# Independent Appraisal & Rating Service



## The Dark One

In a different thread (somewhat derailed) it occurred to me that it would be a good idea to start up a ms appraisal and rating system (paid for) which gave an author both constructive feedback and a rating out of ten. Seven or above meant it was deemed to be of publishable quality and anything less than seven was effectively a rejection. The idea being that this was in recognition of the fact that many books rejected by mainstream publishers are of publishable quality, they simply don't fit with publishers' programs at the time.

Authors could learn from effective rejection and feedback and resubmit until they got the requisite score. This would also be a guarantee of quality to the book consuming public that any book that bore the independent rating (above seven) was worth purchasing.

Authors would submit their ms with the appraisal fee and it would be read and rated by two professional readers, both of whom would provide at least (say) 500 words on the strengths and weaknesses of the novel.

What do you think? Does anything like this already exist? Who would be interested in using the service and what should it cost?


----------



## buyjupiter

A quick check for "manuscript critique" brings up this through Writer's Digest: 2nd Draft Critique Service | Improve Your Writing | WritersDigestShop

My major concern would be how to do it so it wouldn't be seen as scammy. (It seems legit from what they say, but I've not used the service.) There are a lot of things out there designed to scam writers (and people) out of their hard earned money for a product that falsely proclaims success, for everyone, guaranteed.

This would, however you set it up, only work for those who are interested in growing as writers. There are some people who are more than happy to continue throwing stuff out into the market, even when they've gotten feedback it doesn't work.

I've done some critiquing (for free) elsewhere and it can get pretty ugly, even if you couch the critique in pleasant language. What provisions would you have in place in case someone thought you were maligning their darling and threatened the business or the persons conducting the business?

I've seen the going rate done by page or by hour. I think a page rate would seem fairer, $3-5 range per page? A minimum amount for a short story? Like $25 per short story or something like that?

You'd definitely want to think about how you'd define "professional reader". Is that someone with editing experience? Agent experience? Errand girl to the assistant to the assistant editor of an indie publisher?


----------



## The Dark One

Valid concerns. I'm not proposing to set this up myself, by the way, but a reputable organisation that maintained high standards would gradually acquire a reputation for non-scamminess. It would have to use numerous qualified professionals (however defined).

The price would have to reflect the service ethic of writers contributing to the community or would be otherwise beyond the means of some writers, but enough to value their time and judgment. No more than $200 total, shared between two readers with a bit for the organisation's overheads.

If you got it right it could be a great service for both writers and readers.


----------



## buyjupiter

I really wish there were a separate form for the plural "you" (I'm trying to cut "y'all" out of my writing and "one" is too formal). I didn't figure you(singular) wanted to take on the challenge of starting a business like this.

But this is something the freelance editors on the forum might want to consider adding to their services.


----------



## Philip Overby

I think this is a good idea, but of course anything like that always comes with some caveats.

1. What determines a professional reader? Someone who has read and critiqued a lot of stories? I guess the issue may be finding people who seem qualified enough to dispense advice to the point that it would be worth money.

2. There are already critiquing services out there that are free like Critters. Some people don't like their system, but they seem pretty successful. What would warrant charging for the reading service? I mean what would this service offer that others aren't?

3. I'd say things like this tend to involve writers critiquing other writers. Meaning a lot of times the person critiquing may not be able to read something strictly for entertainment or marketing value, which might be what a lot of writers would be looking for. Not to say writers critiquing writers is necessarily bad, it's very helpful obviously, but I can get that for free by trading critiques with someone I trust.

All that said, perhaps this proposed service would be most helpful for those that don't have time to trade critiques and just want some feedback before sending their work out into the world. Perhaps having a pool of readers who could be rated by the clients, much like freelance services function. Therefore if you're ranked 1 on a scale of 1-5, then you might be cheaper, but your reading is not as thorough. If you're ranked 5, then the writer submitting their manuscript might expect detailed beta reader notes. In this case, the clients and the service could help rank the feedback that they're receiving. Then if a reader says, "Yeah, I liked it" they'd probably get ranked 1 and not many people would use them. But if the reader gives detailed notes and spends time on it, then they may get ranked 4 or 5 and would be recommended by other writers.

I'm sure there would be some willing to submit to a service like this if it meant they could get tons of useful feedback in a short amount of time. I mean, me for instance, when I did some freelance writing, I was paid for the amount of words I wrote and then I had a deadline. If the freelance readers were given a deadline to get their comments in in order to get paid, it might increase the productivity. Money always speeds things along.

So that said, I think this is a good concept, but would need to be executed by the right people who not only have the reputation (like a Writer's Digest or some such), but also have the business acumen to pull off something like this without getting into messy lawsuits.

I also think Dark One's original proposal sounds good, in which authors strive to get their work to a certain rating level as well. That would make writers be more careful before sending their work to be published or self-published.


