Mine is maybe a bit more harsh than your way, though I do utilize half stars in my reviews.

5 - as good/loved it as much as my favourite ever book/series 4 - very good/enjoyed it tremendously 3 - it was alright. Don't necessarily regret the experience but will not remember the plot/book itself in a few months 2 - not that enjoyable honestly. Maybe a few good scenes/chapters 1 - there is nothing I enjoyed/appreciated about this book. I might remember it solely because of the lack of enjoyment I had while reading

0 stars(unrated) - giving it a rating felt inappropriate. Usually reserved for very touchy/sensitive memoirs or extremely long short story collections where a single score is just not viable.

This is closer to the way my friend ranks things. The unrated is interesting; I can see why you’d take that approach for books on sensitive topics. I don’t rate DNFs as I don’t feel it’s fair, b it everything else I generally rate

Oh yeah, I also don't usually rate DNFs unless I somehow got well over halfway through

5 stars: I loved it and will reread it.

4 stars: Great book but i would not read again / loved it overall but had some boring parts.

3 stars: It was ok but nothing stood out in a good or bad way / good book but bad ending / good but forgetable.

2 stars: Had some good parts or beginning but was bad overall / boring but good written / good story but dragging and badly written.

1 star: dnf book / badly written / whole book was boring / nothing was good about it

i use what goodreads themselves use

1 star – didn’t like it

2 stars – it was OK

3 stars – liked it

4 stars – really liked it

 5 stars – it was amazing

1 star - It was so bad that I didn't finish it.

2 - I didn't like it that much but still finished it.

3 - It was okay, but not something I might recommend to people.

4 - Liked it a lot and would recommend.

5 - I will swear by it.

I would actually appreciate it if it were possible to give half stars, many five star reviews of mine would probably be more like 4.5.

5 - loved it, could not stop reading/listening to it, would recommend it without doubts

4 - liked it, enjoyed it a lot, but not quite as thrilling / absorbing

3 - just ok

2 - part of it was enjoyable, but generally did not like it, probably took me longer to finish when I am reading multiple books at once

1 - absolutely hated it, considered stopping reading (I try not to DNF)

My average rating is 4.08, but I tend to do a lot of research before picking up a book, that keeps disappointments to a minimum.

Pretty similar to me!

To be honest my rating criteria isn't consistent, and I've gone back to change ratings a few times. I also use Storygraph which allows half and quarter stars, which makes the decision more complicated. That said, here's my general method:

5 stars - my absolute favourites, books that I both really enjoyed reading and are objectively well written.

4.5 stars - books I loved but had some flaw that keeps it from being a 5. Usually, books I had a blast reading but some part of plot or worldbuilding fell apart once I thought about it some more.

4 stars - books that are fairly enjoyable and engaging. Most books I finish are here.

3.5 stars - books I loved parts of. eg an excellent book with a disappointing ending, or one that has an amazing character or plot twist but is otherwise meh.

3 stars - OK books, that I liked but didn't make much of an impression. Also, books that I recognise are well written, but aren't for me.

2 stars - books I struggled to get though. Interesting enough characters or subject matter that I wanted to finish the book, but boring / repetitive / actively frustrating.

1 star - books that are objectively bad, that I did not enjoy. Has only happened a few times - a local history book that was plain inaccurate, an obnoxious celebrity memoir.

I didn’t know Goodreads had set out recommendations. What do you do for books that are well written but not your taste? It feels weird for me to give it a low response if I just don’t like it for some reason

I don’t rate DNFs as I don’t feel it’s fair if I haven’t read most of the book to give it a rating. Do you have to read a certain amount before you rate it a 1?

i just checked and apparently after the redesign it doesn't appear anymore when you hover the stars. i have changed to storygraph about a year ago.

i just rate it for myself. if it's a revolutionary book at the time of publishing i'll throw in an extra star or two for their contribution to literature even if i hated it

Not the person who commented first, but I use the same system. If I didn't like a book that was well written, I use 1 star because, well, I didn't like it. It doesn't mean that this was the worst book in world, it just wasn't for my taste.

I only give it 1 star if the reason I didn't finish it was because it's bad. But if I stop reading it because I realize the story is not for me or it's not my preferred genre, then I just don't rate it at all.

I agree, half or quarter stars like on StoryGraph would definitely give more leeway. When you say you do research, does this include other Goodreads reviews?

5 if there really is no competition, 4 if it was really good, 1 otherwise

Yes, I look mainly at Goodreads reviews (or Audible if it's an audio book). I feel like anything with a avg rating above 4 is worth reading (if you are into the genre of course).

I always tend to rate books higher right after finishing them, then sometimes i get back and downgrade them later on haha.

5* is I am obsessed, I love everything about that book. Love how it makes me feel, love the message, the characters, the writing style, will probably reread some day.

4* when I really enjoyed the book but there was something missing, maybe it had some boring parts in it or was dragging on for too long

3* often means I’m not quite sure what to think about the book. I liked parts and at the same time I disliked other parts a lot. It was okay. Not more, not less.

2* is usually when I was glad when I finally got through a book. Books I didn’t like at all but pushed through and sometimes was even close to give up on reading it.

1* - I think it happened only once but was a DNF at like 50% that i hated and literally made me mad.

I read mostly non-fiction, and I don't really read for "fun" (though it may get bonus points) but out of interest. My rating scale is a range from "incoherent garbage or actively harmful to society" to "sound seminal work, you should know about this".

Even when I read fiction, I apply similar criteria to an extent. For instance when I read Laurent Binet's Civilizations, I enjoyed about 3/4 of the story and I'd give it 4/5 rating, if it weren't for the alternative history based off fundamentally flawed premises; thus, it ends up 3/5 and I explain the problem with its pop "big history" framing and how the world building leaves out for example crucial trade relations with the other part of the world.

1 star- hated it, no redeeming qualities 2 star- it was meh 3 star- liked it fine 4 star- loved it 5 star- blew me away

5 stars: all my love and I will make everyone I know read this book.

4 stars: loved it but few minor things took away from the experience such as predictability and writing style. Would recommend.

3 stars: meh. Good read, liked it well enough. Would probably not read again but will continue the series if part of one. Would probably recommend.

2 stars: finished it. Didn’t like it. Would ‘t recommend. Usually some redeeming factor but not enough.

1 star: hated it. Rated exactly one book this badly and it was for school so not very common rating. Usually some combination of bad plot, writing, and characters. W

i rate a good portion = 1 stars...its books i hated or couldn't get into

some might be even considered great but i just couldn't get into them

5 is exclusive for absolute fav books or masterpieces or just very well written or very enjoyable

i am not usually generous with scores .. cause I am more like an amature critic ..so 3 stars is my most given i think

however I do find a problem in deciding many times..so i don't

I’m curious; how many actively harmful to society books have you read?

Why give it a rating when you can write an extremely long review?

Quite a few.

As I was finishing high school, I was gifted a book by a prominent politician in my country that promoted climate-change denial. I actually believed it for a while.

However, as I got out of that, my late stepfather went down an esoteric and far-right rabbit hole. I looked into what he read to be able to critically engage with him. There was fake-historian punditry, edgy eugenics, Russian mysticism and for example trash fantasy that has a cult around it (a bit like scientology).

I can read a book every couple of days OR I could write my personal memoirs through Goodreads reviews

My simple system:

5 stars: a friend wrote this book

No rating: everything else

5 stars - the best books I've ever read. Only 20 spots available (although I think I need to update the number to 5% of all read books).

4 stars - very good books, enjoyed them, will probably read them again sometime.

3 stars - ok books. Nothing that particularly marks them as good or bad.

