this problem would start collecting data (date, times, and numbers) and complain en masse to Amazon.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Ok everyone I have a question.  If you got this review would you complain?
RATING: 5 stars
Review:  It is obvious that the author attended Faber College and was a member of the Delta Tau Chi Fraternity.  There are more inaccuracies than I could count on just the first page.
End Review.

Now 10 points to anyone that can tell me where Faber College is located and who attacked Pearl Harbor.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

cinisajoy said:


> Ok everyone I have a question. If you got this review would you complain?
> RATING: 5 stars
> Review: It is obvious that the author attended Faber College and was a member of the Delta Tau Chi Fraternity. There are more inaccuracies than I could count on just the first page.
> End Review.


I wouldn't complain about that review even if it were a one-star. (I would complain to my cat if it were an inaccurate review.) If a review were to say "I never read this and I don't know how it got on my Kindle. I don't remember buying it, but I'm reviewing it to get it off my list." I would click the report button -- and I'd do it no matter what the star rating or whose book it was on.

Camille


----------



## vrabinec (May 19, 2011)

cinisajoy said:


> Ok everyone I have a question. If you got this review would you complain?
> RATING: 5 stars
> Review: It is obvious that the author attended Faber College and was a member of the Delta Tau Chi Fraternity. There are more inaccuracies than I could count on just the first page.
> End Review.
> ...


Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life, son. (It was actually my motto in college)


----------



## LeeBee (Feb 19, 2014)

Sandra K. Williams said:


> This is something I don't understand. How can a person know whether it was a mob attack or just a lot of readers discovering a book they downloaded was not to their taste and, instead of taking the time to write a review, up-voting another review that expressed their opinion? 25 out of 30,000 doesn't sound unreasonable to me (not that I'm any kind of statistics whiz).


You can't know that, of course. There is a real lack of perspective among indie authors, it seems, when it comes to negative reviews. It appears that no one thinks that negative reviews could possibly be legitimate, and the circumstantial "evidence" they provide generally doesn't prove their point.


----------



## vrabinec (May 19, 2011)

Mark E. Cooper said:


> Well, I briefly took my sig line down then I thought duh! I've been using my real name in forums since the dawn of time! okay...since the dawn of the Internetz. So I put it back, and pretended I was one of the brave ones


If you REALLY wanna be brave, I'm renting my siggy space for $5 a day. For a mere $5 a day, some lucky author can draw the benefits as well as the occasional wrath I elicit for the readers.


----------



## Susanne O (Feb 8, 2010)

vrabinec said:


> If you REALLY wanna be brave, I'm renting my siggy space for $5 a day. For a mere $5 a day, some lucky author can draw the benefits as well as the occasional wrath I elicit for the readers.


Lo, Fred, you'll be inundated! Do you accept all genres? And is there a review requirement?


----------



## LeeBee (Feb 19, 2014)

So, things have gone pretty far down the rabbit hole on this thread since I last read it. Couple of points:

1. _*Someone said that reviewers should expect "blowback" for their negative reviews, and that they should not expect "their opinions to go unchallenged."*_ Assuming that this attitude is meant for all writers of negative reviews and not just the ones people are referring to here as "trolls," well, that's just kind of silly. Indie authors routinely beg people to review their books, and there are dozens of threads on this forum alone where authors beg for tips for getting more reviews. Everyone acknowledges that the number of reviews you have affects your ability to promote, and lots of authors tell their fans that reviews are the lifeblood of an indie author's career.

So when someone does take the time to review your book, no, they should not expect to be challenged, or attacked, or publicly ridiculed. You put your work out there to be read, presumably enjoyed, and yes, judged. This is what a review is. A negative review not an attack, it's not "hating," it's not trolling. Unless the content of the review actually attacks you personally, it's just a negative opinion. You don't do your public image (or your book) any good at all complaining about it or responding to the opinion, especially defensively. When trad authors do this, they are subjected to ridicule, because at best, they look silly.

2. _*Legitimate review attacks (disproportionate numbers of 1-star reviews happening in a short period of time) are not a KB problem, but an Amazon problem.*_* I completely agree. Everyone can abandon the KB ship and the people who engage in this sort of negative activity will just find a new way to target you - assuming they truly were using KB as the fish barrel in the first place, which has by no means been proved.

This brings to the fore another point that nobody seems to acknowledge: the near-complete dependency of the "independent" author business model on Amazon. People are constantly referring to their businesses here, debating what constitutes professionalism and who is entitled to consider themselves professional and businesslike. Yet as far as I can tell, everyone's business depends overwhelmingly on the behavior of a giant corporate entity that treats indies not as business partners, but as consignment sellers - just another bunch of individual vendors in a vast pile of small vendors. Indie authors have set up businesses that depend on accumulating a certain number of Amazon reviews of a certain value before they can even buy effective promotions. These businesses can be severely damaged by not just negative book reviews and Amazon's near-nonexistent policing of reviews, but by sudden changes to Amazon's policies or algorithms without notice or transparency.

I can understand indie authors' consternation over these events, but I do wonder how anyone can justify building a business model on such a precarious foundation. I see people talking about staying exclusive to Amazon, further increasing their business' utter dependency. To me, this seems like the equivalent of building a skyscraper on a foundation of toothpicks.

The root problem indie authors face is not "internet bullying" or "review attacks." It's not newbie authors being "unprofessional" by opting not to pay $1000 or more to publish their first book. It's the fact that their businesses are almost entirely dependent on a distribution outlet that holds all the power and doesn't really regard its indies as business owners. This is the problem we should all be pondering and brainstorming ways to deal with. The rest is just petty sniping by comparison, providing entertainment to a few troublemakers and smokescreening the real issues from the business owners involved. Abandoning KB won't solve the real problem.*


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

Mark E. Cooper said:


> Well, I briefly took my sig line down then I thought duh! I've been using my real name in forums since the dawn of time! okay...since the dawn of the Internetz. So I put it back, and pretended I was one of the brave ones


Gotta say I've never considered taking down my sig line. I've always loved the way Kboards handles sigs. Passive marketing, to me at least, means more time just talking about stuff and less time hawking my wares.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Mark E. Cooper said:


> Well, I briefly took my sig line down then I thought duh! I've been using my real name in forums since the dawn of time! okay...since the dawn of the Internetz. So I put it back, and pretended I was one of the brave ones


Same here.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Google "Cherise Kelley" and you get 

About 12,200 results.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

I only know of one other netizen with my same name.