----------



## PaulineMRoss

I don't see any objective way to rate a book on a 1-10 scale. You can say: yes, it meets a minimum standard for grammar, spelling and punctuation. That's quantifiable. 

But having engaging characters? Having a sensible plot? Having credible motivations for characters' actions? These are very subjective. Something that one reader loves as a pacy, action-packed adventure may be another person's over the top explosion-fest with cardboard characters. What might be a character-driven, introspective and thoughtful read to one person is a whiny, angst-ridden pile of boredom to another. You can't reduce all of that to a single number and say: this one is 'publishable' and that one isn't. Whatever 'publishable' means.


----------



## C Hollis

In my mind, the pro readers would have to be former agents, professional editors, etc.  People with credentials.

As far as the benefit over your standard critique from fellow writers, this is where I may been seen as a bit harsh.
Publishing is a business, and a setup like this should be treated as such.  You're not submitting your work to your mother to get her stamp of approval, you are submitting your work to get (looking forward here) an industry recognized rating that must maintain its own integrity.  Therefore, you won't get the have-to-sugarcoat-to-not-discourage critique, you will get the hardcore no-nonsense truth as they see it.
As I mentioned in the other thread, whether the manuscript is salable on a grand scale shouldn't even be a consideration with this service.  Is it a well-written, complete (beginning, muddle, end) story?

I think the biggest hurdle, for the service, would be structuring the reviews and process in a manner where personal opinions are muted (won't be able to eliminate them).  You don't want writers to start saying things like "Well, Jane hates sci-fi, so she always gives low ratings to those stories.  Re-submit, maybe Bill will get the story.  He's a sci-fi geek."


----------



## Philip Overby

More good points made. These kind of things always have lots of issues to consider. I'm almost thinking doing something like oDesk or some of the bidding sites would be a good alternative. In this case, a site that focuses on fiction writing first and foremost. A network where you can find editors, cover artists, and potentially paid readers. oDesk often allows people to bid on a job by stating their qualifications, writing a cover letter, etc. In the case of a reader service, the writer would have several potential readers bid on the chance to read the novel. The writer would then chose who they wanted based on his or her skills, interests, etc. This could avoid the "so and so doesn't like action novels" and such. However, some don't like the bidding model. In this case, I think that might work.

When it comes to the need for a service like this, I definitely think it would be viable. I constantly see people looking for beta readers, but it always comes with the catch, "read mine and I'll read yours." While this is good in principle, some writers may find the time management spent reading dozens of other people's work just so they'll read theirs might not be the best thing for them.


----------



## PaulineMRoss

C Hollis said:


> As far as the benefit over your standard critique from fellow writers, this is where I may been seen as a bit harsh. [...] Therefore, you won't get the have-to-sugarcoat-to-not-discourage critique, you will get the hardcore no-nonsense truth as they see it.



Honestly, if a critique group is sugarcoating, it's time to find a new critique group. If a writer is just looking for someone to make encouraging noises, they're not ready for the real world. Any critique should be hardcore no-nonsense truth (which includes saying what works as well as what doesn't, of course). 

Otherwise, your points are well-made. I just have trouble imagining any system which can provide an objective assessment of quality in writing. But I guess that's just me.


----------



## BWFoster78

Dark One,

I think the service you've brought up is definitely needed.  There are a lot of authors out there like me who are thinking, "As far as I can tell, my work is up to snuff, but how can I be sure?"

I'd take the service a step farther, though.

Frankly, it's difficult to find good indie books.  The service could make extra money by pointing readers to the best books.  That also would make it more valuable for the author as they not only would get validation but marketing as well.


----------



## BWFoster78

PaulineMRoss said:


> I don't see any objective way to rate a book on a 1-10 scale. You can say: yes, it meets a minimum standard for grammar, spelling and punctuation. That's quantifiable.
> 
> But having engaging characters? Having a sensible plot? Having credible motivations for characters' actions? These are very subjective. Something that one reader loves as a pacy, action-packed adventure may be another person's over the top explosion-fest with cardboard characters. What might be a character-driven, introspective and thoughtful read to one person is a whiny, angst-ridden pile of boredom to another. You can't reduce all of that to a single number and say: this one is 'publishable' and that one isn't. Whatever 'publishable' means.



I'm not sure I agree with you here.

I'm reading an indie book now that I'm almost finished with.  Frankly, I'm not enjoying it that much.  However, I can tell you that the quality of the book is just fine; it's just that I don't particularly care for the story and characters.

The point is that a reader can objectively say, "Even though I didn't care for this book, the quality level is acceptable."

No one is going to like every book no matter how well done it is.  This service wouldn't be a "review" but a stamp of quality.  The point isn't to tell the reader, "Hey, you'll like this book."  It would be to tell the reader, "Hey, this author actually knows how to write.  Check out the reviews and see if the characters and story will appeal to you."