2 stars - finished it. There are some problems with it, but nothing that completely breaks them.

1 star - didn't finish, or finished out of spite. Hate it, important problems that break the book.

I wish they have half stars. Story graph lets you rate books with .25 increments and I find it better. For instance 3 is a very average book to me and 4 Mena's that I enjoyed it but it wasn't amazing or I'm not likely to read it again. Sometimes I really want to do 3.5 stars because it's not quite 4/5 yet

[deleted]

5 stars - An all time favorite

4 stars - A book I thoroughly enjoyed, may read again, and will likely share.

3 stars - I read it, I thought it was ok.

2 stars - It just didn’t work for me.

1 stars - I probably stopped reading at some point because I disliked it so much.

I tend to be more apt to rate something I like than something I don’t like though.

I rate 1 through 5 stars.

[deleted]

5 stars - It has become a part of my personality and I think about it all the time, I would recommend it everytime I could, cause personally they are must reads!

4 stars - I loved it and I think about it regularly I would recommend it if it suits the person's interests

3 stars - I liked the writing and the story but there wasnt a lot I gained from the book and I dont think about it too often, I wouldnt feel bad recommending these books but I would recommend something that matters more for me personally if I have the chance

2 stars - I didnt enjoy the writing style or the substence and it made me feel like I have wasted my time.

1 star - I hated the book and I would rather eat hot magma than read it again. (this one only has one book for now and its "The Box Man" by Kobo Abe, who also coincidentally has one of the best books I have ever read which is "The Woman In The Dunes")

I use Storygraph because you can rate books in increments of .25 stars. I treat it like a grade out of 100%, so 5 stars = 100% perfect book 4.75 stars = 95% Etc.

5 is I absolutely loved it and want to reread (if I find time).

4 is great book, really enjoyed it, and would probably reread but only if I was really in the mood/it's part of a series/I have nothing else I'm clamoring to start.

3 is I liked it but it may not have stood out in any way as really good.

2. I really did not like it and it was a struggle to finish.

1 is I DNF. Since starting a Goodreads (4-5 years ago) I have never DNFed, but I came close a few times.

Goodreads ratings are not holy to me and my baseline rating is like a 3.5 (jesus christ i wish half stars were possible). But what i mean is I give nearly everything a 3 or a 4 (and honestly probably more 4s than 3s). I give a healthy amount of 5s. All of my ratings are (obviously) subjective, and a book that maybe is a 4 can become a 5 merely by me being pleasantly surprised by how much I liked it. Similarly a 4 could become a 3 if I had higher hopes.

Because of the good people here on /r/books and /r/fantasy I generally find that by and large I really do enjoy the things that I start. People give good recommendations. And there are a lot of excellent books to read. Too many.

Yeah, I think I'd say similar.

5 stars - absolutely adored it. Was interesting, fascinating and educational. Would re-read and recommend to others.

4 stars - loved it. Was interesting or educational. Wouldn't re-read but would recommend to others.

3 stars - relatively enjoyed it. A decent, pleasurable read but nothing that stood out. Wouldn't re-read and probably wouldn't recommend to others.

2 stars - didn't enjoy it. Was boring, too flawed or unmemorable. Barely had any redeemable qualities and I'm glad to finish it. Wouldn't re-read or recommend to others.

1 stars - hated it. A book that I not only didn't enjoy, but actively hated and the reading experience was ruined for me.

I tend to not have too many 1s as I'll just quit while I'm ahead but sometimes required reading for my uni course ends up in this category. Additionally, hating a book doesn't necessarily mean it has no value - I really didn't enjoy Paradise Lost because I thought it was way too long, hard to understand and I didn't enjoy the subject material, but my seminar had some interesting discussions about religious doctrine, the sexism against Eve and whether Satan was a villain or a hero.

I rate them like your friend. I don't go by a book's rating on goodreads to determine if I want to read it / will like it or not.

I only use the rating to remind MYSELF what I liked or didn't like - and I suspect quite a large number of other goodreads users do the same.

Personally I don't give a 1 ever because that would be a DNF - and you're right, if it's that bad, then it's probably on me selecting a book that's not my taste. Those I simply shelve as DNF, don't rate and move on.

5 stars = Worth reading multiple times

4 stars = Worth recommending

3 stars = Worth reading once

2 stars = Would discourage others from reading

1 stars = Waste of time

⭐ Hated it

⭐⭐ Didn't like it.

⭐⭐⭐ Wouldn't recommend it

⭐⭐⭐⭐ Pretty good

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ Loved it!

Omg! Thought I was was the only one to do this 😂 I feel sometimes if I don’t like the ending I emotionally rate the book lower than it deserves. Then I go back to change it.

This is why I don't like to rate books on public forums. My emotions and personal preference always intertwine in my rating. And I'm afraid someone else who the books style is more their cuppa won't read it and enjoy it, because it wasn't my personal taste.

[deleted]

I like this way of doing it :)

I use StoryGraph as well because I like the data side of things. Do you change the grade based on how much you liked it vs how good a book it is? For example, a book that was well written but not your thing vs a book that you loved that had some issues?

I mostly rate books based on personal enjoyment but I try to be a little technical too. 1 and 5 stars are ratings I only give if I have some sort of bias, it's hard to be objective because I either found the book personally offensive or emotionally validating. I rate with my feelings anyway but in the middle of the scale I often manage to put some of them aside.

1 star - I actively hated it, and I wish I'd DNFed it or DNFed sooner (I rate books and write a review if I drop a book past the halfway point, because I think "this book was so bad I couldn't finish it" is still valuable information). (examples: Light From Uncommon Stars, The Midnight Library)

2 stars - I didn't like it but it wasn't necessarily bad. To me it was boring, forgettable. (examples: Bonds of Brass, She Who Became the Sun)

3 stars - I liked it but it was just okay. I may have a couple of major complaints or the book wasn't "for me" for whatever reason. (examples: Dune, They Both Die at the End)

4 stars - I liked it a lot and have no real complaints, might reread one day, but it lacked that little extra "something" that would make me love it and feel emotionally attached. (examples: The Blade Itself, Mort, 11.22.63)

5 stars - I loved it and really connected with it, it was the right book at the right time, I'll be talking about it for weeks and years to come and almost definitely reread it at least once. (examples: The Martian, Assassin's Apprentice, The Long Way to a Small Angry Planet, Nimona)

I usually write at least a small review to explain my feelings, so that if anyone is looking to ratings/reviews for guidance they can get a sense of whether or not they should take my rating seriously. While I agree that it sometimes feels unfair to rate a book low based on gut feeling alone (like you said, it's hardly the book's fault if it doesn't connect), it's also how I and many others read. A lot of books that for me were 1-3 star books are very highly rated on goodreads and some of my favourites have received bad reviews, so at least for me ratings are just not a good guide.

Edit: I wish Goodreads had a bigger range because just 5 options seems too limiting. (Storygraph is better, yes, it's just that most people haven't made the switch yet.)

I rate based on how good a book I think it is, not how much I enjoyed it. I can enjoy a book and know it's not redefining the genre. Sort of like "yes, I enjoyed this trilogy about superpowered magical werewolves and devoured it in a week but is it actually as good as Pride and Prejudice? Should I really be putting it on the same shelf?"

5*: It's a masterpiece in its own way. The themes are on point, the prose is amazing, the plotlines are all superb.

4*: Wow. This book did something so well that I keep coming back to it. Will/have reread. Not quite a masterpiece but wow.

3*: It's a good book. The plotlines tie up nicely, the pacing is good. It's a well-crafted book. (Most books I read end up in this category)

2*: It's an alright book. Some of the plotlines didn't quite get resolved well, the pacing felt off, the characters are mostly cardboard cutouts. It was just interesting enough to keep reading. I'll most likely give the book away but won't encourage people to read it.

