The lines of interaction.

While I have no specific advice, I thought you handled it very professionally when LJ-friends reviewed Feed in the discussion post. You never got "grr" with negative responses, and gave happy-but-not-gushing responses to all who enjoyed it. It blended well.

Twitter is tricky. If I link one of my reviews on there, I might put the author's twitter name, but I would do that if I wanted my followers to go check out the author's Twitter, rather than particularly wanting (or expecting) the author to read it. So unless I specifically "@" a "celeb" (I'm counting authors in that term) and say, "Hey, I just reviewed your book, blah de blah," I don't intend for the author to read it. Not that the author CAN'T, clearly.

re: boundaries for behaving politely toward authors, I think no one should act on the Internet differently than they would in real life. I am a loud, opinionated person, and if I don't like a book, I'll say so, both IRL and online. That being said, if I know I'm having a REALLY negative-emotion reaction to a book, I try to wait a little before reviewing it so that I can be as objective as possible. I also would not personally attack an author in a review, no matter how much I hated the book. I write reviews for the readers, so I try and point out what exactly I disliked (and liked; usually there's a bit of both.).

(PS my book-blog is a blogspot, not an LJ, if anyone wanders over there looking for reviews ;))

I believe that authors have a right to defend themselves if there is an egregrious error or personal slander in a review. Defending other authors is touchy, but people have a right to stand up for their friends if the above happens. I think that making a blog post or other public statement about the above is taking it too far except in the most extreme cases. (Internet pile-ons can be brutal, and I've seen them happen on tumblr for the use of one word in ignorance.)

I think it is very thoughtful when authors comment positively on reviews--it's brightened my reviewing heart, certainly.

The boundaries are where you set them. We ought to respect that. I have reviews of your books up on the Chapters website, but since that's akin to Amazon and you've mentioned that you don't want to know about that I haven't mentioned it. Chapters is significantly smaller, but then, so is Canada's population.

Boundaries can be odd, we, the readers that is, have to remember that while we feel that we know you through your writing and blog. And that we may have talked one or twice. And in my case, you have auctioned me off (G) we don't have a relationship. You don't have the energy to have THAT many close personal friends. It simply isn't reasonable. So I might think "I wonder if ...." I could THINK it. But I couldn't actually ask it. Although what is the worst you could say if I asked you privately? I'm not to sure how to reach you that way? I'm not going to ask in a public forum. That would be rude. And would be crossing over way to many boundaries. Sorry my brain wanders sometimes. Seriously I would like to ask you something in private, and I'm not sure the best way to do that.

When I @ you on Twitter I'm tickled pink when you respond but I don't expect it and I certainly don't get bent out of shape if you don't. You're too busy for your own good and I grok that. Of course, a lot of times when I do that I'm tipping my followers to your music and books and a response on your part isn't at all required.

I do have a quirk, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Money is scarce so I'm very picky where I spend it. I'm far more likely to buy the books, music, and other products of someone that is "friendly" on the internet. Someone who responds politely to fans at least occasionally and behaves with integrity. I honestly bought Rosemary & Rue on Kindle the first time because I'd been following your blog and I liked you. Then of course I was hooked. A good many of the authors I read regularly I "met" first on the internet.

I can recall two occasions when I've gotten authors' responses to my online reviews. I was flattered that they'd noticed. One called mine a "rave" review (I liked this book but didn't think I was quite gushing), so we were both happy. Another disagreed with some points on my review but was respectful. He did use the annoying "Well, why don't you write something yourself?" line, but I told him politely that I had written some stories and even had a couple published, and acknowledged the difficulty.

Just BTW, my review of Feed is here. Respond however you like, or not.

I don't see how anyone could expect personal responses from someone with thousands of 'followers' (or billions in the case of certain deities), so I don't see that you could reasonably be considered rude because you didn't respond to a few prayers tweets. A hand-written and decorated letter, on the other hand *g*...

Great post :)

I've been lucky so far. I haven't had any bad (as in 'unkind')reviews yet. I've seen a few downright spiteful 'reviews' for other people's books on Amazon. I like to think I could resist responding if I got one like those, but it would be awfully tempting.

It's perfectly understandable for a reader who didn't enjoy a book to say so, but mean personal attacks are out of order, no matter what the venue - at least, that's my take on it.

No clue how twitter should work, but I do wish it was ok to respond to Critical reviews (as opposed to negative ones). They reviewed 'Feed' at Strange Horizons and while the reviewer liked the book a lot, he seemed to be describing a very different set of characters (in short: the whole thing works best when interpreteted as a scathing satire of modern journalism and Georgia is actually a horrible journalist...but the book is great!). It kept making me go "whut?!?"

OTOH, I just got 'Late Eclipses' delivered at work and am trying to figure out how to read it immediately without getting fired. :-P

I think the @replies are a whole new kettle of fish. Personally, if it's an @reply notifying me of a review, I read the review and perhaps say "Thanks for reviewing!" If it's an actual message, written to me rather than as a general notification, I'll engage in that sort of dialogue you do with email. But I"m always careful about it, as Twitter is public...

I'm not an author or a reviewer, but I do share twitter and facebook and a bunch of email lists with a lot of people who are my paying customers (the joy of working as a vendor to a fairly small industry).

In many ways it's the same thing. I always respond professionally, and in my "work" persona on my "work" accounts. My "personal" accounts are a lot wilder, but I always remember that some of the people following them are my customers. Laura is much the same. We both have intentionally chosen "our personality is our brand" as a marketing approach, and I think that's an approach that's a natural for many authors.

