Discussion in 'The War Room' started by rokzilla, Sep 12, 2017.
I'm sure @Jack V Savage has bought a copy and given it a 5 star review
that's VERY creepy
And yet still more reliable than Best Buy's in-house electronic reviews. I cannot be the only person who thinks this.
Amazon has had so many problems with that book review system. Publishers and authors have been caught spamming negative reviews for competitors, or positive reviews for themselves. I can't say I've ever paid much attention to it. I care what the public has to say about how a lawnmower works, and the collective numeric value of that, not what their opinion is about a set of ideas in a work of nonfiction. Why would I draw my own opinion from herd think?
Not that it makes sense, but I just realized I don't care with fictional books, either. That's inconsistent. After all, I do tend to take note of IMDb and RT/MC for movies (although the latter's scores are pretty much a matter of pure business now, and are no longer useful). Yet I don't care for books. I don't care about music reviews, either, but I sift resources like MC, Pitchfork, Billboard, Spotify trending, and others when I'm trying to narrow down a listening discovery of new groups. Don't even do that for books with reviews.
I adored their service that tracked which books were most popular in given circles, but they got rid of that. You used to be able to see what the bestselling books were at the various universities like Harvard or Stanford were, or by location (ex. New York City). Some of the major corporations were even included (ex. what Google employees were reading). I miss that. Otherwise, I usually take note of the major award winners like the Pulitzer or National Book Award, but ultimately the nonfiction books I end up opening tend to come from the WSJ editorial review section. Those editorial writers are really good at selling a book.
Cry baby trump fans are sad because Amazon took down unverified (bogus) reviews made by like minded trump fans.
Trumpanzees gonna trumpanzee.
Safe to say this isn't the first book it happens to on Amazon.
Let's not act as though Hillary is such a victim.
A Trump book would be solid gold. If he had a good illustrator.
loling good at all the Hillcucks in here fervently defending the woman they voted for..... but all denied voting for her when she lost. sad!
Safe to say it's also not the first time Amazon deleted troll book reviews, positive or negative.
True, but with America, and most of the world, getting stupider by the minute, who's to say what's legit and what isn't these days?
the real question is, why would anyone believe in an amazon conspiracy to protect clinton at this point? does anyone give a shit about her anymore? the only reason she got the votes she did is because she was the trump alternative, and the dnc helped her beat bernie.
I'm not sure what your point is but reading it has made me feel stupider by the second.
Right. People like you would do the same thing if Trump was the auothor.
No, I don't waste my free time writing fake book reviews on Amazon.
We also know Trump won't ever auothor or authoer or authier anything himself.
We actually have a straight-up comparison to this, remember the Trump Christmas bauble which was being sold by Trump's presidential campaign? Article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/christma...-make-america-great-ornament-proves-surprise/
While the tree decoration has clearly found favour with Amazon's shoppers, reviewers have been quick to label it a load of old baubles, giving it an average star rating of just 1.6 out of 5.
Containing lots of troll reviews of people who didn't purchase the product, such as:
"It tried to put my nativity figures into an internment camp," complained one review. "Would not buy again."
Hillary's book currently has 1600 reviews. So Hillary's book has garnered less interest than the bauble, yet the bauble's negative reviews were not purged, but the Hillary book's are. Either censor everything, or censor nothing.
A double standard that surprises no one.
Did you complain to Amazon about it 6 months ago?
That's redundant, surely
Why would Hillary need defending? Bezos is the one who is playing fast and loose with his power, here.
Separate names with a comma.