1*: DNF, not even planning to get back to it. Or I managed to finish (hoping it'd get better with the ending) but I wish I hadn't. What a waste of time.

I use that too. 3 stars is a pretty good book for me.

I think enjoyment vs good writing is the main difference between peoples ratings in this thread. You can’t tell on Goodreads whether people think the book is well written even if it’s not their kind of book or if the book is their favourite but not necessarily high quality.

My ratings are generally like yours, but you seem a bit more focused on the editing. I certainly consider that if it reaches a point of distraction. I agree that poor proofing/editing tends to be the norm these days. It is also pretty common to find a book converted to digital with a lot of errors remaining. I read quite a lot of non-fiction and I also consider the accuracy, objectivity, and level of research. I am sure that not all of my Amazon ratings are on GR, but on GR I only have one 1-star.

I fully agree. I came up with my way after I looked back at my earlier ratings and they sort of felt wrong. I think it's easy to rate a book higher when I've just finished it and I'm riding the emotional high from it.

Boiling a whole book down to a star rating is simplifying so much. Maybe too much. But star ratings in general are a whole another topic.

Editing is certainly a part of it, but errors can also refer to continuity issues, or more commonly, historical inaccuracy. For a recent example, I was reading a book that was started by the author and finished by one of her friends after she had died. The original author was extremely attentive to historical details, with very minor changes as the plot necessitated. The new author didn’t have the same attention to detail; I remember her saying a character drank Jäegermeister as a small detail, in a historical setting a full twenty years before Jäger was invented. I don’t mind one or two of these errors, but the more they rack up the more I’m pulled away from the story. The more attentive an author is to accuracy and detail, the more likely I am to be impressed, even if the story isn’t necessarily something I would choose to read again 🙂

For me, a 1 is racism, sexism (a focus on the way women characters look while the men are just a name, all the women in the novel are stupid/shallow/careless, descriptions of breasts), or terrible grammatical or factual errors (one author confused the Civil War with the American Revolution... just HOW????). Most of my 1s have been self-published works from Kindle Unlimited.

I give my 4 stars 5 stars and the rest I like 4 stars or I don’t review them

As of last year, I refuse to rate any art.

In this algorithm obsessed society, doing so can keep great art from people it will connect w it the most. Every book, even the truly awful ones, are more complex and deserve more respect than a 1-5 star rating systems

1 - Not worth the energy, time, or money. Please use those three items to seek another book. I will use this rating if the book's pretty bad in terms of plot, characters, grammar, and editing. I tend not to use it often as I will "DNF", or read with thorns on my side to hate review later.

2. Okay book. Just not worth the re-read. Did I waste my time, money, and energy reading this book? Yes.

3. Good book. However, I'm not doing cartwheels. It's entertaining, but not memorable, and probably would end up on the auction block to make room for 4's and 5's.

4. Great book. Memorable. Highly recommended. More likely to show on my end-of-year list. Great plot, characters, and writing.

5. Amazing. I will shout from rooftops, singing the book's praises. However, I strive not to use it often as many 5-star ratings make me nervous about taking it seriously.

5* All time favorites. 4* Enjoyed it a lot! 3* Fun, but not great.

I usually don't give 2* or 1* ratings because I rarely finish books I don't like. I shelf them as read, but without rating and with DNF tag.

Your rating system is similar to mine. But based on other ratings I probably lower the score of decent books sadly. If it’s a decent average book, worth reading but not spectacular it gets a 3

I'm very giving with my ratings.

If I enjoy a book, I always give it 5 stars.

I also don't care about writing reviews or any of that stuff. But I do find it hilarious when the dudes go on to write a bible-sized essay on their book reviews.

It's a book, brah.

Read it or not, enjoy it or not. No need to write about it like that review of yours is the formula to achieve eternal life.

Depends on the type of book. I’ve got different expectations for a literary fiction vs a murder/mysterie.

Enjoyment is always the most important factor when reading a book though.

And I did stop rating most non-fiction books. Especially memoires.

[removed]

I don't rate books and have never used Goodreads

I don't think I've actually ever rated anything below 3 stars because I'm good at picking books for myself or gave up on any that would be but here's mine:

1-Awful, mostly likely didn't finish but still feel the need to warn others. Truly nothing redeeming. Potentially hateful content etc.

2- Disliked the book, I don't recommend it but wasn't truly awful

3- An ok book that I wouldn't rush to recommend to anyone but still enjoyed it to some extent

4 - A great book that a loved but has a few flaws/points I didn't like. Didnt wow me from start to finish.

5 - Near perfect, almost life changing. Hard to find any negatives.

And then I have a further tier - favourites shelf which are books that changed my life/ I really want to highlight/ mean something to me.

I rate them the same way as everyone else: every book gets a 4 unless I really liked it (5), or really hated it (3).

5--love this, would pre-order the author's next one, possibly in hardover

4--really good, highly recommended

3--Okay--reasonably well-crafted, but there were things I disliked

2--Not for me, but may have redeeming qualities

1--Probably didn't finish and I don't think anyone should bother.

5: perfect

4: almost perfect

3: pretty good, but has some flaws that really dragged it down.

2: mostly bad, but there's like 1 or 2 good things in here being drowned by the bad stuff

1: these books are either all-around just an insult to literature, or there are a couple flaws in them that are so awful the book isn't worth reading for any reason.

i use storygraph which allows .25, .5, and .75 as well, but for simplicity i'll stick mostly with whole numbers:

5 - one of my favorites of all time. the last time i read something that reached this was fall 2021

4 - very good book, either is just incredibly well written or would recommend to anyone

3 - good book, happy to recommend to some

2.5 - total middle of the road, as would be implied by it's position in the middle of the scale. books here are okay. i liked or appreciated everything above this and did not like anything below

2 - bad book that maybe had some good elements, could have been good if executed better

1 - really bad (this would be where dnfs go)

< 1 - dogshit, i could talk about how much i hate it for hours. i finish these out of morbid curiosity (coincidentally, the last time i read one down here was also fall 2021, a week or so after reading the 5 star one lol)

⭐️ : what the hell did I read ? ⭐️⭐️ : did not like. Could’ve been better ⭐️⭐️⭐️ : it was ok ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️: I liked it ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️: I loved it , give me more

Basically how I look at it too. I think the only books I've rated 1 star were books I was forced to read for schoolwork and hated. There are some others I dislike so much I couldn't finish them but I feel like I shouldn't give a rating for a book when I haven't read the whole thing

I frequently read things I don't think I'll like, so that rating system wouldn't be fair for the books.
4 - Made me think and sticks with me for a while. This is the highest initial score I'll give. If I'm still thinking about it six months later, I'll give it a 5.
3 - It was okay, but lacked weight or quality of writing.
2 - I didn't like the message nor the presentation, nor do I think it is a useful way to spend my time.
1 - Badly written, bad ideas, not thought provoking. But I have to think, is that because I didn't like it, or it's not what I like. Am I being fair?

I use the same system

My rating system is similar to yours. I noticed I started comparing my own ratings when deciding on a new rating. For example, I recently downgraded a book from a 4 to a 3 because I realized I simply didn't enjoy it as much as my other 4's and the flaws bothered me more later on

Most of the people on here have pretty similar answers, so I won't spell out star ratings individually. But I do have a subtle variance in my approach.

I'll usually go sort of in tiers of evaluation.