----------



## DTW (Apr 13, 2014)

cinisajoy said:


> Review: It is obvious that the author attended Faber College and was a member of the Delta Tau Chi Fraternity. There are more inaccuracies than I could count on just the first page.
> End Review.
> 
> Now 10 points to anyone that can tell me where Faber College is located and who attacked Pearl Harbor.


They took the BAR. The WHOLE F'ing BAR!


----------



## Silly Writer (Jul 15, 2013)

I changed my avatar and name... Now I feel silly and paranoid.

If someone can guess who I am in five minutes or less, I'm putting it all back. (Some of you know because I told you...so don't be a cheater...)


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

The Dragonfly said:


> I changed my avatar and name... Now I feel silly and paranoid.
> 
> If someone can guess who I am in five minutes or less, I'm putting it all back. (Some of you know because I told you...so don't be a cheater...)


It took me about 22 seconds to find your author name and name of your book.


----------



## Silly Writer (Jul 15, 2013)

Atunah said:


> It took me about 22 seconds to find your author name and name of your book.


How? And who?


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

The Dragonfly said:


> How? And who?


I don't want to post your name if you don't want it out there. Your book title in the 1st book is 3 words. Short words. Starting with an L. Your title font is red. 

How? Your own words in your posts. Older posts.


----------



## luckyme (Mar 29, 2014)

Well, it seems that this thread is well off the topic it was started about, but anyway, here's my take on it (and yes I am an author, both indie and trad published) 
I never ever even look if and what kind of reviews the work I've written gets. Those are written for other readers to assess whether or not they want to read that book. So, no I will not respond to negative reviews, not even if they were to attack me as the author, for the simple reason that I have better things to do than peruse the interwebz to see if and what kind of reviews there are on my work. I need to write more, edit stuff that's already written, and read, because I'm a reader/reviewer/book blogger too.
As mentioned earlier a negative review isn't a reason for the author to stalk the reviewer with reasons why they should really like the book and explain the book, or whatever the author thinks is necessary. The reader has read/reviewed and that's the end of it. No discussion, a review is not open for discussion, it is the opinion of that reader on that book, not on the author. Or at least that's how it should be. Even if the review is poorly written and 'attacks' the author all the more reason to ignore it and move on. It will soon enough be buried under more, other reviews, because that person's dislike could be just the reason why another reader is enticed to pick up that book. 

So, don't worry about reviews, but use your time to write new material and improve on your writing by reading and doing the research needed to make your next book shine even more.


----------



## Silly Writer (Jul 15, 2013)

Atunah said:


> I don't want to post your name if you don't want it out there. Your book title in the 1st book is 3 words. Short words. Starting with an L. Your title font is red.
> 
> How? Your own words in your posts. Older posts.


Well dang. I went thru four hours of wasted time trying to delete any mention of me, but unfortunately, even if you change your name/avatar... It stays the same when anyone quotes you.

So I deleted dozens (?) of posts for nada 

Eta: real name and sig line... Not because I'm brave, but if someone wants to find me, they can unless I delete my acct here...and that's not gonna happen


----------



## Lloyd MacRae (Nov 18, 2012)

cinisajoy said:


> Ok everyone I have a question. If you got this review would you complain?
> RATING: 5 stars
> Review: It is obvious that the author attended Faber College and was a member of the Delta Tau Chi Fraternity. There are more inaccuracies than I could count on just the first page.
> End Review.
> ...


Your reference to Animal House and 1941 are suspicious.
Are you telling us you are actually John Belushi and lurking behind that avatar?


----------



## Silly Writer (Jul 15, 2013)

Atunah said:


> I don't want to post your name if you don't want it out there. Your book title in the 1st book is 3 words. Short words. Starting with an L. Your title font is red.
> 
> How? Your own words in your posts. Older posts.


Atunah,
That was very considerate of you not to call me out. I appreciate your discretion.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

E.L. MacRae said:


> Your reference to Animal House and 1941 are suspicious.
> Are you telling us you are actually John Belushi and lurking behind that avatar?


Oh no, I am outed now.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

L.L. Akers said:


> Well dang. I went thru four hours of wasted time trying to delete any mention of me, but unfortunately, even if you change your name/avatar... It stays the same when anyone quotes you.
> 
> So I deleted dozens (?) of posts for nada


It would be just so difficult to never say anything about your books. I mean any mention could be found. If someone wants to find you as the author personally, they will find you if you keep posting. So why bother taking away the possibility of someone finding your book to read.

I found a post of yours where you posted a blurb of your book. All that was needed was to google that blurb and it lead me to your author facebook. If you are worried, that post is one of the first ones you made on the board, just go backwards in time. I wouldn't bother though, you'd have to check every single post and never talk about yourself, your book or any such thing ever again. How would you even do that in the WC.

And this is assuming it would be through KB they find you. You have a facebook and website, etc. Anyone can find you at any of the online places.

eat: I put the second part of my post back in after I deleted it, as it would be easy for anyone to find your name. But I see you are back to yourself. So I put it back in. Welcome back, nice to see your books again.


----------



## The 13th Doctor (May 31, 2012)

luckyme said:


> I never ever even look if and what kind of reviews the work I've written gets. Those are written for other readers to assess whether or not they want to read that book.


This.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

L.L. Akers said:


> Eta: real name and sig line... Not because I'm brave, but if someone wants to find me, they can unless I delete my acct here...and that's not gonna happen


I don't think deleting your account gets rid of your posts. Your user name just becomes plain text, since there's no longer a member profile to link to.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

LeeBee said:


> This brings to the fore another point that nobody seems to acknowledge: the near-complete dependency of the "independent" author business model on Amazon. People are constantly referring to their businesses here, debating what constitutes professionalism and who is entitled to consider themselves professional and businesslike. Yet as far as I can tell, everyone's business depends overwhelmingly on the behavior of a giant corporate entity that treats indies not as business partners, but as consignment sellers - just another bunch of individual vendors in a vast pile of small vendors. Indie authors have set up businesses that depend on accumulating a certain number of Amazon reviews of a certain value before they can even buy effective promotions. These businesses can be severely damaged by not just negative book reviews and Amazon's near-nonexistent policing of reviews, but by sudden changes to Amazon's policies or algorithms without notice or transparency.


