I'm deciding on whether or not to buy and it wouldn't mind some reviews. The few reviews on Amazon are all very negative.
Don't take this the wrong way, but please try to leave the fanboism out of the reviews. I'd like honest opinions.
Heh, it's not that we are going to bat for the novel, just for a obvious problem with the reviewer.
It's called decency.
It has nothing to do with whether the book is good or not. I have no idea and I don't care. It's about really loathsome people who take pleasure in trying to hurt other people.
These aren't people ridiculing some book by some author they've never met or don't know. This is a book they're ridiculing precisely because they do know the person who wrote the book.
LOL. Elaborate? She made a long winded, semi-literate snarky review on her blog and announced it on the site her husband was banned from and then, with her husband, participated in shitting on the book on amazon. That's elaborate to you? Petty, yes. Elaborate, no.
That's what struck a nerve with me too. Not healthy people.
It's amusing because Bradley Wardell has nothing to do with his banning. Tom Chick does, and it was in response to Matt's behavior over a period of time over several different topics.
Once again, for the record, I am also quite bemused at the rancor conjured by the suggestion that a videogame tie-in novel might not be all that good.
Getting back on the subject, is anyone who is reading this thread and owns the novel willing to review it? Obviously, nobody will be totally unbiased, but I'd like to hear a bit from the legions of "non-haters" who read it and loved it. I just downloaded the sample to my Kindle, and am giving it a read, right now.
From where I'm sitting it looks more like a very ugly lashing out, championed by a Stardock employee no less, against a woman who said critical things in a reasonable manner. The personal attacks, the way her motives have been put in question, the way people have ignored what she said and focused on who she is, that is childish.
The "rancor" is not about the book. For the sake of argument, let's assume the book is the worst book written in history. OK?
A person who knows the author in the virtual sense chose to write a blog ridiculing the book and making a thinly veiled accusation that the author is a racist to boot. Then, she and her recently banned from the site husband, go onto amazon.com to further ridicule the book and then post it on a site that Brad has publicly stated he spends a lot of time presumably to make sure he sees is.
The "rancor" is that there is a group of people who are so filled with hate and bile that they have nothing better to do than write things to insult and put down someone they know, presumably in the hopes it will cause him some anguish or sorrow. Otherwise, why pick that book? The world is filled with shitty books. They picked that one to shit on. The motive seems pretty easy to see.
Yeah sorry why would she get all bent out of shape about a temporary banning? He's been banned before and will be again and I've never seen her get mad about it.
If you're going to go off about her review argue about the points in the review not the woman.
Why pick the book? Because Elemental was a highly anticipated game on QT3 and some of us were interested in it's quality.
Oh please.
http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/showthread.php?t=60997
Time stamps are your friend.
Okay, I really didn't want to get involved in any drama about who reviewed the book or why they may or may not be biased or how anyone's political views tie in. I really don't care, I just wanted to hear what people thought of the book. But this line is too much to pass up.
Let me get this straight: Quarter to Three, great site that it may be in many respects*, unfortunately seems to have some issues with drama and personal attacks - hard to deny that what with people getting banned over it. Then there are book reviews, possibly biased, possibly related to forum drama, possibly not - but either way they spawn threads on Qt3 and more drama on those unfortunate forums. This drama eventually bleeds over here into the Stardock forums and, lo and behold, newly-created Stardock forum accounts staunchly defend the Qt3-originated drama.
And you tell us not to join your forums and bring our bullshit into your quality content ... after you joined our forums to bring your bullshit into our quality content? I hate all the drama and am really beyond caring how good or bad the book may be at this point or who the hell chooses to review it, but that, man, that hypocrisy is just loathsome. Faith in humanity -1.
*I do have a lot of respect for many people that post on Qt3, and have read some fascinating game-related discussions there (the political crap on the other hand..), I ain't saying it's all bad by any means. Just that certain people here are making an (unfortunately) poor representation of a site that deserves better.
