Well, It looks like the good times are over!

[PS Power]

The sales are fine enough, I was just hoping that this would be the one that would break into the big time. Now it won't be. There's a delicate time window where that can happen, and the attack (at this point I don't care if it was done out of spite or for economic reasons) managed to do just enough to stop that from happening. If others hadn't piled in with some positive reviews the whole series would functionally be a loss by this point.

I don't know why people do what they do online. I think it's that people don't really connect with others.

[Korwin]

On the whole top100 thing, while it might be cruel to us Readers
you might want to go the preorder route.
While we here on the Forum all (I think) buy your books, we don't to it at exactly the same time.
With preorder (as I understand it) those orders will all Count for an single Point in time, which might help...

[Jockla]

Damn. Just finished the books under discussion, and checked in here to see what you're planning next Dale - to find this uproar.

If it cheers you up at all, I rate books by how many times I re-read them.
Although I don't quite have all your books - don't have Greasepaint/Dead End/Crayons/Terror - I do have most of them, and have read all of them with the exception of the latest at least twice.
Keeley series - 7 times
Y.A. -3 times
Infected -2 times
Lament -8 times (just finished latest run through before getting E.B. x3)
Gwen -11 times

Prior to finding your books my previous record was 9 times for the Belgariad by Eddings, and since I've had those since the '80s I think they've kind of been trumped.

Also, take some heart from the fact that if they're trying to sabotage you, they must think you're a threat.

[bdrosen]

I know that fake reviews solicited by a company or author are illegal, but I think fake reviews solicited by a competitor are illegal as well. Even if they are, one would likely need to prove that they are fake. For example, the reviewer never actually read the book at all, the reviewer is somebody other than they represented themselves as, etc. I imagine this would be harder to prove for a kindle book, than for a consumer of a service. (http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/b ... l?page=all or http://maximizesocialbusiness.com/astro ... egal-9985/)

Additionally, I think fake reviews could also let somebody sue for Defamation and Libel, where the burden of proof may be lower if it is a civil suit vs a criminal suit.

I'm not sure if this means that all beta readers who posted reviews on amazon need to disclose that they got a beta copy prior to the release since they were given a beta copy for the purpose of editing, not reviewing.

[PS Power]

Those are rules, not laws. Technically attacking a book, movie or person for the direct purpose of harming them either physically, mentally or financially is always against the law. It's also almost impossible to prove the intent of another person in court.

Amazon.com allows Beta readers to do book reviews, as long as they did not receive financial gain from it. so family members aren't allowed (since they might have a financial oar in the water) but people that have simply been given a book to review (not even just for beta reading for an actual review) is allowable. MOST of the early reviews from large publishers are paid for, directly, and still allowed. (Note the Early there. Once released they tend to garner reviews on their own, like everyone else.)

[bdrosen]

I think there are both rules (TOS) and laws. If you followed the links, you can see that the NY State Attorney General actually prosecuted a number of companies, as did Florida. Or are you referring to the fact that these come from the FTC vs congress? Or possibly even from false advertising statutes at a state level?

As for the reviews by people given books, I have seen a number of people writing reviews disclose this, although as you mentioned these may have been early or vine reviews posted before the book was released, so maybe the disclosure was more about being clear rather than being required. I suppose the fact that the reader gets an early copy of the book is not enough to qualify as a reward by itself ?

[PS Power]

As far as I know at this point, and I have looked into this a lot, a free book is NOT considered a reward. Even if it's a thirty dollar hard back copy of an author that is probably going to be a best seller. Amazon.com was going to make that a rule, at one point, but they were pushed into allowing the big five to do it, since they get a lot of traction that way. Amazon basically said "fine, then the Indies can do it too!" Which is where we've stood on the matter for the last two or three years.

[bdrosen]

For me, the reward would not be the book itself but getting access to it early. This would be particularly relevant for big five based publishers since the delay between rough draft complete and general availability is a longer longer for them then it is for indies generally. For example, if I was waiting for the last Robert Jordan book (actually written by Brandon Sanderson) for years, then getting access to it 2 or 3 months early is much more valuable than simply getting it for free. I think this is the premise that Baen goes with by selling ARC copies for $15, but selling them for $10 or so once they go on sale generally.

[Korwin]

[Korwin]