Active Users:416 Time:17/09/2025 10:59:16 PM
I'm shitfitng to no too. Hope more people change their votes. fionwe1987 Send a noteboard - 22/09/2009 10:34:22 PM
I really didn't. I assumed if someone had a copy there was a reason, like they were supposed to share their opinion.


That's precisely the point of ARCs, and nowadays publishers love to use non-traditional medias, like Blogs, fan sites etc. Tons more ARC are distributed around, and leftovers are often given away in contests weeks before the book is released etc.

And if Tor is sending out copies before Oct. 27 after all, there's no harm no foul in publishing reviews - that would be why they send copies to people in the first place. But for TGS, it appears every reviewer who asked have been told "Sorry, no ARC printed for TGS, we can get you a copy for release day".

When reputable people/bloggers with established ties to publishers (incl. a few experienced reviewers like Larry from OF and Ken of nethspace, Pat's Fantasy Blog, Adam from Wertzone etc.) start posting reviews, the odds jo-blo poster on a MB has also gotten a copy somehow will be increased a little, but for now you can count on those reviews being fake or from copies obtained illegally.

Normally, there would be more than Jason having a review up by this point. Back in the day, TL, Wot Encyclopedia, Wotmania, Tarvalon.net would all have non spoiler reviews up by this point, and some online media would publish theirs too. There may well be more reviews down the line for all I know, but it's also well known how much Harriet, Brandon and co. dislike spoilers - an this ought to be respected. Some love to use spoilers and half-spoilers as a mean to generate hype, but it's never been the case with WOT. Back in August Brandon didn't even want to mention in Q&A vague stuff he was aware had been officially released - even which two story lines were the focus of the book. He knew it was around, even told people who wanted to know where to look for the info, but he wouldn't speak of it openly (nor does he do on his blog, where he's extremely careful about the information he shares - no doubt knowing very well it's gonna be everywhere after that, and considered legitimate to spread without warning).

The secrets of the book being spread around would not harm Tor's sales, but they sure would piss off Harriet, Brandon etc. Most fans want to discover those for themselves in the book itself - not by accident coming on a MB, whether the spoilers are real or invented by morons with nothing better to do than pulling starved fans' legs.

We waited five years, what's five more weeks before we can judge TGS for ourselves and with a fresh eye anyway?