1. Personal enjoyment for me (pure opinion).
2. Innate quality of the work within its sphere.
3. Technical competency.

If a book is less than 3 or 4 stars on a given tier, I try to switch to evaluating on a lower tier instead. I want to clarify this isn't necessarily an average, but rather a way to hopefully give books a "fair" rating even if I didn't personally like them, or even if they arguably failed at what they set out to do.

For example, I recently finished two YA fantasy books: Lightlark by Alex Aster, and Kingdom of Ash by Sarah J. Maas.

• Lightlark Is the first book in (presumably) a gestating fantasy series. ultimately I gave 3 stars. For personal enjoyment it was down in the 1-2 stars area, so I started evaluating on whether it was a good YA fantasy book in general or a good book to launch a series. That ended up being like 2-3 stars. Dipping into the technical competency level, I rounded that up to 3 because the writing was functionally okay, if uninspired.

• Kingdom of Ash was the culmination of a long YA fantasy series. Going by personal enjoyment, I would have given it maybe a 3. I didn't not enjoy it, but this isn't really my genre and I was reading it for my wife. So I switched to evaluating on the innate quality of what the work is trying to be, and ended up giving it 5 stars because it's a fitting and powerful end to the series and a great example of broad appeal YA fantasy. As that ended up being an acceptable rating for me, I didn't weigh in basic technical competency to my score.

5 - Loved 4 - Liked 3 - Ok 2 - Didn’t Like 1 - Awful

It depends on what you hope to get out of the rating system. Are you doing it for more accurate personal recommendations or for being a reliable recommender of books to others? Or, for weighing in on what books are truly great and truly bad whether you or even most people would personally enjoyed them or not.

As for me, I use it for accurate personal recommendations. I have no problem giving low ratings to books even if I recognize they're well written or of some importance. Also, there's a "not interested" option in Good Reads' recommendation feature for books that I already know aren't my cup of tea.

About the same as you. I have given 1 stars though very rarely. It usually means the book had major problems. I was probably skimming it at some point just to find out the basic plot of the rest of the book because I couldn't force myself to actually read it anymore.

I only rate about half the books I read for this reason — that and many books take effort to assess quality. Reviews are much more valuable to a reader IMO, I try to explain what did and didn't work for me, so someone with different tastes can get an understanding of if those things will be an issue for them.

5* - One of the best books I've ever read.

4* - A book I thought was incredible

3* - A book I enjoyed reading

2* - Didn't really enjoy this book

1* - I wish I could go back in time and warn myself not to read this

5 - Quite possibly perfect. I adored it. I wouldn’t change a thing.

4 - I really enjoyed it, but there’s a few things I would change.

3 - I equally liked and disliked things

2 - I disliked the majority of it, but there’s were some redeeming qualities

1 - I literally did not like a single thing about this. Terrible.

I’ve never read anything that’s a 1 and only a couple things that were 2s. The majority of stuff I’ve read falls into 4!

5* Exceptional,

4* Really great stuff.

3* Yeah it was pretty OK?

2* Bad

1* Probably did not finish.

My rating system is similar to yours, OP. I very, very rarely give 1 or 2 stars. If I DNF I don't feel qualified to judge the book, but if I finished a book and really disliked it then my rule is that I have to explain why. I rarely review, but I think it might be useful in extreme cases to explain why it provoked the reaction it did. I think I've made done this once on Goodreads where there was zero character growth, zero plot development and none of the characters were remotely likeable.

5 - Perfect 4 - Great 3 - Good/Okay 2 - Not Good 1 - Awful/DNF

Personally, a 5 star is reserved for the best books I will ever read. There should be no question in your mind "is this a 4 star or a 5 star?". You KNOW it's a 5 star. You would give it 6 if you could.

So 4 stars for me are still incredible books, just not in the best books of all time category. I've read 18 books this year so far and only have one 5 star. But lots of fantastic 4 stars.

I rank in a similar manner. Never done a one because I would never bother finishing a one and I don’t feel comfortable eating a book I haven’t finished! 🤷🏻‍♀️

5 - transcendent, genre defining or defying. i used to give more 5s but i’m down to 2-4/year (out of 40-50 books read). Gormenghast by Mervyn Peake, Tinkers by Paul Harding, Piranesi by Susanna Clarke, Blood Meridian by Cormac McCarthy, The Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco. Books i will reread multiple times. Will recommend to anyone. 4 - amazing books, worth a reread. Seriously enjoyed but not as unique or masterful as 5. Will recommend frequently. 3 - enjoyed it. probably won’t reread. Will recommend if matches a prompt well. 2 - meh. probably won’t recommend. 1 - DNF.

5 stars - Amazing. Will think about a lot and possibly read multiple times. Would recommend to anyone.

4 stars - Enjoyed greatly. Would recommend to anyone who enjoys that genre of book.

3 stars - It was fine. Would only recommend to other people with caveats.

2 stars - Not good.

1 star - Let's never speak of this again.

5* - Books that I not only loved, but I actively remember for a while after reading it. The stories not only stick, but also influence what I look for going forward. If there are any flaws in the book, I don't find them impactful at all. I only have a handful of these.

4* - Books that I thoroughly enjoyed. The only difference between 4* and 5* is that I find some of the flaws harder to overlook. Maybe I was bored with a certain section, or think passages could have been reworked a bit. But I still would very much recommend these books and think they are well worth the time.

3* - Books that I liked, but felt were just about average. The flaws are significantly harder to overlook, but despite that, I still enjoyed the read. Still, they aren't bad books by a long shot, and I would still recommend them, however they most likely aren't the first thought that pops into my head as I believe there are better books out there.

2* - Books that I did not like. Perhaps the concepts were cool, but the execution left me wanting. Usually, I'll finish a 2* book and think it wasn't worth my time. I wouldn't recommend these books to anyone.

1* - Books that I not only hated, but felt that they actively wasted my time. Everything about them felt awful and I often regret reading them. Sometimes, I'll even refund these if I realize I won't DNF. Not only would I never recommend these books, I'll actively express how I felt about them if it comes up in conversation.

I don't actually rate anything lower than a 3*. I've read that authors shouldn't do that because it kind of creates a stigma around that author and people might be hesitant to work with them. As an author who already has a hard enough time networking, I didn't want to dig my own grave. Instead, I just don't rate them. Plausible deniability at its finest.

But I know what book gets what rating.

Also, I really wish Goodreads was out of 10 instead of 5. Or maybe gave half stars. No matter how much I love a book, I don't think I've ever read something that was absolutely perfect. But, to me, 5* sort of implies perfection. I'd give those books 9/10 or 4.5/5. But I don't feel like, with the current system, that they should get a 4* because they are markedly better from my perspective.

One thing I have learned from Yelp and other online review sites is there are two kinds of people: Those who consider expected mediocrity as 5 stars and those who use the entire rating system. The former rate a greasy spoon 5 stars if their hot slop was not thrown in their face. The latter are the only people who actually leave useful reviews.

Corporate types want everyone to the the former. If they don't have a 4.5 star+ rating on a product or service, it is utter garbage because they are only concerned with marketing their junk by any means necessary. So they punish their workers and unsubtly tell users that they must rate 5 stars or they are assholes.

I use the whole rating system, because I am not leaving reviews for marketing wanks, I am leaving them for other readers so they can find the best stuff easily.

As a side note, a friend is a struggling author (is there any other kind?) and he has noted that high ratings are great, but it is the number of ratings that matters on places like Amazon. If you don't hit a certain threshold in reviews, your book will never make it onto suggested lists, and you will never be read. So if you like something mildly obscure, throw it a review on amazon, google, as many services as you can find. They need it. If it is a major release by an author with a publishing deal, fuck it they are fine.

Slightly off-topic, and not aimed at OP, but I'm always a little suspicious when a user's ratings don't follow a bell curve.