I think this is a really smart point. I wonder how much of the profound anxiety we're feeling about drive-by reviews, up/down-voting, and so forth is really our deeper anxiety finding an easy outlet. Not just an easy outlet, but an outlet that actually comes with a solution (leave KB, go anonymous, whatever). The deeper anxiety would come from the situation LeeBee outlines: the vast majority of us are deeply dependent on Amazon, and Amazon can at any time twitch an eyelash and put the brakes on a successful career. For instance, my strategy right now depends on permafree. Amazon could get rid of permafree any time. It's not even codified in their TOS. Now, I don't _think_ they'll do that. I think they think permafree is good for Amazon. But what do I know? That's scary. And there's not a lot I can about it. Crossing my fingers and hoping Google Play becomes a viable competitor doesn't really count as taking action.


----------



## BillSmithBooksDotCom (Nov 4, 2012)

cinisajoy said:


> Ok everyone I have a question. If you got this review would you complain?
> RATING: 5 stars
> Review: It is obvious that the author attended Faber College and was a member of the Delta Tau Chi Fraternity. There are more inaccuracies than I could count on just the first page.
> End Review.
> ...


"Did we give up when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? No!!!"

-- Inspirational rallying speech from future Senator Blutarski

Awesome reference!


----------



## John Twipnook (Jan 10, 2011)

Harvey said:


> I've been thinking about the one-star reviews, upvoting negative reviews, and other examples of online bullying that have been discussed here.
> 
> Of course, we ban and IP-block any member who engages in that. But as you know, these bullying actions take place outside of KB, and are done anonymously. So... what can we do?
> 
> Well... there *is* something we can do. Stop feeding their egos.


Here's how I see it.

There's no knowing what might set a bully off. Maybe they see something you posted weeks or months ago. Maybe they don't like that you just got written up in The New York Times. Maybe they're just plain crazy.

Since these bullies are cowards and don't want to reveal anything real about themselves, anyway, who knows? Moreover, how does the average author distinguish between a bully/troll attack and a spirited conversation?

I'd like to believe that ignoring trolls/bullies would make them stop leaving 1-star reviews, but that just ain't gonna happen imo. Right now, leaving nasty reviews is too easy and the enticement of watching a plummeting sales rank too powerful.

Honestly, saying "just ignore the bullies" is like your mom telling you to just ignore the kid who steals and eats your lunch on the bus every day. Your mom assumes you must be doing something to set them off.

What I _would_ get behind is a movement or petition to convince Amazon and others to start a policy so that they, like the mods here, will ban or IP-block the review trolls. It really needs to be addressed on the admin level of the sales channel.

Petition.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

John Twipnook said:


> What I _would_ get behind is a movement or petition to convince Amazon and others to start a policy so that they, like the mods here, will ban or IP-block the review trolls. It really needs to be addressed on the admin level of the sales channel.


I think Amazon already has a record removing those few reviews where there is unequivocal proof of drive-by-itude. But for most reviews authors find suspicious, it's probably going to be hard to really prove the allegation, in Amazon's eyes.

I've heard quite a few rationales offered for believing a particular review is a drive-by. Off the top of my head:
- It's so short/undetailed; a real reader would say more.
- The terminology is too sophisticated; real readers don't know all those fiction-writing terms.
- Timing. I haven't gotten a one-star in six months. Then I suddenly got one after posting a milestone on KB.
- It's the reviewer's only review.
- It mentions another book the reviewer thought was better. Clearly this is an author shilling for themselves.
- It's really, really nasty. A real reader wouldn't be so intensely critical. This review is designed to damage the book's sales.
- It's clear they haven't read the book.
- No "verified purchase" tag.
- The reviewer seems to know something about the author that's not in the author's bio.
- My good reviews were down-voted and my bad ones up-voted at the same time the review was posted.
- The review contains lies about the book.
- All the reviewer's reviews are negative.

Some of these reasons might be cause for suspicion (though I wonder if we'd all have a different take on which ones), but it's hard to cite one of them as unequivocal proof when you're talking to Amazon, an entity that's always going to give the customer the benefit of the doubt. Looking at each one of the above, I can just hear Amazon's rebuttal. Assuming they bothered to give one.

I think the only way Amazon could stop harassment through the review system would be to require every review and every up/down-vote to be publicly attached to the reviewer's/voter's credit card name. I don't really see another way. I'm pretty sure they don't want to do that, and it might be a net loss for authors if they did. At the least, the number of real readers leaving reviews would probably go way down.


----------



## luckyme (Mar 29, 2014)

garam81 said:


> This.


Might be thick of me and it's off topic, but what do you mean by "This"?

This book instead of that book?

Or something else entirely? I've seen the comment in other places too and wondered then too, now I just decided to ask. So, please explain to me what it means when someone replies with only 'this'.

Back to the topic at hand
The review cinisajoy is referring to wouldn't get a response from me either, because like I said, authors should not reply to any kind of review. Leave that up to other readers, or your fans, but don't go and ask for votes up or down on certain reviews, because that is just plain wrong. There is enough amiss in the whole review system as it is on Amazon (and Goodreads) without authors trying to 'play' the system and make the whole review scene even more unreliable.

The whole idea of review swaps by authors resulting in 5-star reviews for books that have no real ground for a 5-star review not only damages that author's reputation, but also that of the reviewer and the whole system. If I encounter a book with a lot of 5-star reviews and I then go and read the sample only to find a mass of things 'wrong' I seriously wonder what book those 5-star reviewers have read and how they could have given the book such a high rating. If I then read that single, or even the multitude of 1-star reviews on the same book and see that those mention the poor editing, resulting in the low rating, it makes me wonder if those high rates were bought, swapped, or given by family and friends. The only thing that does to me is not wanting to read anything by that author ever again.


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

luckyme said:


> Might be thick of me and it's off topic, but what do you mean by "This"?


It means "I agree with the previous (or quoted) post".


----------



## luckyme (Mar 29, 2014)

Lydniz said:


> It means "I agree with the previous (or quoted) post".


Thanks.  And I learned a new thing today. See? Never too old to learn.


----------



## luckyme (Mar 29, 2014)

Becca Mills said:


> I think Amazon already has a record removing those few reviews where there is unequivocal proof of drive-by-itude. But for most reviews authors find suspicious, it's probably going to be hard to really prove the allegation, in Amazon's eyes.
> 
> I've heard quite a few rationales offered for believing a particular review is a drive-by. Off the top of my head:
> - It's so short/undetailed; a real reader would say more.
> ...


To address just a few of the list mentioned.

