No, and that's what i'm saying - everyone is defending their criticism by hiding behind the fact that it's okay to criticize writers, but none of them actually read the book. That's is hypocrisy at its finest.
Let's examine this statement, shall we?
Your cover sucks.
You shoulda asked one of us mooks to do you one. It'd've been all flashy and psychologically imposing.
A critique of the cover-art. Appears to be relatively fair.
ive just read it, its ok its not bad either.
ive read books that have more imagination, but of course not everyone has the same taste in stuff, good start and good job.
A brief critique of the book itself after having apparently read it. This seems fair, too.
It's a vanity press product.
I'm going to need more incentive before I even try to read it. Writers working to get published tend to view vanity presses as, well, contemptible.
I don't mean to be harsh here, I respect what you've done, but lots of people can produce a novel-length manuscript. I've done it four or five times. It's getting one that's publishable that's a feat.
A critique of
how the book was published. I know nothing of the subject [evidenced by my earlier error], but his criticism does not seem to be unfair or insulting towards Gai Daigoji.
Now, given that only three criticisms have been made in this thread, and only
one defended, it's fair to say you're overreacting here. If, for example, there had been a barrage of badly written, overtly insulting posts by posters who had obviously failed to read the book, your criticisms would have been justified. However, given that the only criticism of the content has been made by someone who
has actually read the book [ignoring the fact that said criticism wasn't even all that criticising], I believe it's safe to ask you to get off your ****ing high horse.
We've hijacked Gai's thread for long enough, back to the topic at hand.
