Liity LibraryThingin jäseneksi, niin voit kirjoittaa viestin.
Tämä viestiketju on "uinuva" —viimeisin viesti on vanhempi kuin 90 päivää. Ryhmä "virkoaa", kun lähetät vastauksen.
1. When a review is flagged as 'not a review', what happens subsequently, if anything? Is it a message to the reviewer to change or delete it? Does it get picked up by admin and followed up? Or does it stay there forever?
2. Following on from the last scenario, what happens if the reviewer then turns it into a proper review? Does the flag stay even though that's no longer appropriate, or can only the person flagging it remove it?
2. The flag remains. The only way to remove the flag, according to Tim, was to remove the book then put in a new copy with the proper review. (Or possibly email the admin regarding it.) You could also place the request into this group for counter flagging purposes that allow the flag to disappear with other's support.
The only real exception is the 25+ (edit: word) review rule for a book reviewed as part of the Early Reviewers program.
Did I do wrong or did I do right or did I waste my time?
I have an odd feeling that they are the same person. Each account has reviewed the same books, and only those books.
And it can't be a coincidence that the 70 books I share with one account are also the same 70 books I share with the other.
Wrong. If it's the same person, and I think it is, it's perfectly okay for him to copy himself.
I don't see how that's different than my reviewing a book twice from one account because I own two copies.
The sock-puppet thing, as I understand it, is to prevent authors from improperly promoting their books. That doesn't seem to be the case here.
Oh well -- If doing so is accepted practice, then I withdraw my complaint and you'll never hear me complain again no matter how silly things get.
My beef is that the two reviews are precisely the same -- that's SAME, as in word-for-word identical. Why would anybody do that?
Easy. If you have two copies (or more) copies in your library, you want all the information about each book in each individual book's record in your library.
It's like it's unfairly bolstering (or lowering) the rating for a book. If a book only had say, 10 reviews, and eight of the reviewers gave it one star, but the other two reviews (the same person in this scenario) gave it five stars, it messes up the math and makes the book look better than it really is.
There's always a weakness in any procedure. Though I suppose it's not a lot different from Putin being bigged up to seem more popular than he really is by multiple voting.