I hadn't heard that Harriet and Brandon didn't want anything out there. Of course I wouldn't have voted for something that was against their wishes if I had. So yeah, I take back my yes vote now that I know this. And I kind of feel like a jerk. :<img class=' />
Reply to message
Do you guys want pre-release reviews on this board? - 20/09/2009 08:40:03 AM 1826 Views
Yes. - 20/09/2009 11:56:22 AM 1160 Views
Sorry wrong place. *NM* - 20/09/2009 05:31:27 PM 561 Views
Yes - 20/09/2009 01:12:18 PM 1101 Views
No. *NM* - 20/09/2009 01:26:48 PM 563 Views
No, I prefer to see them after the 27th. - 20/09/2009 01:42:38 PM 945 Views
They don't have to read them if they don't want to *NM* - 21/09/2009 01:54:30 AM 562 Views
NO! *NM* - 20/09/2009 02:05:47 PM 611 Views
No *NM* - 20/09/2009 02:22:15 PM 675 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 03:08:41 PM 612 Views
Yes please! *NM* - 20/09/2009 03:40:41 PM 617 Views
NO *NM* - 20/09/2009 04:16:55 PM 564 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 04:17:32 PM 609 Views
Re: Do you guys want pre-release reviews on this board? - 20/09/2009 05:33:49 PM 954 Views
I just hate getting interupted. even if I'm at work *NM* - 21/09/2009 06:12:13 PM 554 Views
Sorry wrong place *NM* - 21/09/2009 06:12:54 PM 560 Views
We need them to maintain the spike in activity. - 20/09/2009 05:34:14 PM 1081 Views
YES. *NM* - 20/09/2009 05:44:48 PM 568 Views
Can anyone who voted no explain why? - 20/09/2009 05:51:51 PM 972 Views
Yes, why not? - 20/09/2009 06:18:42 PM 1260 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 06:30:54 PM 551 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 06:39:34 PM 540 Views
Yes. I see no reason not to. *NM* - 20/09/2009 07:08:47 PM 546 Views
No, I'll just read them and then go regretting it *NM* - 20/09/2009 07:18:27 PM 595 Views
Yes! - 20/09/2009 07:30:59 PM 975 Views
yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 07:46:37 PM 606 Views
Yes - 20/09/2009 08:34:03 PM 918 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 10:08:42 PM 556 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 10:17:51 PM 556 Views
Yes- Give ppl the option to see the reviews *NM* - 21/09/2009 12:03:27 AM 554 Views
Yes *NM* - 21/09/2009 12:33:13 AM 525 Views
I vote yes. - 21/09/2009 04:21:28 AM 1000 Views
Yes - 21/09/2009 06:12:37 AM 960 Views
Yes - 21/09/2009 09:32:56 AM 947 Views
Yes. Don't click the link if you don't want to read it. *NM* - 21/09/2009 02:39:16 PM 584 Views
No - 21/09/2009 06:15:19 PM 1023 Views
I think you missread the rules... - 21/09/2009 08:24:22 PM 1495 Views
so you want to give the admins all kinds of extra work? - 22/09/2009 02:16:56 AM 1011 Views
I'm strongly against it - 22/09/2009 05:06:13 AM 1184 Views
I hadn't thought about all that, you should have made some kind of pros and cons list - 22/09/2009 08:53:39 AM 1082 Views
Re: I'm strongly against it - 22/09/2009 11:45:26 AM 1008 Views
So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 12:03:16 PM 963 Views
Re: So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 12:16:57 PM 1134 Views
Re: So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 12:42:55 PM 1378 Views
Re: So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 01:20:58 PM 967 Views
Re: I'm strongly against it - 22/09/2009 02:39:55 PM 1153 Views
As I mentioned elsewhere - 22/09/2009 02:51:00 PM 893 Views
I had no idea about these legalities. - 22/09/2009 05:44:18 PM 963 Views
Re: I had no idea about these legalities. - 22/09/2009 06:25:20 PM 878 Views
Good to know. - 22/09/2009 10:19:57 PM 1085 Views
I'm shitfitng to no too. Hope more people change their votes. - 22/09/2009 10:34:22 PM 1195 Views
Re: Good to know. - 22/09/2009 11:01:35 PM 999 Views
Interesting - 23/09/2009 12:16:38 AM 1083 Views
How much is that infamous COT review to blame? - 24/09/2009 05:01:29 AM 893 Views
Well, Rand IS a transvestite - not exactly a spoiler anymore. - 22/09/2009 08:29:12 AM 972 Views
No, no, no, no, no! *NM* - 21/09/2009 06:31:22 PM 529 Views
You're going to ban/forbid spoiler filled reviews? Weak. - 22/09/2009 08:26:15 AM 942 Views
Ever hear of Napster? - 22/09/2009 12:11:02 PM 895 Views
But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 23/09/2009 12:36:35 AM 1067 Views
Sounds right to me. - 23/09/2009 12:27:57 PM 1154 Views
Thank you for the clarification. - 23/09/2009 07:04:13 PM 942 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 23/09/2009 07:33:11 PM 1238 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 27/09/2009 02:41:11 AM 1036 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 28/09/2009 07:53:46 PM 957 Views
Baloney. The two are not related at all. *NM* - 23/09/2009 07:00:47 PM 582 Views
Yes, as long as no-spoiler policy is employed. *NM* - 23/09/2009 12:04:41 AM 530 Views
No *NM* - 25/09/2009 07:05:03 AM 545 Views

Reply to Message