How do YOU rate books when reviewing? Your personal thoughts

[Zoe303]

A 4-star book has to be perfect, in my own standards of course. A 1-star book is one I really hated or considered a waste of time. My system of rating is quite weird I would say. A book would lose or gain a star depending on its lack of what I love in books or the presence of something I hate. For example, I don't like books with a lot of obscenities, so if it was one it would lose a star. And I love books with suspense, so if it had that it would get a star, and so on.

[MarieMc]

I generally give up on a book If I have to rate it a 1. Why torture myself and the author? I think there should be a 5 as well for 'life changing, excellent'. I read a lot of books that I might give a 4 to, because they are really good, but I wouldn't say are life changing. These really good books I kind of hate to say are a 3 because 3 doesn't seem to be an all that good of a rating. It is certainly a dilemma.

[Patientguy247]

I feel that a book review should have 1 to 5 stars with 5 being the life changing review and a 4 being excellent. 3 should be so so. 2 should be not great but maybe others may think otherwise and 1 being horrible. Maybe i am wrong but that makes more sense to me in terms of rating a book.

[MatthewAlexander]

I understand what you mean...I personally have never given out a four, though I have given ones. When I give a book a one it's usually for a mixture of reasons, not just one specific flaw. For example, many of the ones I've given have been to books that were difficult to read due to the writing style or the technical errors; some books simply should have been given more work before being published. Fours are definitely harder to come by; I'd have to be very touched and blown away by a book to give it a four.

[Scerakor]

Wow, this sure has harboured a lot of interesting discussions. I agree with a lot of what has said w.r.t. the awkwardness of the 4 star rating system, but here is another stick to throw in the spokes. I find that, especially for what we are doing here, the 4 star system actually works out a bit better than a 5 star or other (i.e. letter grade) system the way that it is defined in the guidelines. It removes a bit of ambiguity.

1 = bad, 2 = fair, 3 = good, 4 = excellent); basically if you give it a 3 or a 4 you are recommending others read it, if you give a 1 you are strongly recommended other people do not bother reading it, and if you give it a 2 that's sort of ambiguous since obviously you didn't like it that much but maybe others will.

For me then, 1 means DO NOT READ, 2 means I didn't like it (or it wasn't great) but still has merit, 3 means I liked it, and 4 means I really liked it.

The issues with perfection being unattainable so a four is never given is less an issue to me if we look at it this way. 4 simply means it is a very good book and is well edited. 1 means I wouldn't recommend it at all. 2 and 3 are equally simple. The more letters/numbers/smiley faces we put in a rating system, the less likely we would be to give the top and bottom marks.

My $.02

[Dh_]

I think I review books in a sinilar way. I never give the book a one unless it was absolutely horrible and I could not finish reading it. Most of them are twos and threes for me too. A book only gets a 4 if it was very well written and kept me interested the whole time or if the concept and plot are something completely original and intriguing. It might be a little harsh, but you're not the only one that does it.

[Amagine]

I realized that there is no book that deserves 4 stars. I don't think I would ever give a 4 star rating because every book that I reviewed had a fatal flaw that kept it from getting 4 stars from me.

[Mailis]

I'm a big old softie at heart, so I tend to rather rate up than down. I have very rarely rated a book 1 star, because I always imagine that somewhere is an author whose feelings will get really really hurt. So it truly has to be bad to get such a low rating. I think I stay in the middle ground a lot as well. If the book wasn't exactly my taste, I take into account that someone out there is probably feeling the opposite and might enjoy it.

[Cynti]

There are few books so bad that I can't even read them. Those would get a 1. Some books are boring, but I read them because I started. Some books I enjoy, but don't feel the need to search for other titles by the same author. The best books almost require that I find other books by that author. I don't think a 5 scale would work for me, but I can see how some people would prefer it.

[1ditzyrn]

I have given a book a one star review, but I had several reasons for doing so. That being said, I still felt really bad about it. I couldn't, however, give it a 2 based on the current system because 2 means "fair" and I would not have classified this book as fair. It's hard to give a low rating to someone when you know they have worked hard on their story, but I feel that we have to be honest with them about our thoughts and how the book made us feel.

[zarah_]

The first time I had to do a review for OBC I was surprised we had to rate a book over 4 instead of the usual 5. For me, as long as I enjoyed it, it was well-written and the story was engaging, I'd automatically give it a 4 over 4. I probably don't give as much thought to ratings as other reviewers, though.