----------



## PaulineMRoss

BWFoster78 said:


> The point is that a reader can objectively say, "Even though I didn't care for this book, the quality level is acceptable."



Only if you can set a sensible measure for an acceptable quality level. Beyond the absolute minimum (correct grammar, punctuation and spelling), what determines that a book is acceptable? Someone upthread said something about having a beginning, middle and end, but that's pretty basic, too. And anything beyond that - relateable characters, a plot that makes sense, good description - is subjective, I would assert.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a great idea, in principle, I just don't see how it would work in practice.


----------



## BWFoster78

> Only if you can set a sensible measure for an acceptable quality level.



What's the famous quote about pornography?  Something like, "I can't define it, but I know what it is when I see it."

I kinda think it's the same for writing.  Even if I don't like a book, I can tell you whether or not the writing is of a sufficient quality, and I think I can do that even without a definitive measure of what that acceptable quality level is.

As a practical matter, maybe you take a few really well written short pieces as examples and say, "There are in the 8-10 range."  Then, take some decent ones and say, "These are in the 4-7 range."  Then, find some really poorly written crapola and say, "These are in the 1-3 range."  Every evaluator would be required to read the example pieces to get an idea of the quality.

Writing is so subjective that I'm not sure you'd ever get an acceptable definitive standard established.

Maybe, again as a practical matter, new evaluators go through an "training" period where their rankings are looked over by an experienced evaluator.

I do think that, since it's so subjective, perhaps The Dark Ones 10 point scale wouldn't work.  Maybe a "Terrible," "Acceptable," and "Good" system would be better.


----------



## The Dark One

Just to respond quickly to Pauline's question about rating, rating/evaluating books is what readers and publishers do all the time. Maybe not in some crass numerical way (despite the hugeness of goodreads) but they still do it in ways meaningful to themselves. That's why the proposed system would always use two reviewers to mitigate the taste issue but also to give confidence that at least two reviewers thought the book publishable (or not).

You could play about with the grading system, give guidance and moderate, just like any grading system at university.

The thing is we need an independent rating system which is valuable and affordable - giving advice to the 'rejected' and marketable oomph to the validated. The right people involved at the right price, doing something like what is proposed would be doing a great service to the independent publishing business.

They could even set  up their own imprint. Independent Publishers Co-op? It would rival mainstream publishers because they are nothing more than filters in the giant ocean of online crap...just like this would be.


----------



## MichaelSullivan

I certainly applaud the concept and see the need for such a thing, but I'm firmly with PaulineMRoss that there is no practical way to implement such a thing. Adherence to grammar is about the only thing you can attempt to judge but there is a world of difference between a grammatically correct book and one that weaves a compelling tale.  Then there are those who violate the rules of grammar for dramatic effect.  Cormac McCarthy's books would likely fail a "grammar test" given his use of fragments, lack of punctuation and run-on sentences, but given his Pulitzer Award and sales numbers the fact that he would score below the threshold really doesn't hold water.

With a single individual they can establish a criteria by which they judge books...and then they can rank the books as such.  Each of us has this ability based on our subjective preferences, but once we try to expand that beyond the individual everything falls apart. 

I've sold almost half a million English language books, and have thousands of positive reviews, but I...like everyone in the business...have the 1-star reviews that are completely baffled by how such a book could ever be published, let alone thought well of by others.  Even if populated by "professionals" like editors, publishers, and agents...consider how many books were rejected multiple times as "unworthy" and yet once they got out in front of people, they sold well and were loved by readers?  

Again I concur with the desire to fix something - I just don't think we can have any system that "grades" books considering the complexity and diversity of what makes a book "good."


----------



## danr62

I'm with Pauline and Michael here. There just isn't a good, objective way to do this.

Not only that, but trad authors have agents and editors to tell them if their books are publishable quaility or not, and self published authors, largely, wouldn't spend the money on this.


----------



## The Dark One

MichaelSullivan said:


> Even if populated by "professionals" like editors, publishers, and agents...consider how many books were rejected multiple times as "unworthy" and yet once they got out in front of people, they sold well and were loved by readers?
> 
> Again I concur with the desire to fix something - I just don't think we can have any system that "grades" books considering the complexity and diversity of what makes a book "good."



Let's not forget that those rejections occurred in the context of the current paradigm - ie, not many publishing slots available. The paradigm we're talking about is not limited by available slots, it is only limited by quality (however defined).

When I used to do slush pile reading, I wasn't reading for slots, just for publishable quality. I didn't have any training - just the confidence of the publisher. I think everyone would have their own idea of what is publishable and you might be surprised how easy it is to make a judgment in an area you felt competent to do so...after a bit of practice.

Anyway, I'm not proposing we do it. I'm proposing someone with decent credentials do it but unconstrained by the usual scarce publishing slots.


----------



## Philip Overby

I do think one thing that attracts self-publishers is not having to deal with gatekeepers to get their work published. A service like this would be most beneficial to readers looking for quality indie fiction. 

