Ya' know, if you do this that someone, even many someones, are not going to like it. So why, oh why, would an author implore readers/followers to "diss the haterz" when said author had to know that the book would elicit this type of reaction?

How stupid does the author hope we are?

I feel a rant coming on ...

Lessee- now we've got... angels divided into Infantry Divisions... The Commander, along with all the other angels saying 'shit', 'fuck'... slapping each other around... normal folks roaming out in the Demon Air and still remaining unaffected...

What is this- an adaptation of Kevin Smith's movie, Dogma?

Basically, I'm done with this shit.  Fuck it.

I'm gonna start asking you guys for help on what ARCs to request, because clearly I'm an idiot.

I bet it's pure luck that so many people who have such intimately detailed knowledge about the Apocalypse and happen to be survival nuts and military veterans all live in this isolated rural community. Golly.

OK- it's dawned upon me that the 2-column page format is supposed to reflect the KJV Bible layout. It's just not conducive to reading an poorly written ebook.

This is one of those books that refuses to let you like it.  And I don't see it getting any better.

The plot intrigues you a little: main character experiences lucid dreaming- sort of like being awake while asleep- and her nightmares bring all the attendant mental stress you'd expect.  And of course, her dreams bring her to the attention of the Powers That Be, who want her for their own purposes, she falls in Instaluv with one of their young flunkies, blahblahblah...

And being a YA novel, our girl is utterly sooper speshul- otherwise what's the point?  Since being able to lucid dream putting you in that top 1% of the population isn't enough, she's also a genius-level intellect who's so bored and disaffected with her life yet she keeps dumbing down her performance in school instead of moving on to bigger and better things.  I could even dismiss all of that- it's YA, remember- except for the fact that this author needs to relearn one of the cardinal rules of writing: SHOW, DON'T TELL!!!

Starting right off the bat with the opening, at least once a chapter you get an infodump of seemingly pertinent info regarding either the science behind lucid dreaming or some future story occurence that the author couldn't figure out how to work into the story, so he just drops it in your lap.  The first time had me shaking my head and moving on, until it happened again.  And again.  And then some more.  And now I'm tired of it to the point I almost can't stand this book.  Plus since these events are supposed to occur later in the story I don't know why he's telling us about them now,

This is one of my favorites so far:

31%- He wore a long, dark floor-length coat, a duster, like a gunslinger, and his chest was clad in silver battle armor.  A long, gleaming broadsword from a scabbard at his waist.  Lori would find out later that this man also happened to possess a very impressive pair of wings, which were folded beneath the fabric of his long coat... Lori would eventually learn that this was the Archangel Michael- the head honco of this little guerilla unit- but right now, right this instant, things were happening too quickly for niceties.

I don't know about you, but now I'm all tingly for the scene where Lori gets to find this out for herself.

I'm gonna turn around now, and when I do someone please hit me in the back of the head with a heavy, blunt intstrument.  Please?

[reblogged from 38 Caliber Reviews]

Scarlet on BL posted this. Let me just repost that screenshot:

Well now, isn’t this just so special? Let’s talk about this.

“Congrats! You are on my list…” Run, run now. “to receive an ebook… for free” Oh really? Just how “free” is free? “in exchange for a positive review.” Oh-oh, a positive review. It’s good to be so certain that your book is the next best thing to Hemingway or Rowling or whoever but “in exchange” is already a price attached to this incipient literary crapsterpiece (and usually when they insist on a positive review the book sucks Nile water).

But it’s free, and surely if you absolutely, positively hate it— well, we’ll get to that. “After reading”, at least the author wants you to read it. I’ve seen authors imploring their fans for reviews and trying to make it easier by saying they didn’t have to read the book. Oops, looks like that “free” price tag is getting a little more expensive. “please help me spread the word by posting positive reviews about it on all social media sites”. On all social media sites and please notice that you are posting only positive reviews. But just in case you didn’t notice, “This includes positive reviews on…”, s/he will just ever so gently repeat it. In the first three sentences s/he uses the phrase “positive reviews” three times.

Already I don’t like this book. But wait! There’s lots more, “Amazon, Goodreads, and any other“, s/he left out Booklikes and Leafmarks; continues with, “blog, vlog, Instagram, Tubmlr (sp), Facebook, Google, or any …“, left out Scrazzle. This isn’t so bad, just copy and paste and paste and paste and…

Why do I feel so tired? Now you are instructed not only where but when, “please mention it BEFORE and AFTER reading“, at least s/he said please. “including links to it on Amazon or Barnes and Noble…“, I wish s/he would be more specific.

Now we get into the whatifIhateit instructions, written with a sense of disbelief because how could you possibly hate this book? Maybe because the author took twice as long to write your rules for reviewing as s/he did to write the damned book. Am I the only one thinking this “free” book is too much work? Do I even know this author?