-a short, not detailed review.
Often when I read to review and the book was really too bland to say much without giving away the plot the end result will be a short review with not too many details. (as a reader I hate those reviews that give away half, or the entire plot and I will never write one that has any kind of spoilers in it)

-it's the reviewers only review
Everyone has to start somewhere and one review might be the first in a long line to come.

-It's really, really nasty. A real reader wouldn't be so intensely critical. This review is designed to damage the book's sales.
What is 'nasty'? I've given, reluctantly, a few low ratings with a review that was perceived by the author as nasty, but by my fellow readers as just my honest opinion. Often enough if you do not like an author's 'baby' they tend to think you're being nasty, while all you do as a reviewer is expressing your honest opinion, or at least that's what I do. I never set out to be nasty and will always try to point out what was well done in an otherwise badly written, or edited book (or a book that just didn't do it for me)
And why would a real reader not be very critical? I am always very critical about everything and I'm a real reader.

-no verified purchase tag.
As a professional reader I often get ARC's from Random House or indie authors and thus will not have a verified purchase tag to my review on Amazon.With me there are many more pro readers/reviewers in the same situ.

-a reader will not know 'sophisticated' writing terminology.
A lot of reviewers are also authors, or at least have had some writing training and thus will know some, or even a lot of the lingo.


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

And yet as I reported on a thread here last week Zon removed four drive-by's within twelve hours - if you don't like what you see report it - you may get a pleasant surprise. If Zon doesn't agree with your assessment forget it and move on. 

It's an imperfect world and yes it can be unfair, and it's particularly unfair when it hits your income and something you put your heart and soul into. I'm totally against the inaction stance taken by authors - by reporting you are assisting your fellow authors as much as you do by posting info on this forum. This is one case where the collective use of the report button will eventually force Amazon to look at a tightening of procedure.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

EC said:


> And yet as I reported on a thread here last week Zon removed four drive-by's within twelve hours - if you don't like what you see report it - you may get a pleasant surprise. If Zon doesn't agree with your assessment forget it and move on.
> 
> It's an imperfect world and yes it can be unfair, and it's particularly unfair when it hits your income and something you put your heart and soul into. I'm totally against the inaction stance taken by authors - by reporting you are assisting your fellow authors as much as you do by posting info on this forum. This is one case where the collective use of the report button will eventually force Amazon to look at a tightening of procedure.


This is probably the most effective action we can take.


----------



## Sandra K. Williams (Jun 15, 2013)

Becca Mills said:


> I think the only way Amazon could stop harassment through the review system would be to require every review and every up/down-vote to be publicly attached to the reviewer's/voter's credit card name. I don't really see another way.


They can easily stop mob attacks and keep the reviewers' names private.

Amazon knows what the normal rate of reviews and up- and down-votes is for each title. Everything that is done on the Amazon website is tracked. (I can say that with confidence because, even without knowing that Amazon likes to collect data, I know that everything that happens on a website is logged.)

For each title, if reviews and up- and down-votes fall outside the normal usage (more feedback than normal, especially in a short period of time, and in proportions markedly different than normal), the reader feedback can be automatically held until a human reviews it.

Or reviews and feedback can be automatically delayed several hours to reduce the troll's instant gratification of seeing their spew posted. While being queued for later display, the reader feedback can be checked for indicators of mobbing.

If you have a WordPress blog, you've probably adjusted the comments settings to allow/disallow links or to require review of comments from unknown persons. Amazon could set up something like this, where initial reviews on an account are delayed until it is determined the reviewer behavior doesn't fit troll patterns, again without human interaction unless a flag is raised.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

To luckyme, that was not a real review.  I made it up for here.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

luckyme said:


> To address just a few of the list mentioned.
> 
> -a short, not detailed review.
> Often when I read to review and the book was really too bland to say much without giving away the plot the end result will be a short review with not too many details. (as a reader I hate those reviews that give away half, or the entire plot and I will never write one that has any kind of spoilers in it)
> ...


Yup. I can think of easy rebuttals for all the others, too.

Authors may have a gut feeling that a certain review is a drive-by, but it's just going to be very hard, in many cases, to move from gut feeling to proven fact.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

EC said:


> And yet as I reported on a thread here last week Zon removed four drive-by's within twelve hours - if you don't like what you see report it - you may get a pleasant surprise. If Zon doesn't agree with your assessment forget it and move on.
> 
> It's an imperfect world and yes it can be unfair, and it's particularly unfair when it hits your income and something you put your heart and soul into. I'm totally against the inaction stance taken by authors - by reporting you are assisting your fellow authors as much as you do by posting info on this forum. This is one case where the collective use of the report button will eventually force Amazon to look at a tightening of procedure.


Maybe so. It sure would be nice.

It occurs to me that Amazon might treat review complaints cumulatively, so even if you are only notifying them based on gut reaction, it could add up if your gut reaction matches a whole bunch of other people's gut reactions over time.


----------



## luckyme (Mar 29, 2014)

Becca Mills said:


> Yup. I can think of easy rebuttals for all the others, too.
> 
> Authors may have a gut feeling that a certain review is a drive-by, but it's just going to be very hard, in many cases, to move from gut feeling to proven fact.


Besides that, most authors should cultivate a layer of thick skin and learn to not take the fact that there are people who do not like their work and have a poor way of expressing themselves as a personal attack. There are so many ways a poorly written review can be taken the wrong way, while the reviewer might not even be aware of how their words are being received. (I'm not talking about blatant attacks on the person of the writer, because that is just trolling, but when the review is about the book, in any way shape or form, it is a review, whether an author likes it or not. To me the best way to deal with those is just take them for what they are and move on, write more, and better and leave the moderation of reviews over to Amazon, or whatever site the reviews are on.
Each author should be too busy writing and polishing their next WIP to spend time perusing the interwebz to see if and what kind of reviews and votes there are on their work.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

luckyme said:


> Besides that, most authors should cultivate a layer of thick skin


I was speaking at a school last week and a question related to this came up. My reply, "JK Rowling has sold a lot more books than me and she still has people who hate her or her work."

It's just the nature of the beast. By publishing a work and putting it for sale, we make ourselves both a business and a public figure. No matter how you play that, at some point you are going to end up with at minimum someone who can't stand your work.

One either needs to learn to deal with it or purposely make it a point to not read reviews, critiques, etc.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

luckyme said:


> Besides that, most authors should cultivate a layer of thick skin and learn to not take the fact that there are people who do not like their work and have a poor way of expressing themselves as a personal attack.


