Friday, September 21, 2012

why the f*ck friday (15) (and introducing my rating system)

Welcome to WTFF. In which I attempt to answer a single question--normally a thought on a book or a bookish subject--that I've been pondering for the past week. This week it's "why the f*ck don't you have a rating system?"

I guess it's inevitable that I would fall into the trap that is a star rating system. It seems the popular thing to do. Some people even go out of their ways to make it a little different by using different symbols.

I've always steered away from using a rating system on my blog. If I used one--I thought--no one would read what I wrote and go directly to the whole "three out of five stars" thing and fixate on it before finding out why it's three out of five stars. A scale should be accurate and only aide in a book review.

Stars? No. Fuck that.
So, I've decided to start using one on my blog. I'm just going to test the waters with it for a week or so to see if it sticks. If it doesn't, then it goes. If I get lazy or tired of it: it goes.*

I'm trying this now because I feel like I've built up enough of an audience for them to understand that the scale is just a sign post. It's something to be guided by, not the end-all-be-all of the entire review.

So here it is. I'm not going by stars. I'm going by Fucks. I have given this a lot of thought. I was originally going to use cats, but felines seem a little too over done on this blog already. But Fucks? I can never have enough of those. Here's the scale:

One out of Five Fucks Given - I either missed the point or it just wasn't for me.
Two out of Five Fucks Given - There's something here. It's not for everyone, but it's fun.
Three out of Five Fucks Given - Probably worth a checkout if you're a fan of the genre.
Four out of Five Fucks Given - Knock it up on your TBR pile so we can talk about it.
Five out of Five Fucks Given - Why have you read this yet? Why did it take me so long to read this?

Please notice that the scale gives no indicator of a book being terrible. There are no bad books. There are just different kinds of readers.

Just to give you an indication of what this will look like when it comes to books:

Enclave - Three out of Five Fucks Given
Black Hole Sun - Two out of Five Fucks Given
Monstrous Beauty - Five out of Five Fucks Given

My question this week: what do you think of the new scale? Do you pay attention to star ratings? Does it influence your reading? Are you guilty of skipping the entire post? Do you even have any fucks to give?

This post is rated One out of Five Fucks Given.

*Like so many other things I've done.
Note: If we're friends on Goodreads--and we should be friends on Goodreads--then you'll notice that I do star things on there. I've been using this scale in my brain for a while now.


  1. I love your new scale. It's so f*cktastic!

    I do enjoy seeing a rating on reviews. However, it does not persuade me to not read a book. If it's 5 stars, it will definitely make me want to read it or jump up and down because I can gab with the reviewer about how awesome I thought it was, too.

    1. Thank you!

      Hmm. I'm the same way. I read the post and make up my own mind. The stars are just an added bonus/guide point for me.

      Also, if anyone else is reading this comment, I won't be responding to WTFF posts until late tonight. So... comment away! I will reply tomorrow morning or late tonight.

  2. Awesome. I like ratings because they're a concrete way for me to get a picture of how good a book was in "mathematical" relation to others. But they're definitely all relative to the reviewer. Getting to know how a reviewer reads - what types of books they prefer, and also how they rates their books - if they give a lot of 5 stars(f*cks) or only rarely - is key to following someone's system. For instance, you seem to be a rarely 5 type of person, so it's a bigger deal.

    I really like this statement: "Please notice that the scale gives no indicator of a book being terrible. There are no bad books. There are just different kinds of readers." TRUTH.

    1. Yes. I hope people read and understand how the rating system works before jumping to conclusions.

      It is rare for me to give out five stars. I feel like if something doesn't wow me then it doesn't deserve it.

      Thank you! I am so glad you agree with me on that point. There is a book for everyone, and let's not forget that I'm reading a lot of books with female characters in them, so it's harder for me to relate to them, so it's coming from a different and more distinct male perspective.

  3. My amount of fucks to give is super limited, but this appeals to my cussing sensibilities.

    Pretty much this is my new favorite rating scale EVER.

    1. Thank you. It came to me after I told a friend I wasn't going out--I was finishing a book and drinking wine and I have zero fucks to give about it.

