Now my book catalog on goodreads is pared down to a few limp protest books (see screenshots below). The censorship ones are self-explanatory; the P2P books are over mine and friends' computer related peer to peer books, shelves and contents getting fried.
Why would amazon find technical computer nonfiction books by mainstream publishers/authors objectionable? Hell if we knew at first. The reason got tracked down to one of the at the time trending bba authors whose books on any shelf the 21 targeted reviewers originally targeted used would get the shelf deleted. (Continued below screenshots).
Well, at least all the reviews formerly on goodreads I wanted to move are here on booklikes. Needed more editing than I expected (because of my errors, not booklikes).
I ditched a few useful to or targets for bba authors (plus the ones that consisted of just a brief sentence—for those, the rating is enough).
Yay! Happy Dance! Treating myself to an end of the month booksigning event!
First, let me say I appreciate any staff responses on any threads on goodreads. And I have some background to follow on why this bothers me. Here's my (apparently going to be nightly until I move my "A" book title reviews here) rant on goodreads.
At https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1620164-large-book-data-import?page=3#comment_90347319 the new "Import Master" says this about the amazon data feed that is destroying goodreads database:
"Solution 2: We're looking into where the bad data is coming from. A lot of it seems to be coming from non-amazon merchants who tend to enter information about their particular product quality, shipping policies etc etc. We're going to see if there's some way to only whitelist descriptions form trusted merchants or for books sold directly from Amazon itself."
Duh. Just don't let amazon data override librarian edits. For the sake of any intentions of pretending to maintain the goodreads database beyond products for sale on amazon, do not let marketplace or third party sellers also override librarian and valid data feed edits. Whitelisted or not.
Seriously, amazon thinks it's a good idea to allow "trusted merchants" and marketplace used book sale information to override publisher and author provided data? And to override and lockout librarian edits that usually just standardize formats, punctuation, capitalization, etc. and fill in missing information. Any seller or merchant putting a used or new book up for sale on amazon gets to override goodreads data including librarian edits?
Oh joy! How wonderful to have a publisher book synopsis of "A wonderful new fantasy series from..." be replaced with "Like new condition, all our books come with a money back guarantee if not satisified. We have a five year record as an amazon seller" -- brilliant idea amazon. Of course, once seller sells that item no one is hurrying to tidy up the goodreads database to replace seller info with publisher's again. Librarians cannot, your data overrides their edits when it doesn't actually lock them out.
A vain moment where I am quoting myself from the thread on the new book page display (nope, they are not putting all editions, genres and shelf displays back). If you missed that one it's at https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1648001-book-page-design-change?page=1
[UPDATE AFTER READING ENTIRE THREAD: Okay, I should not have quoted myself. Becky brings up a better point in message 48 -
"Yeah, I really can't imagine why anyone would want to navigate to the review page just to see the shelved date, when it was always easily visible from the community reviews.
It's useful to see how many people added a book on a specific date, as well. Sockpuppets will love this change, I'm sure."
*sigh* the date rated/reviewed being suspicious was always one thing that alerted me to potential sockpuppets. Change hasn't actually rolled out to me yet, so in my defense, I was just looking at screenshots.]
Log in with Facebook 