This always seems to happen.

This is not what this thread is about. This thread is about _anonymous online bullying_.

I hope we never cultivate a layer of skin thick enough to ignore bullying.


----------



## LeeBee (Feb 19, 2014)

Andrew Ashling said:


> This always seems to happen.
> 
> This is not what this thread is about. This thread is about _anonymous online bullying_.
> 
> I hope we never cultivate a layer of skin thick enough to ignore bullying.


Yes, but the problem is, a lot of authors cannot accurately distinguish between getting negative reviews and actual review harassment (I refuse to use the word "bullying" to describe it). There has been so much hysteria surrounding instances of people retaliating against authors by recruiting others to give 1-stars and downvote good reviews that many people will now assume that 1-stars and downvoting are an organized attack, rather than legitimate.


----------



## luckyme (Mar 29, 2014)

Andrew Ashling said:


> This always seems to happen.
> 
> This is not what this thread is about. This thread is about _anonymous online bullying_.
> 
> I hope we never cultivate a layer of skin thick enough to ignore bullying.


I agree when it is actually bullying, but when a lot of low ratings are posted on a book and high ratings are voted down, that isn't a sign of bullying is it? It could be that the high ratings are unjustified and are being voted down because of that reason. But then again I never read reviews on my work, or keep track on votes on reviews, I'm too busy writing and polishing, and I rarely ever vote on a review, up nor down, unless the review actually helped me make a decision. 
Am I living in a bubble? Could be, but I still think us authors shouldn't worry that much about silly people that have no other things to do than be online and post useless crap in the hope to hurt someone. It's only bits and bytes, isn't all mentioning of your name publicity? From what I've been told there is no such thing as bad publicity. Use the trolls to your advantage and get your name spread over the interwebz, or am I wrong?
It will be worrying if there's a real danger, as in real life danger, but as long as it's online they can't really hurt you, can they?


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

LeeBee said:


> Yes, but the problem is, a lot of authors cannot accurately distinguish between getting negative reviews and actual review harassment (I refuse to use the word "bullying" to describe it). There has been so much hysteria surrounding instances of people retaliating against authors by recruiting others to give 1-stars and downvote good reviews that many people will now assume that 1-stars and downvoting are an organized attack, rather than legitimate.


And another problem is that online bullying is a very real phenomenon. The answer is never to let the bully carry on and do nothing. The answer is never to blame the victims and tell them to "grow a thicker skin."

The answer in this case, in my opinion, is to report bullying, every time you think you have a legitimate case, to the authorities that be. An then, _but only then_, move on.

Maybe there will not be an instant reaction, but I'm sure Amazon keeps tabs on whatever may hurt their business. One day the bullies might find their "reviews" gone and their account annulled.


----------



## LeeBee (Feb 19, 2014)

Andrew Ashling said:


> And another problem is that online bullying is a very real phenomenon. The answer is never to let the bully carry on and do nothing. The answer is never to blame the victims and tell them to "grow a thicker skin."
> 
> The answer in this case, in my opinion, is to report bullying, every time you think you have a legitimate case, to the authorities that be. An then, _but only then_, move on.
> 
> Maybe there will not be an instant reaction, but I'm sure Amazon keeps tabs on whatever may hurt their business. One day the bullies might find their "reviews" gone and their account annulled.


We have very different definitions of the meaning of "bullying," on- or offline. This isn't Facebook we're talking about and no one is trashing someone's real-life reputation or image. This is an attack against a businessperson on their commercial playing field. Authors would be better off losing the "bullying victim" mindset (and the hyper-emotionalism that comes with it) and approach this as businesspeople dealing with an obstacle to their success. Coming to sites like this (or a personal blog) to rail against the "bullies" is not a professional response to a career setback.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

LeeBee said:


> We have very different definitions of the meaning of "bullying," on- or offline. This isn't Facebook we're talking about and no one is trashing someone's real-life reputation or image. This is an attack against a businessperson on their commercial playing field. Authors would be better off losing the "bullying victim" mindset (and the hyper-emotionalism that comes with it) and approach this as businesspeople dealing with an obstacle to their success. Coming to sites like this (or a personal blog) to rail against the "bullies" is not a professional response to a career setback.


This isn't a career for me, I'm not a professional, and I'm not a businessman.

I don't "rail" against bullies because they hurt my (virtually non-existent) business, not even from a personal perspective, but because I thoroughly loath the whole phenomenon.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

'Grow a thick skin' is the same as saying 'roll over and show your soft, vulnerable underbelly' or, to put it more laconically, 'bend over'.


----------



## LeeBee (Feb 19, 2014)

Andrew Ashling said:


> This isn't a career for me, I'm not a professional, and I'm not a businessman.
> 
> I don't "rail"'against bullies because they hurt my (virtually non-existent) business, not even from a personal perspective, but because I thoroughly loath the whole phenomenon.


First of all, I didn't mean to imply that you, personally, are doing any railing.  Sorry for the miscommunication.

Secondly, a huge argument on this topic of review harassment has been that the attacks can impact sales and an author's livelihood or even scuttle their writing career entirely. This is my foundation for arguing for professionalism in responding to it. However, I think that not taking such attacks personally - or at least, not giving any public sign that you are taking it personally - will make it easier to get a satisfactory outcome.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

luckyme said:


> I agree when it is actually bullying, but when a lot of low ratings are posted on a book and high ratings are voted down, that isn't a sign of bullying is it? It could be that the high ratings are unjustified and are being voted down because of that reason. But then again I never read reviews on my work, or keep track on votes on reviews, I'm too busy writing and polishing, and I rarely ever vote on a review, up nor down, unless the review actually helped me make a decision.
> Am I living in a bubble? Could be, but I still think us authors shouldn't worry that much about silly people that have no other things to do than be online and post useless crap in the hope to hurt someone. It's only bits and bytes, isn't all mentioning of your name publicity? From what I've been told there is no such thing as bad publicity. Use the trolls to your advantage and get your name spread over the interwebz, or am I wrong?
> It will be worrying if there's a real danger, as in real life danger, but as long as it's online they can't really hurt you, can they?


To begin with your last statement: they probably can't hurt you or me. After all, after being an author for a while you grow a thicker skin, don't you?
Then there are case like this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_of_Megan_Meier. And there are far more of them than you would think.
It's a general Anonymous-Humans-On-The-Internet-thing, and it should be rooted out wherever it is found. Even if there is a world of difference between this tragic case and merely harassing an author.