  4. Adam, you've shed some new light on the saying "I don't give a fuck"--now it's completely appropriate to use when reading, although it may have been that way before. Like right now, I don't give a fuck about the current book I'm reading, but I must finish it for a challenge.

    Anyways, great rating scale. I have one sort of. I was using stars, but I got too lazy to add them in every post. And I'm thinking about eliminating it altogether because my 'reviews' aren't formal enough to warrant a rating system.

    I only ever pay attention to ratings if someone has given a book a considerably higher or lower rating than I would've given...I'm usually curious to see their interpretation of the writing. I guess that fits in with the whole, "There are no bad books. There are just different kinds of readers"--man oh man, do I disagree.

    1. Are you still on your color challenge?

      I think if you're being informal that the stars shouldn't matter. So I agree.

      Hmm. I tend to think that. I think a lot of people gravitate towards critics/bloggers that they have more in common with, or that read the same things, after a while you get used to the reviewers taste. And when they read something out of their comfort zone, man oh man can you tell.

    2. Yes...I'm still on my color challenge...

      Let's see. Have you read Too Far by Rich Shapiro? I read it a year or so ago. Certain elements were interesting, but the overall combo made for a not so great read...I'm pretty sure someone on Goodreads said it was Bridge To Terabithia on drugs. And I agree with that assessment.

      But the cover is fantastic! Like what you were talking about last week, except I got it for free.

  5. When you mentioned that you were thinking of a rating scale, my first thought for you was cats. But that seemed really boring. The fuck scale is PERFECT.

    I like reading the reviews and don't really pay a lot of attention to the ratings. A five star rating may draw my attention more quickly than a 2 or 3 star rating, but it all depends on the review in the end.

    1. Cats seem over done. I am enjoying the Fucks.

      I rarely give out five stars. So... you might not read any of my reviews!

    2. That is not true. I read all of your reviews. I decided to actually read a Dessen book because you gave them 4&5 stars on goodreads. The same was true for Dash & Lily's book of Dares. The rating just pushed them up the TBR list.

  6. I approve of the swearing, mostly because I swear a ridiculous amount.
    I had a rating system on my blog but got rid of it because I was lazy. Plus, it was hard for me to decide what to rate books I didn't like all that much. The only time I really pay attention to ratings is when I'm not liking a book. Then I'll hop over to goodreads so see if it's just me or the general consensus.

    1. I find it odd that other bloggers don't swear as much on their blog as I do. Maybe it's my lack of professionalism.

      I've done that before. I had to do that with Divergent. Which I would give One out of Five Fucks Given.

  7. I don't use a rating system on my blog either for similar reasons. I don't really like how it can pit books up against each other, when, as you said, there's a right reader for every book. I do rate on Goodreads, but feel like I'm constantly reminding people that when I rate a book as 1 or 2 stars it's because I didn't like it or think it was the right book for me, not because it's necessarily a bad book. I actually recommend books I didn't like all the time when I think I've found the right reader for them.

    I'll admit I'm guilty of zoning in on someone's rating before I read a review, but it doesn't usually stop me from reading a review, especially not if it's a blogger I read regularly. The only time I'll skip the review is if it's a review I know I'm going to be reading/am currently reading and don't want to have my opinion influenced by others.

    1. Yes! I do the same thing. While I wasn't a huge fan of Cinder: I have recommended it to people because I know they'd like it. Excellent point.

      Good to know. My rating scale isn't even bad to good. It's just this-isn't-right-for-me to this-is-perfect-for-me.

  8. I tried one, but it just didn't work in theory, I like what Goodreads has, if you hover over their stars
    1-5 reads
    I didn't like it
    it was okay
    I liked it
    I really liked it
    I loved it

    Since I post short reviews there and then longer ones on my blog I just use that rating system now.

    1. I'm not opposed to stars, they're just not for me. I try not to openly bash books, I also try not to praise them too much. I just want that happy medium.

  9. Love your rating system! It makes sense and would help pick. I only go by star ratings when I know the person. Like I trust Gingers and Katelyns star ratings bc I know them. Other than that I go with reviews. Yours is good though! I'd trust it.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...