I didn’t mean to do this but my ratings tend to be: everything gets a 3 except books that are so bad they make me angry (1) and books that are so good I don’t stop talking about them (5).

I do rate them on a more emotional level. I don't really care if it was competently put together or had 'errors'. I read for pleasure I'm not doing an academic report or proofreading.

If something is good but I recognise it's not for me I'd probably rate it a 3. Middle-of-the-road, overall meh. 2 and below are things I hated, 4 and above I really liked/loved.

Huh. Very clean-cut, I like it.

5 - A perfect book from start to finish. Can’t think of a single time I struggled to get through a section or felt anything was unclear. This is a book I think will resonate with me for a long time and I’ll constantly think about. This book made me feel a lot emotionally. Very few books I feel will fall in this category. Example for me: The Cabin at the End of the World by Paul Tremblay or Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn

4 - This book was great. Very few if any complaints about the quality or the structure of the book. There will have been parts of this book that felt like a struggle to get through or felt a bit forced. Things will happen to the characters that are just to convenient that it’ll pull me out of the story. For a bit, but overall it was a great story with a good ending. Example for me: Tender is the Flesh by Agustina Bazterrica or Dark Matter by Blake Crouch

3 - This book was okay. Nothing ground breaking or something I’d revisit, but was satisfied when I finished it. The book has some bits that were a struggle to get through, but was interesting enough to keep me going. Example for me: The Coward by Stephen Aryan or Dark Places by Gillian Flynn

2 - A book I finished, but wasn’t really happy about it. I either finished it because I felt it could get better (but never did). Characters were either boring or the writing was nonsensical, but not so off putting or boring I opted to not finish. Chances are this book started decent, but had an awful ending. Example for me: Snuff by Chuck Palahniuk or A Dirty Job by Christopher Moore

1 - Could not finish. Book was just so off putting to me for one reason or the other. I struggled to even get half way through. Whether the writing style was boring or the characters uninteresting or the plot became nonsensical, I just couldn’t do it. Example for me: I am not a Serial Killer by Dan Wells or Steelheart by Brandon Sanderson

1 star: abysmal

2 stars: didn’t like it but it wasn’t a disaster.

3 stars: liked it and would recommend to fans of the genre

4 stars: Excellent

5 stars: A classic

Here is how I rate books:

5 stars - A new favourite, I'm obsessed with it, it's likely to stay on my mind for a very long time. I loved it, it's well-written, and I don't have any negative criticism of it.

4 - I really liked it, I found it thoroughly enjoyable, but it's not necessarily a favourite. This might mean I have some slight criticism of it, or that it it didn't leave a strong enough impression on me to rate it 5 stars. But still, really good book.

3 stars - This can mean a variety of things for me. It can mean that it was an average, generic reading experience for me. I didn't hate it, maybe I even liked it, but I didn't find anything that interesting about the book either. Or it can mean that I enjoyed a book and found it interesting but I have a lot of criticism. Thus, I have "mixed opinions". Or maybe I thought the story was interesting but didn't like the writing style, or something about the book didn't quite connect with me. In that case, I would say that it's still a good book and it's worth a read, but it didn't click with me that much, and so I only somewhat enjoyed my reading experience.

2 stars - This one is a very rare rating for me. It usually means I disliked a book but not due to it being problematic. Perhaps I thought it wasn't a very well-written book, but I don't have any beef with the book or the author. It means "I disliked it and I'd like to move on and not talk about it".

1 star - I reserve this for books I despise, especially if the book is problematic, for example by reinforcing misogyny or homophobia. The books I rate 1 star are books that use harmful tropes or normalise unacceptable things.

I actually do the opposite. I sometimes won’t love something as I finish, but then six months to a year later will look back on it more favorably (possibly because of some short term nostalgia).

5. Loved it, still think about it months or years later. I never read books a second time, so for me that's not a qualifier for 5 stars.

6. Just an excellent book, but with minor flaws. Usually related to pacing.

7. Just decent, was worth my time.

8. Obvious issues with the plot, writing, characters etc. For example if your characters are cardboard cutouts you end up here.

9. Never rated a book a 1. I don't rate DNFs, and apart from that I'm pretty strict in my book selection.

If it was well written but I didn’t like it, I usually give it 2*-3* as a middle-ground, and make a short review/comment pointing this out to be clear. I might also skip rating it entirely. It depends a bit on how much I didn’t enjoy it, and for what reasons!

I used to do it like you stated. But I track a lot of books in spreadsheets to construct my reading lists, and one of the things that I've noticed is that the range of ratings on Goodreads is quite narrow. For instance, of the 381 books I'm tracking that were published in 2022, the Goodreads ratings range from a minimum of 3.14 to a maximum of 4.81. So there are only a range of 1.7 stars between the "very worst" book and the "very best" book. I think most people are giving books a 4, unless it was really good, and they bump it to 5, or it is meh, and they drop it to 3. This seems like a pretty lazy approach to rating books.

So now I have a rating system from 1 to 10 (which I divide by 2 to get a Goodreads rating), and multiple categories that I rate. For instance, I might really like the world building in a book, but think the dialog is crappy, or that the first two thirds of the book is excellent, but it fell short in the last third. People have a tendency to rate a book according to its worst attribute -"The book was excellent, but it had a weak ending, so the book is weak." Or, "the book was excellent, but the dialog was crap, so the book is crap". So I currently have seven categories that I rate, and average them to make a final rating. I have an overall informal rating as well, and if the numbers don't match the overall rating, I have to ask myself why the metrics don't match. Either I'm not being honest about it, or I'm missing a category.

In the end it doesn't matter, since most books add up to a 4 rating (out of 14 books read so far this year, one was rated 3, eleven were rated 4, and one was rated 5) . But at least I can explain my rating to myself.

This is an interesting question! I feel very unstandardized at times so a lot of the books I read wind up as 3 stars as a result. I think my biggest criteria when I am between ratings is the writing quality. Generally:

5 stars: Very exclusive. I only use this rating for my favorite books of all time. Subjectively, I absolutely loved something about it (characters, plot, world, tone). Can’t stop thinking about it. Has to have high quality writing or creative writing.

4 stars: Usually books that I really enjoyed, read through quickly as a result, but maybe not perfect in terms of writing or plot. Minor flaws.

3 stars: Anything in between good and bad. I am glad I read it, but there’s nothing super special about it either. Some good aspects and some parts I didn’t like.

2 stars: has to have both bad writing + really bad story to be in this section.

1 star: unbearable to read or DNF. I am a completionist so I have literally only a couple DNFs before, read them most of the way through, and feel justified in rating the book even if only partially completed.

I rate by how much I enjoyed it and how likely I am to pick up the next in the series or try other books by the same author. Although I'm aware that the ratings are public, I rate for my own information.

3* and 4* are my most common ratings, it has to be pretty bad for me to want to rate it lower and it has to make a big impression for me to give it 5*

It's complicated I think because even though I have a follower audience of only 4, I really want to be fair to the authors. I often go back and edit my ratings down on average by 1 star a few months later.

5: It could be life changing for me. At the very least it was profound in its artistry and I have read nothing like it. There were no problems with the characters, prose, or plot. It left me thinking and enriched my intellectual or spiritual life. It's an important book for someone to read because they might finish a better person.

4: Really incredible in just about every way. No character development bromides. Unique in some way (I really appreciate novelty). I derived value from this book intellectually or spiritually even if it didn't introduce any necessarily new concept.

3: It was good. There were some things that didn't quite work for me. The most common culprit is a repetitive word or phrase or a character that doesn't really feel totally genuine. I enjoyed reading it almost every step of the way, even if some parts may have been overly contrived.