I've long thought a service that simulated a traditional publisher could be beneficial in some way for writers not sure if their writing is up to snuff yet. Maybe it could have like a group of fake publishers (maybe industry professionals, volunteers, etc.) who treat your manuscript as a traditional publisher would. Like they wouldn't publish anything, but still put the same level of scrutiny that a traditional publisher might in regards to their personal feelings about submissions. So even if the manuscript is "rejected" there would be other "simulated publishers" that you could submit your work to. Even if you disagree with their ideas, you at least got some feedback and could still self-publish your work either using the feedback or not. If your manuscript gets "accepted" perhaps the fake publishers could offer up some rewards for those authors by way of promotion of their self-published book, free cover art, reviews, etc. The "accepted" self-published books might get some kind of stamp of approval from the service. Something like this might be best done through some kind of start-up like Indiegogo or Kickstarter.

Of course this might just be a really complicated way of me saying, "get really thorough beta readers."


----------



## Caged Maiden

the hardest part of this for me is a star rating of sorts.  If I were going to self-publish, I'd certainly consider doing the equivalent of Paypal Verifying, sending my manuscript to an independent service to be read and "approved" for publishing.  However, I'd want a detailed reason for the grade, whether it was ten or five or one.  500 words wouldn't do it for me.  I know it takes a long time to read someone's novel... more if it's terrible... but the grading system should probably have an attached worksheet to briefly hit on all points.

If my book scored a 7, I wouldn't know whether that meant it was good but needed improvement or what.   Would 500 words possibly indicate that everything was great, apart from stilted dialogue throughout most of the story?  Notes would be really important.

Also, I see anther potential pitfall... I have had a lot of people beta read my WiP.  Some really enjoy my MC, a girl who is very naive.  Mostly men really seem to enjoy her parts of the story and they tell me so.  But women tend to hate this character.  Two have stopped reading because of her.  Wow.  Since women are my target audience... what do I do?  How could a service using only two readers, with 500 words of information, possibly deal with a problem like that?  Perfect grammar aside, I could get failed for the sake of turning off the reader.  

Concerns aside, I'd still use such a service if it existed.  I look at the number of other businesses that have purchased the best payment gateway I found (Authorize.net) and I recognize their stamps on every website I pass.  Once a badge is popularized, you sort of need it.  I'd certainly think that if such a rating system occurred, giving a book a stamp of approval, writers would seek it out (at least those who were serious).  It would be something that would be copy-catted and probably improved upon, though.

Also... let's face it $200 is nothing for said service.  With two people reading say, a 100k word novel... they are not making enough, unless maybe we're talking about skimming more than reading?  I can't really do that, so I'm not sure how it works.  Maybe you could crit the first three chapters like an agent would and either "request a partial" or "reject" the manuscript?


----------



## TWErvin2

One way I could see this possibly working is some independent organization could read a published work (at the request of the self-published author, probably for a fee) and if it met minimum standards:

Spelling/Grammar/Punctuation etc.
No Major Plot Holes

Adequate Dialogue
Storyline that goes somewhere

Maybe a 'stamp' of approval could be earned by the book by the organization. However, the two latter items that I listed, for example, would be subjective. It's much more difficult when one delves into subjective areas.

It would be even more effective if a stamp of disapproval would be included with those novels that did not make the cut.

Again, the subjective. There are some reviewers who are good at what they do, but I rarely agree with their opinion on a novel.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith

A way to minimize subjectivity would be increasing the sample size. Most reviews are done by one person, and therefore very subjective.

However, if a rating service (not a review service) employed a team of 20+ readers, and each reader independently graded the work on a scale of 1-5, the average would be a better representation of differing likes and dislikes. 

There would be no review. Simply a standard form for each reader to fill out at completion. Grades are compiled and averaged...done. Your book received a rating from "Such & Such Reader Group" of 3.8 stars....


----------



## TWErvin2

T.Allen.Smith said:


> However, if a rating service (not a review service) employed a team of 20+ readers, and each reader independently graded the work on a scale of 1-5, the average would be a better representation of differing likes and dislikes.


That would make it unfeasible...20 readers per title.

If a project opened with 1000 readers, and each reader could read 10 titles per week (2 per day), that would be: 26,000 titles per year. That's a drop in the ever growing self-publishing bucket...and that's with 1000 hired readers.

Then, with 20 readers for each book, what reasonable fee would be charged for the service? If a reader read 400 words per minute, a 80,000 word novel would take 3.33 hours. Say 4 hours per book after completing the form and a 15 minute break (thus in an 8 hour day two books could be read and evaluated). If paid roughly minimum wage (USA) at $8.00/hour, that would mean $640 to just pay the readers, plus overhead and paying managers, say $700 per book. I believe that fee for the service would be unlikely to attract many self-published authors. Since it's skilled labor, to an extent, $12.00/hour might be more reasonable, so that would be over $1000 to have the book read and properly rated.