So you think, that reviewing a book of a person her husbnd had a very public "disagreement" is the right thing to do? You don't think it brings up questions? Any reasonable person would think that. I don't understand why she did that review, posted on amazon and made sure all her buddies on Qt3 could see a post about the review, it really seems spiteful. Her motives should be in question in this situation...step back and look at it in a reasonable manner.
Yes, I believe what I wrote. Why? Because, unlike you, I know what I'm talking about. And apparently I'm capable of reading excerpts from a novel and realising just how terrible the writing is.
Semi-literate? Long winded? Oh dear.
She "announced it" on the site that mostly inspired her to make the site in the first place. The site that has previously enjoyed her other reviews and where several people know her personally. It's also the perfect audience - everyone on QT3 knows Brad, everyone on QT3 is aware of Elemental. And please, provide some goddamn proof that she participated in "shitting on the book on amazon", because all anyone knows is that Matt posted a review.
I've read that thread. Angie Gallant's posts there are far more pleasant in tone than most I've read in this thread.
LOL. You can almost hear the spinning from here.
The comments in their own thread tell the story.
I don't know or care why should wrote the review. Maybe it just pisses her off that Brad got to write a book. Maybe she's mad about her husband getting kicked off their board because of Brad. Maybe it's because she's a political nutjob. Maybe she was just bored. I don't know what her motive was.
I can only judge her and her friends by what they've written in that thread I listed above.
I'm shocked anyone would want to be part of that forum to be honest, lot of hate and bile.
I'm the one that brought the QT3 debate over here? Interesting. I happen to be a member of both communities, yes, and I know some of the people involved in this. I didn't bring in that drama.
This thread is comedy gold.
EDIT: Yes, I'm still reading! I had to take a break, lol.
If you guys want to argue about whether or not some random internet troll is a troll, feel free to do it elsewhere. The poster started this thread looking for more measured reviews, and since the discussion is clearly not providing that, there's really no need for it to continue.
Sigh. Whatever. Have fun buying and defending the purchase of product tie-in books. Encourage the book industry to churn out more of these crimes against literature.
Those of us with taste will be elsewhere reading something edifying.
I just looked, she commented on one of the reviews defending the book trying to argue that it's racist.
At least you concede the argument, the people on QT3 know Brad and so it's hilarious to make fun of his book. Stay classy.
Grammar matters in writing because it is writing. A professional writer (i.e. someone who expects to get paid for it) should know the intricacies of grammar the same way a plumber should know about pipes, a carpenter should know about wood or a chef should know about the mother sauces.
Anyone with minimal intelligence can snake a drain, cobble up a crude bookshelf, or make macaroni and cheese. But if you want to provide those services to someone else and get paid for it, you should know your craft. This is no less true of writing.
I think that if she wants to review the book then that's her right. She bought it. She read it. She can voice her opinion. If she makes valid criticism, and as far as I can tell she does, then her reasons don't matter. If you think her review is dishonest and that she, falsely, wrote bad things about it to hurt Brad then yes, that would be spiteful. But iff she's being honest and if her criticism is valid, how is that spiteful? If the book is poorly written then pointing that out isn't spiteful, unless you happen to think that pointing out that the emperor has no clothes is spiteful.
Translation: in case you aren't prepared, I am going to flame everyone. "Everyone?" Yes, everyone.
Is this from the "Forum Thread Potatoes Official Scorebook?" So if a page contains 25 posts and only is 4 pages long, it is small potatoes compared to a thread that has 10 pages with 8 posts per page?
I can tell you did your research, copying/pasting right from the review and all.
Wow, and here I thought it takes longer than a sentence to say "You are a racist." How many sentences does it take to call someone a racist, then? Please clarify this so I know how to qualify this at a later date.
You know what, forget it. I think I'll drop a deuce and ask it. It has a better chance of providing a more intelligent answer.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