For the rest I sort of agree. I do read reviews but I don't attach any importance to them. They have no context, so I can't judge their validity. "I hate people with blond hair and the MC in this book has blond hair. One star." What have I learned? Nothing, except that at least one person on earth hates people with blond hair.

Even a comment of two lines may be the result of a thorough analysis by a literature professor, in which case it's probably wrong. But I have no way of knowing that. I need context, i.e. a real review in which the reviewer tells me what they _think_ the book is _about_, _how_ they came to their conclusion, _what_ the elements were that attracted them and which one they disliked, and _why_.



> <snip>I still think us authors shouldn't worry that much about silly people that have no other things to do than be online and post useless crap in the hope to hurt someone.


I agree. _Report them_ and move on. Nothing to get unduly upset about.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

LeeBee said:


> I think that not taking such attacks personally - or at least, not giving any public sign that you are taking it personally - will make it easier to get a satisfactory outcome.


Of course.



Andrew Ashling said:


> _Report them_ and move on. Nothing to get unduly upset about.


PS: no offense taken.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

Andrew Ashling said:


> Maybe there will not be an instant reaction, but I'm sure Amazon keeps tabs on whatever may hurt their business. One day the bullies might find their "reviews" gone and their account annulled.


That goes both ways, though, and that's why I believe a thick skin is a necessity. I ask myself if I want to do business with someone who is potentially abusive, or even just overly sensitive, to their customers. I'm not sure I do. When I buy a product, I don't want that kind of hassle.

I don't consider ignoring stuff like this to be rolling over and playing dead as much as I consider it staying focused and not letting unimportant things bother me. I am very careful about what I consider to be harassment/bullying vs. what are just the normal lumps of running a business.


----------



## She (Apr 15, 2014)

I'm going to weigh in here as someone who has been bullied in real life (had to change schools when I was 13 because of it and I was still bullied throughout most of my teen years). Stories about horrific cyber-bullying (like the instances that have driven teenagers to suicide) are horribly fascinating as well as very upsetting to me because it's just mesmerising (in an awful way) what people will do if they feel safe in a cloak of internet anonymity.

I do feel that it's important to maintain a clear picture of what bullying is, though. I think everyone's agreed that an honest one-star review isn't bullying, it's correct use of the review feature. You can't please all of the people all of the time, and I think that's what's meant by the use of terms like "grow a thick skin" in this sort of context (correct me if I'm wrong!). A negative comment on something you worked hard on stings, there's no getting around that, but in that situation it isn't personal.

Going further (and YMMV, of course) I wouldn't even categorise a one-off, spiteful act like down-voting or one-starring someone's book because of jealousy or random dislike as bullying. It's unpleasant, definitely, but it's more akin to yelling "That outfit makes you look fat!" and then running away before the person has a chance to respond: cowardly, bizarre and hurtful, but relatively easy for someone with decent self-esteem to brush off. I would argue that this is the sort of situation where it's best to just cry on the shoulders of one or two of the people closest to you and then carry on, because drawing attention to it won't change the fact that it happened and might make it happen again.

To me, bullying is more systematic. It's about undermining someone's confidence at every turn in order to diminish what they are or have and make yourself look and feel better in the process. So in the context of self-pubbed authors, it might be marshalling friends or sock puppets to leave a deluge of bad reviews and negative blog posts all over the internet, or harassing the author via social media. This is the sort of thing that no one should have to grow a thick skin to defend against, because it's near-impossible to cope with without talking to someone. I would HATE for anyone experiencing any kind of bullying to feel like they have to keep it to themselves. That's literally the worst thing you can do - and it means the bullies win, because isolating you and making you feel like what you have to say doesn't matter is EXACTLY what a bully wants to accomplish.

So yes, by all means refrain from giving drive-by trolls the satisfaction of seeing that they've hurt you. But, for the love of cake, don't stay silent about genuine incidences of bullying. Tell everyone on the internet if you have to, and keep telling people until you find someone who can help.


----------



## luckyme (Mar 29, 2014)

As said above, the moment you have written, and published a book, it is out there and you are in business, whether or not you consier yourself a professional writer or not. You are selling your work and earning from it, i.e. you are doing business with your clients/readers. Even if you give your book away for free, it is still a business transaction. If you are just writing for the love of it, print it and only give it to those people you want/trust. Than you are treating it as a hobby.
In business any kind of negative publicity is still publicity and only a hurdle to overcome.

When on the other hand the negative reviews and down voting of high reviews isn't all that is happening but a person/group of persons anonymously (which they always are, it's very rare that a troll will reveal their real identity, they're just too safe under their bridges) follow the author around the interwebz and posts all sorts or negative things about the person of the author, going beyond review harassment, then I agree it is cyber bullying.
Still even then I do not think giving much attention to it will actually help the victim other than letting them feel they have a support group, but it will not make the bully go away. Neither will reporting, because more often than not they simply move to a new fake online identity and carry on where they were forced to end their sick games.
Denying them the pleasure of seeing their victim hurt is what I strongly believe one of the best things to do, that and letting people you know and trust know what was/is going on, just dont crawl into the role of victim and freeze up in it. Go about your way and do not let trolls rule your life.

I've seen one author who had a troll stalking her and she successfully turned it around. She dedicated a day in teh week on her blog to the troll and just posted what he/she posted about the author but with her own comments, it showed how silly all the remarks by that troll were and soon enough it ended.
So, no, don't roll over or bend over, be strong and live your life, fight back if you must, but I choose to ignore and just live my life in my bubble and be happy, uncaring about what inevitably some people on the great interwebz will think they need to say about me.


----------



## valeriec80 (Feb 24, 2011)

I don't know, guys.

When you publish a book, you become a public figure. I don't know if you're getting "bullied" so much anymore. You don't have the same rights as a private citizen.

People can publish pretty much whatever they want about public figures. That's what tabloid magazines do. Generally speaking, you're allowed to say all kinds of nasty things about people who've put themselves in the public eye, and it's covered by free speech. (I watched _The People vs. Larry Flynt_, so I now consider myself an expert on the first amendment, . In all seriousness, I'm sure I'm oversimplifying things here, but I'm just trying to draw an analogy.)

Now, if you're a public figure, and you figure out that every time you go to a certain restaurant, nasty untrue stories start surfacing around you? You realize, first of all, that you can't stop the people from making up the nastiness or from trying to hurt you. But since it does hurt you, you stop going to that restaurant. You hire security to try to keep the paparazzi back. You build a big gate around your property.

