Active Users:640 Time:10/11/2026 12:28:07 AM
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 2166 Views
Yes. - 20/09/2009 11:56:22 AM 1523 Views
Sorry wrong place. *NM* - 20/09/2009 05:31:27 PM 749 Views
Yes - 20/09/2009 01:12:18 PM 1423 Views
No. *NM* - 20/09/2009 01:26:48 PM 752 Views
No, I prefer to see them after the 27th. - 20/09/2009 01:42:38 PM 1232 Views
They don't have to read them if they don't want to *NM* - 21/09/2009 01:54:30 AM 764 Views
NO! *NM* - 20/09/2009 02:05:47 PM 788 Views
No *NM* - 20/09/2009 02:22:15 PM 914 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 03:08:41 PM 812 Views
Yes please! *NM* - 20/09/2009 03:40:41 PM 795 Views
NO *NM* - 20/09/2009 04:16:55 PM 774 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 04:17:32 PM 810 Views
Re: Do you guys want pre-release reviews on this board? - 20/09/2009 05:33:49 PM 1297 Views
I just hate getting interupted. even if I'm at work *NM* - 21/09/2009 06:12:13 PM 736 Views
Sorry wrong place *NM* - 21/09/2009 06:12:54 PM 738 Views
We need them to maintain the spike in activity. - 20/09/2009 05:34:14 PM 1399 Views
YES. *NM* - 20/09/2009 05:44:48 PM 769 Views
Can anyone who voted no explain why? - 20/09/2009 05:51:51 PM 1268 Views
Yes, why not? - 20/09/2009 06:18:42 PM 1634 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 06:30:54 PM 741 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 06:39:34 PM 725 Views
Yes. I see no reason not to. *NM* - 20/09/2009 07:08:47 PM 725 Views
No, I'll just read them and then go regretting it *NM* - 20/09/2009 07:18:27 PM 766 Views
Yes! - 20/09/2009 07:30:59 PM 1292 Views
yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 07:46:37 PM 801 Views
Yes - 20/09/2009 08:34:03 PM 1217 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 10:08:42 PM 715 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 10:17:51 PM 760 Views
Yes- Give ppl the option to see the reviews *NM* - 21/09/2009 12:03:27 AM 736 Views
Yes *NM* - 21/09/2009 12:33:13 AM 690 Views
I vote yes. - 21/09/2009 04:21:28 AM 1394 Views
Yes - 21/09/2009 06:12:37 AM 1291 Views
Yes - 21/09/2009 09:32:56 AM 1269 Views
Yes. Don't click the link if you don't want to read it. *NM* - 21/09/2009 02:39:16 PM 797 Views
No - 21/09/2009 06:15:19 PM 1350 Views
I think you missread the rules... - 21/09/2009 08:24:22 PM 1813 Views
so you want to give the admins all kinds of extra work? - 22/09/2009 02:16:56 AM 1353 Views
I'm strongly against it - 22/09/2009 05:06:13 AM 1512 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 1466 Views
Re: I'm strongly against it - 22/09/2009 11:45:26 AM 1354 Views
So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 12:03:16 PM 1261 Views
Re: So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 12:16:57 PM 1478 Views
Re: So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 12:42:55 PM 1681 Views
Re: So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 01:20:58 PM 1338 Views
Re: I'm strongly against it - 22/09/2009 02:39:55 PM 1505 Views
As I mentioned elsewhere - 22/09/2009 02:51:00 PM 1176 Views
I had no idea about these legalities. - 22/09/2009 05:44:18 PM 1303 Views
Re: I had no idea about these legalities. - 22/09/2009 06:25:20 PM 1239 Views
Good to know. - 22/09/2009 10:19:57 PM 1454 Views
I'm shitfitng to no too. Hope more people change their votes. - 22/09/2009 10:34:22 PM 1554 Views
Re: Good to know. - 22/09/2009 11:01:35 PM 1322 Views
Interesting - 23/09/2009 12:16:38 AM 1444 Views
How much is that infamous COT review to blame? - 24/09/2009 05:01:29 AM 1240 Views
Well, Rand IS a transvestite - not exactly a spoiler anymore. - 22/09/2009 08:29:12 AM 1266 Views
No, no, no, no, no! *NM* - 21/09/2009 06:31:22 PM 694 Views
You're going to ban/forbid spoiler filled reviews? Weak. - 22/09/2009 08:26:15 AM 1305 Views
Ever hear of Napster? - 22/09/2009 12:11:02 PM 1199 Views
But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 23/09/2009 12:36:35 AM 1446 Views
Sounds right to me. - 23/09/2009 12:27:57 PM 1541 Views
Thank you for the clarification. - 23/09/2009 07:04:13 PM 1219 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 23/09/2009 07:33:11 PM 1594 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 27/09/2009 02:41:11 AM 1410 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 28/09/2009 07:53:46 PM 1289 Views
Baloney. The two are not related at all. *NM* - 23/09/2009 07:00:47 PM 734 Views
Yes, as long as no-spoiler policy is employed. *NM* - 23/09/2009 12:04:41 AM 733 Views
No *NM* - 25/09/2009 07:05:03 AM 702 Views

Reply to Message