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.
' />
Do you guys want pre-release reviews on this board?
- 20/09/2009 08:40:03 AM
1917 Views
No, if people want to review the book, they can do it on their own blogs. *NM*
- 20/09/2009 09:27:18 AM
609 Views
Yes. Visitors who don't want them should simply avoid reading them. *NM*
- 20/09/2009 02:42:15 PM
678 Views
If it's going to be in a separate section, and it's spoiler free, why is "NO" even an option?
- 20/09/2009 05:04:11 PM
1126 Views
Absolutley! ^ If they don't want to read that section then it shouldn't be a problem. *NM*
- 21/09/2009 04:24:37 AM
631 Views
Re: Do you guys want pre-release reviews on this board?
- 20/09/2009 05:33:49 PM
1018 Views
Yes-- reviews are an essential part of any fanpage-- People have the option not to read them though *NM*
- 20/09/2009 06:53:42 PM
612 Views
Why is No even an option? there supposedly wont be spoilers duh *NM*
- 20/09/2009 11:40:37 PM
588 Views
Yes. If a review is clearly marked as such, please who don't want to read it don't have to. *NM*
- 21/09/2009 12:59:54 PM
1060 Views
If they are quarantined in an announced post, I don't see and problem for me, so yes I guess
- 21/09/2009 01:09:41 PM
1130 Views
No
- 21/09/2009 06:15:19 PM
1106 Views
I think you missread the rules...
- 21/09/2009 08:24:22 PM
1547 Views
so you want to give the admins all kinds of extra work?
- 22/09/2009 02:16:56 AM
1074 Views
I'm strongly against it
- 22/09/2009 05:06:13 AM
1270 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
1183 Views
- 22/09/2009 08:53:39 AM
1183 Views
Re: I'm strongly against it
- 22/09/2009 11:45:26 AM
1083 Views
So are you going to be the one to enforce this?
- 22/09/2009 12:03:16 PM
1019 Views
Re: So are you going to be the one to enforce this?
- 22/09/2009 12:16:57 PM
1208 Views
Re: I'm strongly against it
- 22/09/2009 02:39:55 PM
1232 Views
I had no idea about these legalities.
- 22/09/2009 05:44:18 PM
1054 Views
Re: I had no idea about these legalities.
- 22/09/2009 06:25:20 PM
956 Views
Good to know.
- 22/09/2009 10:19:57 PM
1180 Views
I'm shitfitng to no too. Hope more people change their votes.
- 22/09/2009 10:34:22 PM
1280 Views
You're going to ban/forbid spoiler filled reviews? Weak.
- 22/09/2009 08:26:15 AM
1020 Views
Ever hear of Napster?
- 22/09/2009 12:11:02 PM
939 Views
But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself.
- 23/09/2009 12:36:35 AM
1147 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself.
- 23/09/2009 07:33:11 PM
1302 Views

*NM*