The people who were getting attacked on this forum are experiencing a bit of "fame." Maybe not huge, national-level, everyone-knows-my-name fame, but fame nonetheless. Famous people are often targets. Famous people tend to withdraw because of that.

Anyway, I think that's why they stopped hanging out here. They're not trying to stop the behavior--although that would be cool--but they recognize that if they come here, people do nasty things to them. So, they don't come here.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

She said:


> I'm going to weigh in here as someone who has been bullied in real life (had to change schools when I was 13 because of it and I was still bullied throughout most of my teen years). Stories about horrific cyber-bullying (like the instances that have driven teenagers to suicide) are horribly fascinating as well as very upsetting to me because it's just mesmerising (in an awful way) what people will do if they feel safe in a cloak of internet anonymity.
> 
> I do feel that it's important to maintain a clear picture of what bullying is, though. I think everyone's agreed that an honest one-star review isn't bullying, it's correct use of the review feature. You can't please all of the people all of the time, and I think that's what's meant by the use of terms like "grow a thick skin" in this sort of context (correct me if I'm wrong!). A negative comment on something you worked hard on stings, there's no getting around that, but in that situation it isn't personal.
> 
> ...


What She said.

Every bit of it except the part I crossed out. Tell someone in charge who can do something about it, but tell them privately. Otherwise, you satisfy the trolls with public displays of your misery. Do not display your misery in public. This includes lamenting bad reviews here on KBoards.

I want to repeat my suggestion that any and all threads here that complain about reviews be deleted immediately.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

valeriec80 said:


> Now, if you're a public figure, and you figure out that every time you go to a certain restaurant, nasty untrue stories start surfacing around you? You realize, first of all, that you can't stop the people from making up the nastiness or from trying to hurt you. But since it does hurt you, you stop going to that restaurant.


I agree that sums it up.


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

Cherise Kelley said:


> I want to repeat my suggestion that any and all threads here that complain about reviews be deleted immediately.


I wouldn't disagree with that suggestion - or at least threads about specific reviews. Personally, I'm always very uncomfortable when I read them. However, it's only human nature to grumble about bad reviews in general, so I don't think there's any need to delete threads that talk about them as a whole, provided there is no way of tracing complaints back to particular reviews.

(PS: I don't complain about reviews, except in my head. I get good ones and bad ones. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. Yes, even that lunatic who froths for 10,000 words about how your book is the worst thing he's ever read and he's going to complain to the UN about it.)


----------



## She (Apr 15, 2014)

Cherise Kelley said:


> What She said.
> 
> Every bit of it except the part I crossed out. Tell someone in charge who can do something about it, but tell them privately. Otherwise, you satisfy the trolls with public displays of your misery. Do not display your misery in public. This includes lamenting bad reviews here on KBoards.
> 
> I want to repeat my suggestion that any and all threads here that complain about reviews be deleted immediately.


I take your point, but I stand by what I said. If there actually is someone who can make the problem go away, then that's great, but if the bullying isn't just contained to one website then that might not be the case. And what if it's a person in a position of power causing the problem? If genuine bullying is happening then I think it's vital that the victim(s) can reach out to a support network.

Of course, what I'm talking about is not quite the same as "complain[ing] about reviews".


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

She said:


> [W]hat if it's a person in a position of power causing the problem? If genuine bullying is happening then I think it's vital that the victim(s) can reach out to a support network.


Absolutely.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

She said:


> I take your point, but I stand by what I said. If there actually is someone who can make the problem go away, then that's great, but if the bullying isn't just contained to one website then that might not be the case. And what if it's a person in a position of power causing the problem? If genuine bullying is happening then I think it's vital that the victim(s) can reach out to a support network.


The problem I have with this is I've seen it done before where it was all bs and people ran with the story without bothering to check their facts. It's really easy to do this...and after a while it becomes hard to tell what's real vs. what isn't. I don't know about others, but once I've been burned a few times I become very very suspicious of such things.


----------



## She (Apr 15, 2014)

Rick Gualtieri said:


> The problem I have with this is I've seen it done before where it was all bs and people ran with the story without bothering to check their facts. It's really easy to do this...and after a while it becomes hard to tell what's real vs. what isn't. I don't know about others, but once I've been burned a few times I become very very suspicious of such things.


True. I've been around the internet too long not to know about the existence of the attention-seeking sob story. But I'd rather that than have anyone feel genuinely isolated.

This is all totally YMMV, of course, and I only signed up here yesterday so it's not like I'm trying to tell anyone how this or any other community should be run, but a total lockdown on discussing potential abuse directed towards authors seems like a dangerous form of overkill to me.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

The most hurtful thing you can do to anyone is to ignore them.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> The most hurtful thing you can do to anyone is to ignore them.


Don't know as I'd agree with that. I wasn't the most popular kid in HS and, though it was sometimes a bit downheartening when I recognized I was being ignored, it was much worse when I was being actively tormented instead. I got to where I was just as content to fly under the radar of certain folks! 

Just sayin'.


----------



## LeeBee (Feb 19, 2014)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Don't know as I'd agree with that. I wasn't the most popular kid in HS and, though it was sometimes a bit downheartening when I recognized I was being ignored, it was much worse when I was being actively tormented instead. I got to where I was just as content to fly under the radar of certain folks!
> 
> Just sayin'.


Maybe when it comes to people engaging in attention-seeking behavior, though, ignoring them IS active torment!


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

LeeBee said:


> Maybe when it comes to people engaging in attention-seeking behavior, though, ignoring them IS active torment!


Well, that's true enough. I was looking at it from the point of view of a person minding their own business. I'd rather be ignored than purposely antagonized.

But, yeah, for folks who poke to get a reaction, some of them will stop the poking if the reaction they're looking for is not forthcoming.


----------



## vrabinec (May 19, 2011)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Don't know as I'd agree with that. I wasn't the most popular kid in HS and, though it was sometimes a bit downheartening when I recognized I was being ignored, it was much worse when I was being actively tormented instead. I got to where I was just as content to fly under the radar of certain folks!
> 
> Just sayin'.


Sorry that happen to you, Ann. I was one of the three biggest guys on the football team in high school, and I used to step in any time I saw someone being tormented. Couldn't sleep at night any other way.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> The most hurtful thing you can do to anyone is to ignore them.


I'd sooner someone ignore me than run me over with their minivan.


