Active Users:882 Time:15/11/2024 08:59:37 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 1575 Views
Yes. - 20/09/2009 11:56:22 AM 923 Views
Sorry wrong place. *NM* - 20/09/2009 05:31:27 PM 408 Views
Yes - 20/09/2009 01:12:18 PM 843 Views
No. *NM* - 20/09/2009 01:26:48 PM 413 Views
No, I prefer to see them after the 27th. - 20/09/2009 01:42:38 PM 710 Views
They don't have to read them if they don't want to *NM* - 21/09/2009 01:54:30 AM 407 Views
NO! *NM* - 20/09/2009 02:05:47 PM 459 Views
No *NM* - 20/09/2009 02:22:15 PM 510 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 03:08:41 PM 459 Views
Yes please! *NM* - 20/09/2009 03:40:41 PM 464 Views
NO *NM* - 20/09/2009 04:16:55 PM 411 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 04:17:32 PM 457 Views
Re: Do you guys want pre-release reviews on this board? - 20/09/2009 05:33:49 PM 723 Views
I just hate getting interupted. even if I'm at work *NM* - 21/09/2009 06:12:13 PM 405 Views
Sorry wrong place *NM* - 21/09/2009 06:12:54 PM 419 Views
We need them to maintain the spike in activity. - 20/09/2009 05:34:14 PM 820 Views
YES. *NM* - 20/09/2009 05:44:48 PM 425 Views
Can anyone who voted no explain why? - 20/09/2009 05:51:51 PM 745 Views
Yes, why not? - 20/09/2009 06:18:42 PM 1012 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 06:30:54 PM 390 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 06:39:34 PM 396 Views
Yes. I see no reason not to. *NM* - 20/09/2009 07:08:47 PM 401 Views
No, I'll just read them and then go regretting it *NM* - 20/09/2009 07:18:27 PM 396 Views
Yes! - 20/09/2009 07:30:59 PM 725 Views
yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 07:46:37 PM 456 Views
Yes - 20/09/2009 08:34:03 PM 670 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 10:08:42 PM 407 Views
Yes *NM* - 20/09/2009 10:17:51 PM 409 Views
Yes- Give ppl the option to see the reviews *NM* - 21/09/2009 12:03:27 AM 399 Views
Yes *NM* - 21/09/2009 12:33:13 AM 374 Views
I vote yes. - 21/09/2009 04:21:28 AM 747 Views
Yes - 21/09/2009 06:12:37 AM 721 Views
Yes - 21/09/2009 09:32:56 AM 715 Views
Yes. Don't click the link if you don't want to read it. *NM* - 21/09/2009 02:39:16 PM 434 Views
No - 21/09/2009 06:15:19 PM 796 Views
I think you missread the rules... - 21/09/2009 08:24:22 PM 1255 Views
so you want to give the admins all kinds of extra work? - 22/09/2009 02:16:56 AM 762 Views
I'm strongly against it - 22/09/2009 05:06:13 AM 896 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 837 Views
Re: I'm strongly against it - 22/09/2009 11:45:26 AM 763 Views
So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 12:03:16 PM 730 Views
Re: So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 12:16:57 PM 892 Views
Re: So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 12:42:55 PM 1130 Views
Re: So are you going to be the one to enforce this? - 22/09/2009 01:20:58 PM 723 Views
Re: I'm strongly against it - 22/09/2009 02:39:55 PM 912 Views
As I mentioned elsewhere - 22/09/2009 02:51:00 PM 648 Views
I had no idea about these legalities. - 22/09/2009 05:44:18 PM 717 Views
Re: I had no idea about these legalities. - 22/09/2009 06:25:20 PM 622 Views
Good to know. - 22/09/2009 10:19:57 PM 816 Views
I'm shitfitng to no too. Hope more people change their votes. - 22/09/2009 10:34:22 PM 958 Views
Re: Good to know. - 22/09/2009 11:01:35 PM 761 Views
Interesting - 23/09/2009 12:16:38 AM 844 Views
How much is that infamous COT review to blame? - 24/09/2009 05:01:29 AM 617 Views
Well, Rand IS a transvestite - not exactly a spoiler anymore. - 22/09/2009 08:29:12 AM 727 Views
No, no, no, no, no! *NM* - 21/09/2009 06:31:22 PM 377 Views
You're going to ban/forbid spoiler filled reviews? Weak. - 22/09/2009 08:26:15 AM 690 Views
Ever hear of Napster? - 22/09/2009 12:11:02 PM 684 Views
But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 23/09/2009 12:36:35 AM 810 Views
Sounds right to me. - 23/09/2009 12:27:57 PM 913 Views
Thank you for the clarification. - 23/09/2009 07:04:13 PM 737 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 23/09/2009 07:33:11 PM 963 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 27/09/2009 02:41:11 AM 776 Views
Re: But that only applies to piracy of the actual book itself. - 28/09/2009 07:53:46 PM 705 Views
Baloney. The two are not related at all. *NM* - 23/09/2009 07:00:47 PM 435 Views
Yes, as long as no-spoiler policy is employed. *NM* - 23/09/2009 12:04:41 AM 385 Views
No *NM* - 25/09/2009 07:05:03 AM 395 Views

Reply to Message