Maybe if it could get off the ground and prove to be an asset to self-published authors, it might work, but to get that level of notoriety/confidence by readership, it would could easily take two years and quite a bit of advertisement/PR. Those costs would have to be recouped in addition to getting authors to pay up initially to get the process going for two years.

Or it would take someone with very deep pockets and a good vision (or some serious venture capital or a very impressive kickstarter campaign).


----------



## T.Allen.Smith

I don't disagree Terry. Everything you say is valid. Still, the only way to reduce subjectivity is to increase the sample size in any rating system.


----------



## The Dark One

The whole point of paying for the service is that you are paying for professional expertise in lieu of numerically valid objectivity. Simply wouldn't be feasible otherwise, and it would be up to the raters to acquire legitimacy and standing.


----------



## psychotick

Hi,

I agree the service is needed, but there's simply no way it's going to happen any time soon. There are just too many hurdles.

First there are over a million indie books on Amazon right now and more every day. If even one percent of authors saw this as something they'd want, what sort of group could meet the demand? Who has the resources?

Second, there's the question of indipendence. Said vetting body would have to be completely indipendent, and on top of that professional. So that means no authors, no publishers, no agents and not even fora like SFWA. Most of the industry would instantly be ruled out as potentially biased.

Then there's name brand issue. What does it mean to a reader to see that a book is vetted as four stars by Joe Blogs? They have to know the name or it means nothing.

After that there's the question of what the author does with the vet. He wants to use it assuming it's good, but Amazon won't allow any reviews that have been paid for. They also disallow loads of others for various reasons. So a book could be vetted and it still be completely useless to the author.

Then there's subjectivity. As has been said, sometimes even the rules of grammar are broken deliberately by authors. Can you really grade a book down for that? As for plot and character etc, what one person likes another hates. The whole thing becomes completely subjective.

There are just too many hurdles in my view. It's why I said it wouldn't happen in 2014 in my predictions blog.

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## C Hollis

Some of the greatest inventions began with the masses screaming it couldn't be done.


----------



## Devor

The Dark One said:


> In a different thread (somewhat derailed) it occurred to me that it would be a good idea to start up a ms appraisal and rating system (paid for) which gave an author both constructive feedback and a rating out of ten.



So are you paying for the edit, the review or the approval?  I think it would be better to separate the services.

What the industry needs, I think, is a stamp (or, y'know, several competing stamps would do).  The stamp would simply mean:

"Mythic Scribes (or whoever) deems that this book is up to traditionally published standards."

And that's it.  No critiques.  No rating.  No reviews.  No feedback.  Submit the book, pay your fee, and either you get the stamp or you don't.  Thanks for submitting.  If you're rejected you can resubmit in six months after editing.  No hassles.

Because I don't need help picking out which self-published book to read.  I need help picking out which books are _readable_.  Get people over that hurdle, and you're gold.

Done right that one thing might fix the whole industry.


----------



## PaulineMRoss

Devor said:


> What the industry needs, I think, is a stamp (or, y'know, several competing stamps would do).  The stamp would simply mean:
> "Mythic Scribes (or whoever) deems that this book is up to traditionally published standards."
> And that's it.  No critiques.  No rating.  No reviews.  No feedback.  Submit the book, pay your fee, and either you get the stamp or you don't.



There already are people who will do that. Pay a fee, get a stamp (or not). And do I trust them? Of course not. Anything the author has paid for is suspect. Plus, the ones I've seen have given stamps to books that I don't think are up to standard.

Whatever system evolves, it has to be independent of anyone with a vested interest in the books concerned. Goodreads is the nearest thing to independent, but it's deeply flawed too. Maybe we need a Rotten Tomatoes for books.


----------



## Devor

PaulineMRoss said:


> There already are people who will do that. Pay a fee, get a stamp (or not). And do I trust them? Of course not. Anything the author has paid for is suspect. Plus, the ones I've seen have given stamps to books that I don't think are up to standard.
> 
> Whatever system evolves, it has to be independent of anyone with a vested interest in the books concerned. Goodreads is the nearest thing to independent, but it's deeply flawed too. Maybe we need a Rotten Tomatoes for books.



There's only two ways to do it.  Either you find a way to make money doing it, or you crowdsource it to the public.  There's too many books to do anything else.  But any time you outsource it to the community, you let in too many variables and unknowns for quality control.  At least when there's money involved there are ways to earn trust and build a reputation over time.


----------



## psychotick

Hi,

Had a small brainwave about this, and have already suggested it to Amazon and put it out for comment on Kindle Boards.

A seal of approval is if not impossible the next thing to it. There are just too many hurdles in my view. But a seal of sales is a different thing.