2: It has something that really irked me but I was ble to finish and appreciate it in some way. This may be that a character is just unrealistic (most common), for example a child said to have an enormous IQ and that somehow means she uses adult idioms that, despite her intelligence, wouldn't have the life experience yet to really speak that way. Or an the same deal but an overly matured child. I really really dislike when an author (Stephen King and John Grisham do this a lot) fixate on sexual aspects of women. I really hate whenever a male main character encounters a women, I must read a paragraph about his thoughts on her boobs and ass, which is sometimes the very first thing to come up when her character is introduced. Brandon Sanderson flirts with this in Way of Kings between Dalinar and Navani but he doesn't take it far enough to be annoying - I just feel like I don't need to read 50 times over how hot he finds her. To digress though, there was something about the book that redeemed it such that finishing didn't take years off my life span.

1: A rare rating for me. Always a DNF. These books are trash and make me think that if THIS got published, maybe I have a chance to be an author too. All of the issues in the 2 star but also the plot and characters are entirely inane. This is like the book equivalent of watching a slapstick cartoon. Maybe it's for adults but it's just so puerile, boring, and even annoying. First book that comes to mind is Gerald's Game. Closed that one after 10 pages and donated it to the café bookshelf

A few others on here have mentioned that they screen for books so that they rarely come across books they don’t like. For me, I’m always suspicious of reviewers who only score highly; that is improbable scoring!

I stopped rating my books at all on Goodreads. The rating system is broken. It's just a way for me to keep track of what I've read and to find more books I'd like to read.

The fact that everyone has a different way of rating is argument enough not to give a star rating or to pay attention to them. If you gave 5 stars each to Beloved or TKaM and a solid piece of genre fiction, for example, how is that helpful, since so much of good genre is still ephemeral and won't stand the test of time? I also find genres to be self selecting. So someone into Manga will give 5 stars to many things Manga, which isn't really helpful to someone who generally reads another genre and wants to try the best of Manga.

5 stars is only for books that are my favorites, things that had enough of an impact I'm still recommending it months later. I rarely use it

4 stars, kept me engaged the whole time, solid writing

3 stars is for a middle of the road book, it was fine.

2 stars is for a book I didn't like. Usually has grammatical issues or repetitive language, or for fiction, characters who don't seem distinct from one another.

1 star is a book I hated, or had serious issues with grammar, or blatant sexism, racism, or homophobia. Rarely use it.

I also add or remove stars for some things. Like if it wasn't my type of book but seems valuable for others to read it, like it gives an important perspective that I otherwise wouldn't be exposed to, I add a star. I recently gave one star for animal abuse. Like, the writing was good, but the asshole abuses animals and still gets to be a NYTimes bestseller? One star for you.

I give purley subjective ratings. There are usually thousands of ratings for a novel on Goodreads, so I don’t see the point of being dishonest with my own feelings toward a book

What would you do instead of star reviews?

[removed]

It’s interesting that you review your ratings after a period of time- how many ratings stay the same after a few months?

I don't rate books on Goodreads. I feel like ratings can be so subjective that I don't want to put mine out without context. And I can't be bothered to write a review. I just have my personal thoughts on wether I liked, loved or disliked a book.

Same!

Out of interest with regards to the one star rating, would you ever read books knowing in advance they were heavily problematic, and if so what effect would this have on your rating of the book?

I recently downgraded two books to one star because I tried to recall something I liked about them and nothing came to mind

Most things get 3 star. Adjust from there.

I have never intentionally read a book with the knowledge that it was problematic and don't see myself doing that in the future. I don't read books I think I won't enjoy.

Generally:

5 stars - Loved it. Will definitely re-read at some point, and will probably recommend it to anyone and everyone. (not rated many books this highly)

4 stars - Enjoyed it, will likely re-read at some point. Will recommend to people if it seems their thing. (My most used rating, as these days I pre-filter books before I read 'em because I know what I like!)

3 stars - Was readable, but was lacking something, there were large sections which were un-enjoyable, or it was just not what I was hoping for/not the quality I expected. Not getting re-read unless I have to for some reason. Also for books that were "not my thing".

2 stars - Readable, but just not good. Poorly written/formatted/edited, or just really not for me.

1 stars - Bad. Either almost unreadable, or the dreaded DNF. For books that I will not only not recommend, but will tell people to actively avoid (such as deliberately misleading or offensive books).

But what's interesting is that, as I said, it's rare for me to give 2 stars to a book. That is because I've noticed that often enough, if I don't enjoy a book but can imagine other people enjoying it, I'm likely to up the rating to 3 stars out of kindness, even if, objectively, it would be more of a 2 star for me. If it's not something I passionately hate, I often feel like rating something 2 stars is too mean. On the other hand, if I hate a book, then it's a one star (and usually, if I completely hate a book, it is because it's problematic in some way). That means that I rate very few books 2 stars.

5 stars- one of the best books I've ever read/one of my favorites of all-time.

4 stars- very enjoyable; would probably read again

3 stars- decent enough one-time read

2 stars- didn't hate it but don't like it either

1 star- avoid at all costs

So I use storygraph so I get the quarter stars as well but for me it goes

1: why does this book exist?

2: very bad book, not enjoyable nor well-written

3: average, ok, forgettable/unmemorable

4: pretty good, had some flaws

5: absolutely perfect in every way, reread for sure, 10/10 will recommend every chance I get

I use this type of rating, and I write a review as well, since I read others reviews to see what they liked or disliked about a book.

i use storygraph and the rating is 0-5 and is quite specific as you can add 25 / .5 / .75 to your rating so i do

5 stars - very rare for me to give basically means i think it’s extremely well written with no flaws (a masterpiece) 4 stars - not without flaws but still amazing (some of my favourite books are even 4 stars because an imperfect book can often still hold a huge place in your heart) then i use the more specific ones for 3 star ratings so 3.25 stars for an average book and 3.75 for one which was great but not enough for a full 4 because it didn’t excite me enough to rank higher (basically not a new personal favourite) and 2 stars for books i liked the plot of but hated the execution (books that are inconsistent with the quality of writing can also fall into this category) 1 star is rare, usually reserved for modern books which i just found deeply offensive, that can’t be explained away by the time they were written in i don’t really give 0 star ratings because i got so used to using 1-5 on goodreads before i switched

5 Stars: I loved it AND it was well written, I would recommend the book and will look into more of the author’s work. A lot of re-read value.

4 Stars: I enjoyed it, fairly well written with only a few flaws to smack it down from 5 stars. I would still recommend the book, but it’s a 50/50 shot if I’ll re-read or look more into the author.

3 Stars: It’s not bad, but it’s not good. Several things put me off or there was one big glaring issue. 50/50 shot if I recommend it and I won’t look more into the author without a lot of persuading. Will only reread if part of a better series.

2 Stars: It’s not the worst thing in the world, but I wouldn’t recommend it or would discourage people from reading it.

1 Star: Either a DNF or a book I hated with a passion. Typically means I finished the book angry, but for the wrong reasons. Typically if I feel like my time has been wasted I’ll rate a book 1 star.

It’s very rare for me to give less than a five, because I love stories. So it goes like this:

5- Yeah! Excellent, excellent, very good, well done, solid story. 2-4- all right, it’s a book, but I’m wrestling with something. 1- ….I don’t like you.

I really wish they had a 1/2 star option too. I feel like, for me, there is too much variation between 3-4 and 4-5 stars.