----------



## LeeBee (Feb 19, 2014)

Rick Gualtieri said:


> I'd sooner someone ignore me than run me over with their minivan.


It would depend on the make. And the color.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

Rick Gualtieri said:


> I'd sooner someone ignore me than run me over with their minivan.


In some cultures 'shunning' is a feared punishment. Didn't people in biblical days 'cast people out' ?

A street beggar once said a very telling thing. He said that some people shake their heads and refuse to give anything, others shout at him, but the worst are the ones who look away and refuse to make eye contact, ignoring him and making him feel like a non-person.


----------



## luckyme (Mar 29, 2014)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> In some cultures 'shunning' is a feared punishment. Didn't people in biblical days 'cast people out' ?
> 
> A street beggar once said a very telling thing. He said that some people shake their heads and refuse to give anything, others shout at him, but the worst are the ones who look away and refuse to make eye contact, ignoring him and making him feel like a non-person.


To extrapolate that to us authors, wouldn't they be feeling even worse when their books get no attention at all? No reviews, not even those dreaded low ratings? The way I look at it, but I've said that earlier already, is that any kind of publicity is your name being mentioned, and even those that gather to down vote reviews, or even take the time to write a scathing low rating review might have someone in their circles that is enticed to actually pick up that book and read it for real.
I've had a reviewer on three of my books, giving them all three a low rating and silly review, but it was her opinion, and she bought the books, so why should I feel bad? It's three sales and her reviews actually helped others in deciding to buy my work, or so I'm told. Hence my opinion on the whole matter of 'bad' reviews. There are no bad reviews and all publicity/mentioning of your name/brand is good.

Like said above, when you enter the realm of being in the public eye you attract peaple who will have an opinion on you, whether that be the right one or a fabricated one that only exists in their mind. It's nothing you can do anything about, treat it as if you are that star that's in the tabloids and stop worrying about it. Their vinegar might be the reason for someone to buy your books, turning their attempt to hurt you into a victory for you to claim.

Just my opinion, but it works for me.


----------



## She (Apr 15, 2014)

luckyme said:


> I've had a reviewer on three of my books, giving them all three a low rating and silly review, but it was her opinion, and she bought the books, so why should I feel bad? It's three sales and her reviews actually helped others in deciding to buy my work, or so I'm told. Hence my opinion on the whole matter of 'bad' reviews. There are no bad reviews and all publicity/mentioning of your name/brand is good.


I think this is something a lot of people are overlooking. It's true that a low star-rating might reduce hits to your book page as people skim past it in search results, but bad reviews in themselves aren't that much to be feared. If they're non-specific ("This book sucks!") then readers are likely to ignore them and form their own opinions based on the description and preview, and if they are specific ("This book has too much/not enough romance/action/sex/violence/focus on the environmental impact of llama farming in the mid to late 1700s") then they might actually help to influence someone TO buy them, the thought process being something like "Well, if that was all that was wrong with it I bet I'll love this book! I love/hate that sort of thing!"


----------



## luckyme (Mar 29, 2014)

She said:


> I think this is something a lot of people are overlooking. It's true that a low star-rating might reduce hits to your book page as people skim past it in search results, but bad reviews in themselves aren't that much to be feared. If they're non-specific ("This book sucks!") then readers are likely to ignore them and form their own opinions based on the description and preview, and if they are specific ("This book has too much/not enough romance/action/sex/violence/focus on the environmental impact of llama farming in the mid to late 1700s") then they might actually help to influence someone TO buy them, the thought process being something like "Well, if that was all that was wrong with it I bet I'll love this book! I love/hate that sort of thing!"


That's exactly what I mean! One person's dislike might be just the thing another loves, and there are loads of books with a low rating on Amazon, for whatever reason. (No reviews yet, or only a few and from that few a few lows dragging the overall rating down) But in the end it is not the rating that sells your books, it's the content. And if that's okay, they will eventually start selling regardless of troll voting, or rating. Readers aren't mindless, and dumb sheep, most of them are very well capable to form their own opinion and will browse to find a book.

If I look at my own book browsing behaviour on Amazon, I don't look at rating at all, and if I do I will read the sample to see why it has a certain rating, but first and foremost (I know it's shallow) I look at the cover, because if the author couldn't be bothered to come up with a professional looking cover I have no hope that the content is any better.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

luckyme said:


> To extrapolate that to us authors, wouldn't they be feeling even worse when their books get no attention at all? No reviews, not even those dreaded low ratings? The way I look at it, but I've said that earlier already, is that any kind of publicity is your name being mentioned, and even those that gather to down vote reviews, or even take the time to write a scathing low rating review might have someone in their circles that is enticed to actually pick up that book and read it for real.
> I've had a reviewer on three of my books, giving them all three a low rating and silly review, but it was her opinion, and she bought the books, so why should I feel bad? It's three sales and her reviews actually helped others in deciding to buy my work, or so I'm told. Hence my opinion on the whole matter of 'bad' reviews. There are no bad reviews and all publicity/mentioning of your name/brand is good.
> 
> Like said above, when you enter the realm of being in the public eye you attract peaple who will have an opinion on you, whether that be the right one or a fabricated one that only exists in their mind. It's nothing you can do anything about, treat it as if you are that star that's in the tabloids and stop worrying about it. Their vinegar might be the reason for someone to buy your books, turning their attempt to hurt you into a victory for you to claim.
> ...


I wasn't really talking about ignoring genuine reviews that are just one person's opinion, I was talking about ignoring the deliberate attempts at 'bullying'.


----------



## Mandy (Dec 27, 2009)

LeeBee said:


> Maybe when it comes to people engaging in attention-seeking behavior, though, ignoring them IS active torment!


In some cases, yeah. Unfortunately, in other cases, it makes it worse. My 11 year old has a chronic illness that makes her lose weight. She's in the 5th grade, and she's only marginally bigger than my kindergarteners. She has a couple of students who go out of their way to make her life hell, and the more she ignores them, the worse they get. Some people just truly get a sick, twisted pleasure out of making life uncomfortable for others.


----------



## luckyme (Mar 29, 2014)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> I wasn't really talking about ignoring genuine reviews that are just one person's opinion, I was talking about ignoring the deliberate attempts at 'bullying'.


I realise that, and I see that my response doesn't reflect that. :-( Still, I agree, ignoring is a far worse thing for an attention seeking troll than rallying against them. Starve them of attention and they will leave eventually.


----------