“IF”, and that’s a big if, “for some reason”, and really, it would be such a teeny, tiny, nit picky little reason, “you don’t like the novel”, GASP, SMELLING SALTS, “don’t think it’s worth a 4 or 5 star review”, OMG, you brute, you bully, you bully thug, you have no taste, “please DON’T leave a review on places like Amazon,”.

Why not? “as 1-3 star reviews REALLY HURT the Indie AUTHOR”. What about the poor, bewildered, exhausted reader? The poor, hard working reader who is spending all their spare time reading the book, mentioning the book, linking to the book, and finally they are ready to post and paste their review. If you, Dear Readers, are that poor reader take your finger off the post button because, “promotional sites will remove the author if you don’t have at least a four star average”.

Three words: Not. My. Problem.

Cold? Not a bit, this is a business transaction and you are not getting a “free” book, you are working damned hard for that book. The author is not without a point about this but here you have to make a choice; if you are lucky the book will live up to the author’s hype but if it doesn’t, what are you going to do next?

I recommend sleeping on it because if you’ve been busily following the author’s instructions you need to rest. Maybe a good meal, some wine. A pedicure.

So what to do if you didn’t like it, “write me and share with me why.”, or not. Just don’t tell any one else. Ever. You’ll kill my career, my glorious career. It doesn’t matter if I have written a big, steaming pile of fewmets, it just matters that you don’t tell anybody. Ever. Because I don’t care, I just want to sell it. To as many people as possible before someone who doesn’t know better or is a jealous hater tanks MY GLORIOUS CAREER by leaving a nesty, career-killing 1-3 star review.

But you won’t not like it. I spent a lot of time on it, nowhere the amount of time I’ve spent on writing out these instructions but this is the important stuff. This is where I become rich and famous. I just need as many of you as I can con persuade into writing those 4 and 5 star reviews.

Now here is the very best part. I can’t believe any author is quite this mind-numbingly stupid.

“As a huge favor, in your review, please DO NOT write things like, “I received a free copy from the author for an honest review…” Why not? “That’s an automatic turn off in review world and discredits your review from those who need to read it, so please don’t do that. Pretty please. :)” What the…?

I don’t know where to start. First, it would be a HUGE favor, all right. One that could land you in some trouble with the FTC, not to mention that some of those social media sites you are busily (or not) posting your review on take a dim view of reviewers “forgetting” that little disclosure. A review that includes the disclosure is not an automatic turn off to me, it speaks to the reviewer being honest. And second, what the hell is the author trying to say with, “discredits your review from those who need to read it”? Does s/he mean that readers skip over reviews that disclose? I’m really not sure.

So, to sum it up, the author wants you to promote his/her book by posting, linking, reviewing. The author wants you to do your very best to make sure the author sells a lot of books and maybe becomes a well-known, sought after author. The author does not want you to ever post publicly about the book if you didn’t like it. The author wants you to ignore the FTC rules and the rules of the sites you review on.

All for a “free” book.

(from Webster’s online dictionary)

Full Definition of FREE

1

a : having the legal and political rights of a citizen

b : enjoying civil and political liberty

c : enjoying political independence or freedom from outside domination

d : enjoying personal freedom : not subject to the control or domination of another

2

a : not determined by anything beyond its own nature or being : choosing or capable of choosing for itself

b : determined by the choice of the actor or performer

c : made, done, or given voluntarily or spontaneously

3

a : relieved from or lacking something and especially something unpleasant or burdensome —often used in combination

b : not bound, confined, or detained by force

4

a : having no trade restrictions

b : not subject to government regulation

c of foreign exchange : not subject to restriction or official control

5

a : having no obligations (as to work) or commitments <I’ll be free this evening>

b : not taken up with commitments or obligations

6

: having a scope not restricted by qualification

7

a : not obstructed, restricted, or impeded

b : not being used or occupied

c : not hampered or restricted in its normal operation

8

a : not fastened

b : not confined to a particular position or place

c : capable of moving or turning in any direction

d : performed without apparatus

e : done with artificial aids (as pitons) used only for protection against falling and not for support

9

a : not parsimonious

b : outspoken

c : availing oneself of something without stint

d : frank, open

e : overly familiar or forward in action or attitude

f : licentious

10

: not costing or charging anything

11

a (1) : not united with, attached to, combined with, or mixed with something else : separate (2) : freestanding

b : chemically uncombined

c : not permanently attached but able to move about

d : capable of being used alone as a meaningful linguistic form — compare 5bound 7

12

a : not literal or exact

b : not restricted by or conforming to conventional forms

13

: favorable —used of a wind blowing from a direction more than six points from dead ahead

14

: not allowing slavery

15

: open to all comers