Quote:
Originally Posted by Darren MacLennan
No, it clearly isn't.
|
I think we'll have to agree to disagree about whether someone can read an entire book while skipping part of it.
Quote:
|
Lacking an editor and copious free time, I'm afraid that mistakes will creep into my reviews.
|
Plenty of people in this world are perfectly capable of writing factually-accurate book reviews without either of those. You have to be willing to spend a few minutes actually looking up material and refraining from commenting on areas where you have no knowledge. It doesn't add much time to the writing process, and it's an important part of it.
Quote:
|
You can nitpick my reviews until you're blue in the face, but it doesn't alter the basic thrust of the review. You've managed to find two minor errors, and you've decided to extrapolate that into "Well, the review is largely worthless!" Which is fine, but it's also missing the point rather seriously.
|
It's not nitpicking to point out that you're making basic factual errors that could be avoided with a minute's fact-checking and indulging in wild speculation about books you actually haven't read. That's simply lazy and irresponsible writing. It will indeed give people who play the game the impression that your review is worthless, because they're certainly not going to trust your ability to read and critique a book after reading what you've said about others.
If you spent a few seconds checking titles and refrained from speculation, you could avoid all this and be more effective at communicating your message.