Stars aren't the issue, there are people reviewing books they haven't read. Books that are not even out yet with multiple 5 star reviews. Goodreads reviews and ratings are fundamentally broken. I choose not to contribute to it. The only thing you could do is verified reviews but since Amazon bought Goodreads that means people would be locked into the Amazon ecosystem and that still doesn't stop the bogus reviews and ratings. It just means they bought the book through Amazon.

[removed]

[deleted]

I'm line line with your friend- I rate based on how I feel, because it's my rating. That said, if I recognize something was well done I just wasn't into it, I'm nicer to it, because it's part of the whole picture. I love classics, but a classic does not get a good or higher rating from me just because it's a classic, for example. For example I understand and appreciate the impact and relevance of Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man, but man do I despise that book, thus it's a one star rating for me on Goodreads. When the differences come in as to "I understand and respect it, but I hate it" are seen and known in actual conversation with me, not in my Goodreads reviews, as those are just stars with no explanation.

Also obligatory we need half stars on Goodreads.

5 Stars - Loved it, adored it, will read it again multiple times (with rare exceptions and are unrelated to the original enjoyment or quality; some books I just can't read again even if great, for many reasons. i.e., I don't think I'll be able to read Call of the Wild again, because I've grown incredibly sensitive to treatment of animals and there's several scenes that I just can't read again). Will recommend to everyone. I could probably talk for hours about it.

4 Stars - Really, really liked it, very good, just didn't make that perfect rating for whatever reason. Strong candidate for re-reads later, but not a given. Will recommend to a lot of people but be a little more in tune to their particular likes and dislikes. I could talk for a long time about it.

3 Stars - It was solidly okay. Not offensive, but not great, lacking overall. Will not re-read, will only recommend if I know a particular person and know it totally aligns with their tastes. Mixed bag of if I'll remember I read it or not, and details will be slightly fuzzy, but I could probably hold a very basic conversation about it.

2 Stars - Well it wasn't terrible. I didn't like it, but I didn't hate it. I will likely forget all details of these and only remember based on reviewing my Goodreads rating and some key details of why will pop in, but not much. I might randomly remember I read it and was meh if it comes up, but details will be fuzzy.

1 Star - Hated it, would never read again, would never recommend, only marked this because didn't become a DNF but probably should have become one. Awful. Sometimes I wish I could give zero, but in absence of that it's a mix of zero, 1/2 star and one star. I will likely forget most of these except when reminded the pieces I truly hated and why, but only when reminded. Does not remain in my head otherwise and is gone shortly after explaining why after being reminded.

[deleted]

This is the only way.

5 star for all books that I didn't hate 2 for books I hated

It's an unfortunate truth that the star rating is used by Amazon(Goodreads owners) to hide and shadowban authors.

So, star ratings that reflect your actual thoughts can cause the author whose book you liked to disappear and those authors to give up.

Just to make a guess of it, I might feel less warm to about 60-70% of the books after a while. I'll recognize that they weren't really special enough to stay with me or make me want to recommend them as much as when I first finished them

1 Star - Absolute chore to finish, usually had to read for school or uni.
2 Star - Average. Pretty much a neutral rating.
3 Star - Was ok, but wouldn't read again.
4 Star - Decent book, that if only it had a few tweaks would have been solid. Might read again.
5 Start - Excellent/Masterpiece, will definitely read again and highly recommend to others. Only ever given 15 books this rating.

5 - loved it, finished it in a ridiculous amount of time because i couldn't put it down and i need an adaptation immediately even though i know it will disappoint me.

4 - loved it, and i need a sequel or two as i'm not quite ready to leave the world/character.

3 - i had a good time.

2 - my time was mostly wasted.

1 - DNF

It's usually the ending that makes me downgrade my rating too. I also factor in re-readability. Most books fall in the "3" category for me, a few might make it into the "4" category, but "5"s are the rarest for me.

I hesitate to rate any book a 1 since I think you can usually find some redeeming quality in any book, even if you might not like it.

I try to use the entire 5 star scale rather than just the top end. The worst book I've ever read deserves my 1 star rating, even if I enjoyed parts of it. I don't need to save that 1 star for "the worst book I can imagine" because that is a book that I'll never read. By the same logic, I'm happy to give books I love 5 stars even if they have noticeable flaws.

My average rating on Goodreads is 3.41 stars.

I find it hard to rate any book a 1, even if I hated it, since I can usually find some redeeming quality about it. Either that or it's so bland that it doesn't seem like it warrants the vitriol that a 1 seems to imply.

[removed]

Yours is exactly how I rate mine.

I mostly rate on how much I enjoyed the book. To me it is clear that every rating on Goodreads is influenced by the reader's individual taste. That's why I always read more than one review.

I'd say my rating system is similar to yours. 1 star would be - I finished it but I regret it. I'd actively discourage someone from buying it.

I rate fiction works based on a variety of elements.

Probably in order of: 1) strong or fascinating plotline, 2) fantastic storytelling, 3) powerful & very memorable main characters or themes, 4) how much I enjoyed the book and 5) pacing.

I rate my experience with the book rather than the book itself (since I don’t believe there is an objective / meaningful rating I can give). I try to mostly reads books that result in 4 or 5 star reviews

I rank books with a 1 star when they have a trope that goes way out of left field and was not mentioned in the blurb. It could also be a book that just made me so mad and upset at the same time. I did this recently for a Jewel Ann book (If This Is Love).

My system is fairly close to yours. I have a lot of 5 stars. Some people think that's weird but if I got lost in your story and thought about it when I wasn't reading it, you get a 5 spot from me.

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ - A new favourite. Would strongly recommend and will absolutely reread.

⭐⭐⭐⭐ - I really loved this, there's just something off about it that makes it less than a favorite. I'd still highly recommend it and would likely reread it.

⭐⭐⭐ - It's fine, inoffensive but nothing special. I didn't actively dislike it, but I'll probably never think about it again. I might recommend it to the right audience.

⭐⭐ - I did not like this, but I was at least able to get through it. It has some redeeming quality that kept me going.

⭐ - I probably didn't even finish this, and if I did it was blatantly a hate-read.

I should also note that despite having an English degree, my ratings are almost purely based on feelings/vibes and not the objective quality of the book.

[deleted]

This is how I tend to rate books - I was giving a lot of 4-5 then as a big re-reader that most of the books I should probably be only rating a 3. I did go back and change some. I only have a few series that I would consider 5 stars.

5* - Couldn't stop reading it/Good quality novel information, which changed my perspective on the world

4* - Good, but wasn't completely obsessed

3* - Average, was bored in a few places

2* - Boring, most of them I didn't finish

1* - Hasn't happened yet, but probably for utter trash. I usually check the score on Goodreads before starting a book, so probably won't happen.

[removed]

Sort of similar to the way you do it, but with exceptions. I rate my books a little harshly at times, so I rarely have 5 star reads. I don't rate them objectively, it's irrelevant how well written a book is if I hated it. My ratings are purely my enjoyment of it

5 = all time new fave, really affected me emotionally

4 = quality book, will definitely reread, just not in the top 10%

3 = I liked it, but not as memorable or interesting as I'd have wanted

2 = kinda bad, but there was something redeemable that kept it from being a 1

1 = I literally despise this book and enjoyed nothing

Yeah I’m with you on the 3 star rating, I definitely wouldn’t recommend someone a 3* book

Either five stars or nothing, and I tend to give five stars to less well-known authors, to try and support them somewhat. I find other ratings problematic, because I'm never going to finish a sub-4 book, and I suspect that my four stars would be more a reflection of my own biases than an actual, "objective" rating. Five stars, on the other hand, are a straightforward recommendation, so I'm good with that.

