Ranting about rating
Do you find more acceptable if someone does not write a review if they have read your story/chapter/drabble but disliked very specific aspects of your writing?
Or are you pleased with the effort of your readers to write a review for you with their honest thoughts albeit they might disagree with your hard work?
Is it only socially acceptable to award 75-100 % of possible stars an archive allows?
Apparently, I messed up again and wrote a comprehensive, but negative review accompanied by 50 % of possible star count and havoc broke again. This feels all wrong.
Action: One reads and does not leave reviews.
Reaction: The authors complain for reader's ignorance and lack of appreciation.
Action: One reads and writes squee-ky reviews.
Reaction: Polite thank-yous, end of discussion.
Action: One reads and writes comprehensive positive reviews.
Reaction: Squee! followed by pat-on-thy-shoulder discussion.
Action: One reads and writes a full-blown critique.
Reaction: Denial.
Action: One does not read.
Reaction: Complains about decreasing hit count.
Counter-reaction: Disillusionment.
Or are you pleased with the effort of your readers to write a review for you with their honest thoughts albeit they might disagree with your hard work?
Is it only socially acceptable to award 75-100 % of possible stars an archive allows?
Apparently, I messed up again and wrote a comprehensive, but negative review accompanied by 50 % of possible star count and havoc broke again. This feels all wrong.
Action: One reads and does not leave reviews.
Reaction: The authors complain for reader's ignorance and lack of appreciation.
Action: One reads and writes squee-ky reviews.
Reaction: Polite thank-yous, end of discussion.
Action: One reads and writes comprehensive positive reviews.
Reaction: Squee! followed by pat-on-thy-shoulder discussion.
Action: One reads and writes a full-blown critique.
Reaction: Denial.
Action: One does not read.
Reaction: Complains about decreasing hit count.
Counter-reaction: Disillusionment.