Now here I'm thinking of the music industry, specifically gold records and platinum records. Now everyone knows that gold records and platinum records relate to sales. But they are also perceived rightly or wrongly as a stamp of apporval of some sort. They tell buyers, x thousand people have bought this record. And buyers see this and say well if x thousand people have bought this it can't be too terrible. I mean the number of times I've heard people arguing about songs and records and one guy says it's crap and the other says well it went double platinum etc in responce is ridiculous.

You can do the same thing with books. So here I'd be thinking golden quills(?) Say your book gets a silver for a thousand sales. A gold for ten thousand. Platinum for a hundred thousand. Amazon processes the sales and when a book achieves the requisite number the quill is automatically stamped on the book page. And then readers see this, and automatically know that this book has sold a certain number of sales.

That's prestige for the author (something he can take to agents, publishers and professional author bodies if he chooses to), a sort of quality stamp for the book, and comfort for the readers. It's also an obvious marketing tool.

And in terms of the quality issue, it does add to that, for the same reason that the quill brings a measure of comfort to readers. The theory is that if a book has sold a thousand copies it must have some basic qualty. While those that don't have that sort of quality should never achieve it. People presumably won't buy them.

This works a little better than a sales rank, since ranks go up and down, and total sales just rise, slowly or quickly. Also I suspect most readers don't even notice a book's sales rank.

My main proviso would be that it could only be for books actually sold (no freebies since people take anything free).

What do you guys think? Does it answer some of the issues raised?

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## The Dark One

Answers some questions but not the main one for me...I was talking about a badge of quality that assures a purchaser that they're buying something written and edited to publishable quality (in the opinion of the raters). Your system is arguably indicative of quality but is also just a popularity contest. What's to stop an author buying a 1000 copies of their own book as a marketing exercise?

I think there are less problems with my proposed system than some are making out. We're just asking for people of reputable standing in the publishing biz to make the same assessments publishing professionals make all the time about a book, with the exception that they're not being asked to invest in it.


----------



## PaulineMRoss

psychotick said:


> So here I'd be thinking golden quills(?) Say your book gets a silver for a thousand sales. A gold for ten thousand. Platinum for a hundred thousand. Amazon processes the sales and when a book achieves the requisite number the quill is automatically stamped on the book page. And then readers see this, and automatically know that this book has sold a certain number of sales.



I quite like that idea. Any book that's sold a thousand copies (which have not been returned in disgust) is going to be at least readable, even if it's not necessarily the best thing ever written.

Some problems though. Firstly, the catch-22 - for an unknown author, how do you get sales when you don't have the quill? And how do you get the quill when you don't have the sales? So it doesn't help anyone to get those initial sales.

Secondly, how do you count sales? Total worldwide (if you could even get those numbers)? Amazon.com? All Amazons added together? Bookseller numbers? Publisher numbers? Amazon doesn't even release sales numbers at the moment.

What I could see happening is Amazon setting up its own system along these lines, without giving away how many actual copies have been sold. They are the people most in need of some kind of quality stamp of approval, and this is a blindingly cheap and easy system to implement that gives potential purchasers some confidence.

Nice idea.


----------



## psychotick

Hi,

Dark One, this is a very simple system that requires none of the things your system does. There's no need for reviewers. No need for professional bodies to give a stamp of approval. No need for authors to pay anything. No need for readers to know the standing of the body doing the review. The only thing that's needed as I see it is a counter field on a computer. Naturally it's not going to be nearly as effective in reviewing books as your system. But the point is that it provides some evidence of quality where currently there's almost nothing.

And there's nothing to stop publishers buying up the first thousan copies. But they're doing that now just to get their books on best seller lists - eg Nigella Lawson's soon to be ex Mr. Satchi!

Pauline, as I see it this would work much as golden records do. Thus artists have gold records for the one song in different countries. So I would assume a book would have a quill in Amazon.UK and another in Amazon.com. It would only be an Amazon system, but since they're the lion's share of the ebook market that's probably ok. And no - it does nothing for authors trying to get their first books noticed. But that's not really the purpose of a quality seal. It's to give some reassurance to readers.

But, as I say, if you set the initial quill (silver?) quite low, say a thousand books, it's not that hard for a book with a proper edit, good cover and decent blurb to reach it, whereas hopefully the others won't. Or not for fifty years!

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## Devor

I think any credential that only tracks sales is going to favor traditionally published or established authors.  Music companies use "Gold Albums" to spur sales for their biggest records.  They don't use it to promote the little guy with talent.  I don't oppose the idea, per say, but I don't think it does the job of sorting the slush pile.  It only shows which ones have already kicked off the slush.

To put out other ideas, a company like Amazon could crowdsource the job, but you'd need a complicated way of ranking not just the books, but the reviewers.  Like maybe, if a reviewer has a dozen reviews that each get a dozen-or-more likes, then that reviewer could check off books to receive a this-book-is-readable star.  A book which gets two stars gets a label.  That kind of thing.