Part of that is remembering that you're always "on" any time you're in any forum you share with potential customers (meaning any public forum, and some private fora). And that while it's a really good thing for customers and partners, both current and potential, to see you as a real person and see your real life, it's also good for that life to be slightly edited for that audience. You're spinning an ongoing tale as to who you are, that's close to, but not identical to who you are. (I have a few private fora, and a few public personas not connected to me, where I don't need to do that, though, and I think that's a healthy thing).

I do think it's important to respond to any direct inquiry that seems to be expecting an answer, as much as you can. Email to you, twitter @ing, comments you notice in public fora that ask for a response from you... But the driving factor should be "what's the end result of this interaction going to be?". If the end result is one reader happy, that's a win and you should do it. If the end result is a long frustrating interaction that eats up a bunch of your time, or an appearance of being intrusive that makes a forum upset or likely to self-censor, you shouldn't do it. Sometimes that answer can be semantically empty but still a response - which lets you avoid the snotty bitch / come off as crazy dilemma.

I'm on several mailing lists where every other participant is either an existing customer or a potential customer. I'm very careful there to _not_ mention our product or services, unless someone else (an existing customer, usually) specifically, publicly asks me to. That's one of the rules I've created for myself for that sort of forum as an easy to follow implication of "what's the end result of this interaction going to be?".

I think your existing rules, including "don't respond to reviews" are excellent, and I think they follow perfectly from "what's the end result of this interaction going to be?" in protecting your sanity, the free exchange of views in comment threads and encouraging people to talk freely about your books. You can probably create rules for other fora, such as twitter and facebook, that are just as good based on the same reasoning. Facebook tagging and liking, for instance, aren't something that's really asking for a response, so it's not something you should feel a need to respond to (unless there's something in the particular instance that makes you feel you want to respond).

But don't stress it. Your online persona is doing just fine. When I think about people who are handling social media to talk to their base well I think of Gaiman, Scalzi, Wheaton and McGuire. At some point really soon, though, you're going to hit the point where you simply don't have the time to respond to everything, and you're going to have to prioritize and decide what sort of interaction with "your public" gives you the most bang for the minute.

I definitely don't expect a response on twitter. Like sfpanda, I think I linked to your username to alert other people. I was in the middle of a readathon and thought people might be curious which books I was devouring/reading. And it was just a general "Hey, another new reader!" message to you. If you feel the urge to respond, great, but please don't feel obligated. Interaction is nice and makes my day and all, but I know how busy writers are. I am quite happy just to see updates in your twitter of upcoming books/stories. Or turning Barbies into action heroines. Whichever works.

(If I have Aqua stuck in my head all day, I will come find someone!)

off topic, but I love that pendant in your icon!

I try not to squick people out or get over-enthusiastic about something. Sometimes my mental filters have a hole, but I patch those quickly.

Personally, I think that you shouldn't respond to anything. I like the idea of there being a distance between writer and reader. It's cool that writers and creative types respond to things, but I don't see as necessary, or even desirable.

This comes from years of professionally absorbing the worst reviews and not responding. Granted, reviews of art exhibitions are not reviews of books, and curators are not authors. But I just like that wall to be maintained, and like the idea that unless an outright lie is spoken, we are adult enough to take bad reviews.

But I admit that I am really not part of "new media" and social networking beyond LJ. I live in some very odd past. But if I'm going to be a dinosaur, at least I know you'll invite me to the best dino dance parties.

You know, as long as people identify themselves in public places - I sure can forgive a lot without saying anything publicly.

Say nasty things, and don't even give a method to respond in a less public venue? That's not even fair. I fear I don't have a lot of patience with that kind of thing, for that reason.

I was a kid around a lot of authors - and was very spoiled and spanked at the same time. I think the way you handle these issues shows a great deal of mental poise and compassion. It's what you would like in return and that is fair.

In my writing group, we have an unwritten rule that we're not allowed to respond to the group's critiques. We can request that the criticism is tipped in a certain direction, or speak up to ask for suggestions on fixing the holes, but we're not allowed to answer, "So why did your character suddenly do a total personality shift in this chapter?" or "Why did your character ditch all his worldly goods to backpack Europe?" If the text doesn't support it, readers are going to ask the same thing, generally, and we need to answer the questions in the text.

It's also to prepare us for the possibility of publication. There will be reviews that ask these questions, and, as much as we want to, we recognize it's a bad idea. Because you can quickly go from, "Those questions will be answered in book 2" to "Why do you all hate me? Whyyyyyyy?"

Most of us are one step removed from that Goodreads fiasco, where an "author" (she was published by a vanity press) went off on someone who'd reviewed her, and rated her one star.

I say most of us, because one member of the group is the object of the writer's ire. I'm being deliberately vague because I don't think you'd appreciate having your name linked to that . . . situation. But if you need details, I'll gladly e-mail you.

I will never be able to think of getting feedback from an author on my review without cringing. Granted, most authors are more mature than to personally attack someone over an unflattering review, but I'm still wary.

Miss Manners never had to deal with being a polite, professional working author in the Internet Age

Miss Manners is, I am happy to say, doing her inimitable thing right at the moment!

I have nothing to add but I have to say that as a casual (all right, make that occasionally obsessive) reader and someone who is "in charge" of my day-job-employer's social media presence, I find these kinds of posts fascinating.

I personally would feel . . . icky . . . bringing a review directly to the writer's attention. It feels kinda like saying, "Look at me! Look at me! Validate my existence!" Which makes me uncomfortable.

I personally appreciated that you took the time to point out a couple of my reviews of your work and linked to them.

Is it impolite to not reply to any of them?
Is it professional suicide?

I think, if it wouldn't destroy my writing career success, that's the option I'd choose.
I'd be unaware of any reviews unless I read them on LJ.