Note: Originally Posted 7-14-06
When you’re cool like me, you’ve got this insatiable urge to write a review on every book you read. I don’t know if it’s because book reports were my strongest subject during my formative years or what, but I’ve just got to do it. It’s like Dracula and blood, Tommy Lee and sex, Paris Hilton and tastelessness; it can’t be fought.
So, other than my “official” website, I like to post my book reports, uh, that is, my book reviews on Amazon.com. Only the coolest people on planet Earth do that. Now you may or may not know this, but people can actually vote on whether they found your review helpful or not.
Cool as I am, I’m no scientist. That being said, I’ve discovered a trend, something on the scale of Ivan Pavlov . . . when you post a positive review, people vote on it as very helpful. But, when you write a negative review, people vote that you weren’t helpful at all. By the way, I have no idea if the Pavlov reference was accurate. Run with me people, run with me.
Anyway, I happen to think that my reviews are always helpful, you know, because I’ve got a healthy ego. Just because I write a bad review on a book, that doesn’t mean the review wasn’t helpful. I simply point out what didn’t work for me. I think people that read my reviews are so smitten with the author they’re looking at, they can’t fathom said author could ever write a book that wasn’t God’s gift. I’ve got news for you folks, some writers can produce real stink bombs. Myself excluded, of course.
So there we go. I will now quote Forest Gump on the subject with, “That’s about all I have to say about that.”
Was this slightly tongue-in-cheek article helpful to you? YES NO (Report this)