----------



## The Dark One

Agree with the point about the quill system favouring established publishers. We're looking for a system that helps the talented little guy.

Although, do grudgingly agree that the quill system would be better than nothing.


----------



## psychotick

Hi,

My thought is that it does help the talented little guy. As long as they write well, edit properly, do good covers and blurbs, it should be as useful for them as it is for the trade pubbed. What it should knock out are those who simply don't want to put in the effort or really don't have a book in them.

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## Graylorne

I'm with Dark One's line of reasoning. I want a system that tells people my books are ok, so that I can reach those first 1000 sales.
Last year I put four books on Amazon. My beta readers and the reviews I have say they are fun reads. They are professionally edited, with professional covers, reasonably priced, and getting them out there cost me a great deal of money. Last year I sold 54 titles in total. How long must I wait to reach those fabulous 1000 copies (per title, I suppose)? Then at least I'd have the initial costs more or less covered.
So those quills are nice for people who already have some traction. But it's not what I need, and many others with me. I want a reputable sign that tells the world I'm at least not writing crap.


----------



## C Hollis

So, when I consider this stamp of approval, I see one difference between it, and making it beyond the slush pile; sales.  When an editor or agent peruse a manuscript, alongside their basic opinion is the question of whether they think the book will sell.  They could very well believe the story is good, but not accept it because they don't think they can sell it.

Subjectivity is a very, very large part of traditional publishing.

If some organization was formed to provide the readers with a stamp of quality, sales should never come into the equation.  What do they care if it sells, they won't have any vested interest in it.  Right?

Add this thought.  If one organization pops up with a stamp of approval, others will follow.  Readers will look at a new title and think, "Well, the Dragon Guild approved this one, so it must be decent."  or, "Ugh, the Hairless Halfling Horde approved this one, I don't usually care for those books."

Which leads me to this question for the group:

As long as one organization remains consistent with what they consider quality, why do we need to remove subjectivity from Dark One's proposed badge?


----------



## Graylorne

I just found a website that appears to do what Dark One proposed. 

Awesome Indies


----------



## Philip Overby

I agree that the quill system would be good to show how many sales someone has made, but I also agree that it's not really helpful for writers who are just starting out or don't have the presence to get that many sales. Of course that could be something to strive for and wouldn't be easy to achieve, so it may push authors to promote more to get the quill mark. There are loads of authors who go undiscovered who are very talented, but just aren't finding an audience for whatever reason. That's sort of how things go in any industry though I suppose. I guess what others are mentioning is how could this system be beneficial to brand new writers. It's kind of the idea of "you have to have sales to get sales." 

I think what Pauline suggested of having a sort of Rotten Tomatoes for books would be a good idea. The problem is, Rotten Tomatoes takes reviews from both professional and user ratings. There would have to be enough professional reviewers to read every single independent books that comes out and that's just not feasible as of now. 

Going back to the original idea, what if there was a sort of independent/indie writers' association that performed these services? You pay a monthly fee and get loads of feedback. The association could put some kind of stamp so that if readers pick up the book they know it's been through the ringer, edited, and polished to the best of its ability. 

I don't know, just throwing ideas out there still. A lot of great ideas are being thrown around and it's good to discuss something anyway.


----------



## C Hollis

> I just found a website that appears to do what Dark One proposed.
> 
> Awesome Indies



I am intrigued.  The cost is reasonable.


----------



## Graylorne

"It's kind of the idea of "you have to have sales to get sales." 
Not only this, Phil. You have to have sales to be able to continue publishing. (halfhearted )

Such an association would certainly fit the bill, as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## Philip Overby

> I just found a website that appears to do what Dark One proposed.
> 
> Awesome Indies



Oh, I missed this post earlier. Yes, Graylorne that does seem very similar to what Dark One is proposing. Would be worth looking into for anyone who is going indie.


----------



## Devor

Graylorne said:


> I just found a website that appears to do what Dark One proposed.
> 
> Awesome Indies



Is anyone familiar with any of the fantasy books on this site?  Are they decent?  There's only a handful there so far.

I would feel better about their recommendations if it only focused on fantasy.  A site like this is going to end up with stronger credentials in one genre or another based on their early contributors.

And if anyone is thinking about taking all this talk seriously, the first step would be putting together a list of 25 to 50 indie books which deserve that seal from the get-go.


----------



## Graylorne

Devor said:


> Is anyone familiar with any of the fantasy books on this site?  Are they decent?  There's only a handful there so far.
> 
> I would feel better about their recommendations if it only focused on fantasy.  A site like this is going to end up with stronger credentials in one genre or another based on their early contributors.
> 
> And if anyone is thinking about taking all this talk seriously, the first step would be putting together a list of 25 to 50 indie books which deserve that seal from the get-go.



I know several titles of the Traditional Fantasy list, actually.

I bought 'Lichgates' recently in a Bookbub offer; haven't read it yet.
Several other titles I saw on bookblogs, book tours etc. 