I have a pretty good grasp on what books I'll like, which is part of the reason why every book I've read in the past couple years is somewhere in the 2.5 to 5 star range. The rating process is very abstract and vibe-based and I don't put much thought into it, but I'll try to retroactively describe what each rating means based on the books in each group. I don't actually have any of this in mind when I'm going to rate a book.

The books I've given 2.5 stars (which are very few) or 3 stars were enjoyable to read in some way or another but felt very surface level or contrived. E.g In Five Years by Rebecca Serle. It's a pageturner, but in a "watching a car accident" kinda way. The vibes are terrible and I'm not sure whether to respect or abhor it for that.

3.5 seems to usually be for books that are thematically affecting to me but fall short of fulfilling their potential. E.g. The Midnight Library by Matt Haig. I'm not always on Haig's wavelength throughout, but there are moments where it does really click.

4 stars are very well-written, enjoyable books that I'd be hard-pressed to find flaws in but may have felt the tiniest bit slight or didn't emotionally resonate with me quite enough to get a higher rating. These books do what they aim to do really well, they just may not be as precisely geared towards me. E.g. The Thing in the Snow by Sean Adams. I don't usually read books of this genre (kinda dry comedy, although in a slightly abstract/surrealist sci-fi world which *is* up my alley), but this one was really fun to read and I liked the writing style.

4.5 stars are mostly books that swing for the fences and/or surprised me with how much I liked them. It's generally hard to say what little bit of abstract judgment differentiates these from 5 stars. Maybe it's a small hiccup in pacing, or a bit of triteness in some of the lines, but everything thematically and vibes-wise works for me. E.g. My Last Innocent Year by Daisy Alpert Florin. My love of this book is mostly coasting on the quality of its vibes, I can't lie.

5 stars tend to be the ones that hit me emotionally the hardest, the ones that stick with me the most and I can't stop thinking about. They explore topics that fit right in with my own brain and its sensibilities and anxieties. Often beautiful prose, subtly devastating themes, and usually a nice mixing of genres. E.g. Our Wives Under the Sea by Julia Armfield; The Vanished Birds by Simon Jimenez.

I don't rate them, I only use Goodreads for logging, categorising, and looking up books I want to read

5* Must read for everybody

4* Liked it

3* Meh

2* Nope

1* BURN IT! KILL THE AUTHOR! -> The Trial - Kafaka

I have a complicated ratings system.

0 to 2 points for plot and character development.

0 to 2 points for writing quality i.e. vocabulary, symbolism, etc.

0 to 2 points for how much I enjoyed it.

So, in theory that's 0 to 6 stars but of course I have to round to 1 to 5.

However, since I wouldn't normally finish a book which I rated 0 in any category almost all books are rated 3 to 5

I'm harsh on Goodreads but my metrics are:

&#x200B;

5 stars: perfect book, even if I didn't love everything about it if I feel the creative decisions were justified I give it full marks (recent example: Young Hugo)

4 stars: excellent book, any criticisms I have need to be more tangible than simple creative differences, such as trimming the length or redundant word choice (recent example: Babel)

3 stars: average book with good content but was a slog at some stretch. Books that are enjoyable but I find lacking in creativity or other elements go here (recent example: Our Wives Under the Sea)

2 stars: bad book saved by some element of creativity or interesting plot. Usually books that are poorly written but have a good plot go here (recent example: If We Were Villains)

1 star: flat out awful book with few if any redeeming qualities. The longer the book the less forgiving I am of strong segments that would bring it up to a 2 (recent example: The Invisible Life of Addie LaRue)

Perhaps unpopular opinion, but I think DNF's should be their own category of scoring. There are so many novels that fluctuate in scores based on whether or not they stick the landing, so I don't think it's fair for someone to judge a book without the full picture.

I don't rate so much on enjoyment as on perceived quality.

5 = great

4 = good

3 = okay

2 = poor

1 = terrible

[removed]

1 & 2 star - I don't use these ratings, I just stop reading a book if I don't like it, and I wouldn't rate a book that I'd read only a small part of

3 stars - good book but probably wouldn't reread and would only recommend it if it perfectly fit the request

4 stars - very good book that I can see myself rereading and would readily recommend

5 stars - great book, will recommend, will purchase if I don't already own it

I rate purely on enjoyment, my enjoyment is mostly based on how good the writing is, how it affects my mental state (including negatively), and how much of a page-turner it is.

The hover text still appears on user pages, review pages, edition pages, etc., just not on book pages

I can't bring myself to give 5 stars. Maybe Shakespeare or something. But that seems too high a bar for mere mortals.

4- top tier

3- pretty good, but had some dull moments

2 -- couldn't finish it

1 -- couldn't even make it through the first few pages.

5- all time faves, rarely used

4- liked it, gr8 read

3- okay, meh

2- dislike, kinda feels like time wasted

1- hate, delete this book from existence pls

5 excellent

4-very good

3-mid

2-shit

1-worse shit

-10-The most worst shit ive ever seen

-1- i wanna die

4 stars: meh, but a nice friend recommended it so much that I can't rate it 2

1. Terrible, total waste of time/money, probably DNF
2. I didn't like it and will never recommend it to anyone.
3. Fine enough as a time filler but forgettable.
4. I liked it. Entertaining. Engaging. Was worth the read, would recommend.
5. Life changing. Changed my worldview. Utter love. I'll keep this on my shelf forever and sing its praises to anyone who will listen.

Read nine lives by Peter swanson, that is the definition of a one star book lol

The synopsis seems like a standard thriller. What's so bad about it compared to other books in that genre?

5- It’s overall amazing. Plot, writing, not corny at all, good pacing, good ending, sticks with me after I’ve finished reading it. Only top favorites ever get this rating for me.

4- Most good books I read get a 4. I like it a lot but there are one or two things that bring it down, maybe it’s a little slow at first, maybe the ending is ok but not perfect, maybe it’s very entertaining/ a page turner but has an element of cheesiness.

3- Good enough to not give up halfway through but I still feel a bit disappointed at the end. Sometimes I will think I love a book the whole time I’m reading and then the ending falls very flat- this is when I rate it a 3.

2- Not that enjoyable or interesting to read, poorly written, bad ending, etc. If a book is feeling like a 2 I probably won’t finish it.

1- A book would have to be so terrible that I stop reading it for me to rate it a 1.

5 stars - Amazing book, I feel like a better person having read it, I'll gladly reread it. Moved me in many ways, not too short or too long, no major flaws.

4 stars - The flaws did not affect how much I enjoyed the book but I recognize them, or most of the book was amazing except for some grating flaws that detracted from my experience; the book was fun/interesting but I wasn't going crazy for it

3 stars - An okay reading experience but there were several issues/things I dislike in books. Other people with different writing style, trope, and genre preferences probably appreciate it more than I did. Still I'm glad to have read it.

2 stars - Book was so bad I didn't finish, but still had some merit. I was able to read a lot of it before giving up due to the amount of good parts.

1 star - Everything the author tried to convey was not reaching me. I didn't enjoy any part of the reading experience.

I don't feel bad giving 2's and 1's because I know the average score, composed of thousands of ratings, will not weigh heavily into my low score. Most books are read by people who like them and who can appreciate them.

It's faster and easier. Most of the time I don't have to say much about the book other than "I liked it" or "it was boring af". Also, when I search for a book on Goodreads, I want to see rating, and I read 3-4 reviews. If some book already has 450 reviews, writing one more seems like a waste of time. I wrote a few short reviews, and all of them are for the books which had a very few reviews.

If the pacing was so bad that I stopped reading before the part where "it got interesting," or "those problems were addressed in a plot twist" then I'm calling it out. And I don't want to waste my time checking out a book a lot of people with similar taste to me have DNF'd due to it being lackluster.