You got me. I often tweet about books. (when I'm not retweeting bad puns, lifve-tweet TV-shows or football-matches or yell about bad Jack the Ripper theories...) I also follow a lot of authors on Twitter but let me tell you a secret:

I probably have never read a single book of more than half of the authors I'm following (I often plan to somewhen but looking at my tbr-pile that won't be happening anytime soon) and I'm also following some authors whose books I have read but found a bit...meh.

Why am I doing this?

Because all those authors are interesting people and tweet cool stuff. They comment on current issues or just make bad puns I can retweet (often both actually). Of course they also talk about their work and announce new books, special offers and such but they aren't doing it all the time. (Just like e.g. the actors and comedians I follow don't just tweet about their upcoming appearances)

In short: of course you can follow me but if I check out who you are and find that your twitter-bio is just praise for your latest novel and your latest tweets are you telling random people to check out your novel chances that I follow you back are...unlikely.

(And if I notice that you keep following and unfollowing me probably in the hope that one day I will follow back I will block you*)

(Yes this post is in reaction to a certain author doing that recently but as they weren't the first to do it I'm not naming anybody as it would be unfair to single one person out)

*that has happened only once so far and that was ages ago but I'm still annoyed

Sorted from bad to worse

1. Having a book set in a different time/culture so that some terms and allusions need some explanation but not putting these explanations in footnotes on the same page but at the end of the book. I do have enough bookmarks to spare a second one for the explanation-page but it's still quite annoying having to leaf back everytime.
2. If that is the case: no indication which terms are explained. No text is so precious that printing a word in italics or putting an asterisk after it will ruin it. Am I supposed to guess what is explained and what isn't? (Because usually there are some things I know that are explained and some things I have no idea about that aren't explained)
3. The above AND NOT GIVING ANY BLOODY CLUE AT THE BEGINNING THAT THERE IS A LIST OF EXPLAINED TERMS AT THE END. Am I supposed to be a clairvoyant? Does everybody look at the last page first nowadays?
4. All this in a Kindle-edition. Where you could just have hyperlinks to the footnotes...of course that would require some editing and not just throwing the text out for the e-book edition as it is.

Yes I am somewhat unimpressed with my edition of Georges (though it's not the first time that one or more of these things annoyed me in stuff I read)...still haven't decided how/if I am impressed by the book.