---

A site recommending all genres would get a more solid/serious reputation than one only for Fantasy, I'd think. 

For that 25/50, I could offer you five titles offhand. Whether they're worthy is not for me to say, of course


----------



## The Dark One

Phil the Drill said:


> There are loads of authors who go undiscovered who are very talented, but just aren't finding an audience for whatever reason. That's sort of how things go in any industry though I suppose.



In fact, I agree with this quote...but just as a side question, how many books have you read that thought were absolutely brilliant that never got published or, as indie titles, never found an audience?


----------



## Philip Overby

The Dark One said:


> In fact, I agree with this quote...but just as a side question, how many books have you read that thought were absolutely brilliant that never got published or, as indie titles, never found an audience?



I haven't read that many unpublished books, so I don't really know how to answer that. I mean, they'd have to be published somehow (traditional or self-published) if I were to read them, right?

As far as indie titles, I honestly haven't read many of them either. I'm starting to read more and more. Of those I've read, Robert Bevan's work has stood out to me simply because his writing is fun and not so focused on being politically correct. There are actually tons of writers around here at Mythic Scribes that if they wrote a book, I'd most likely get it because I'm a fan of their short stories. As a reader, I'm not so much looking for brilliant writers (although that would be great), but writers who are offering something different than what I can get from mainstream publishing. I wish something more indie fantasy writers would do is take chances by trying to tell the stories mainstream publishing isn't. We have tons of epic fantasy novels from mainstream publishing. That's great. I like epic fantasy. Some of my favorite writers write it. But if I were looking for indie books, I'm probably not looking for epic fantasy. I'm looking for something a little weirder, quirkier, funnier, darker, whatever. Not to say I wouldn't read epic fantasy from an indie writer, but I would just expect something a bit different is all. That's the same reason people watch indie movies or listen to indie rock. They're finding something Hollywood or mainstream music labels aren't offering.

I think indie writers are a relatively new phenomenon so it's hard to say if there are writers who are absolutely awesome who are languishing in obscurity. I do think there are a lot of writers here at Mythic Scribes and other communities I'm a part of who I think are undiscovered, great writers. However, they're not at that point where they're ready to put their work out there yet.


----------



## PaulineMRoss

Phil the Drill said:


> I think indie writers are a relatively new phenomenon so it's hard to say if there are writers who are absolutely awesome who are languishing in obscurity.



I read a lot of indie (I prefer the term self-published) authors and yes, there are awesome writers out there languishing in obscurity. If you write a good, solid book and do a certain amount of marketing, you can sell a modest number of copies, but it's virtually impossible these days to break through without either knowing someone to give you a leg up, or buying your way to fame and fortune. Income levels are dropping, too. Best bet nowadays (if you want to make money from it) is erotica.

For anyone who's interested, here's my best self-published reads of 2013:

5 Self-Published Gems of 2013 | Fantasy Review Barn

Note that Andrea K Host has been nominated for awards in Australia, has numerous YA books, but still can't make a living from it.


----------



## Philip Overby

I'm not sure even moderately successful writers make their living only from writing. I've heard a lot of bestsellers still have day jobs and such. I believe the term "languishing in obscurity" would pertain more to someone who has only had a handful of people read their work. Definitions of this vary from person to person I'd wager.

Thanks for the link, by the way, Pauline. I'll take a look at your list. It would be nice if more people read enough indie writers to make lists for readers to point out the diamonds in the rough. I still think a big key to small press and indie writers' success is support from reviewers. There aren't enough people reviewing the work to get the word out.

I am probably one of the best examples of someone who wants to desperately read more indie work but I have no idea where to start. A service like has been mentioned in this thread I ultimately think would be very useful for readers who don't want to read dozens of self-published books and hope they get lucky finding one that's decent. I mostly just pick up books from friends or people on social networks that I think sound cool. 

As someone who hopes to go the hybrid route (traditional and self-published together) I hope I can get a firmer grip on what readers are looking for both in a traditionally published book and a self-published one. I think nowadays the expectations are still widely varied, but I imagine the gap will close over time.


----------



## Graylorne

Phil the Drill said:


> I am probably one of the best examples of someone who wants to desperately read more indie work but I have no idea where to start. A service like has been mentioned in this thread I ultimately think would be very useful for readers who don't want to read dozens of self-published books and hope they get lucky finding one that's decent. I mostly just pick up books from friends or people on social networks that I think sound cool.
> 
> As someone who hopes to go the hybrid route (traditional and self-published together) I hope I can get a firmer grip on what readers are looking for both in a traditionally published book and a self-published one. I think nowadays the expectations are still widely varied, but I imagine the gap will close over time.




Do you have a free BookBub subscription? You get a daily email with book promotions in the genre of your choice, either completely free or bargain priced. All books are pretty rigorously chosen, so there is a good chance of a decent book. I bought several interesting sounding fantasy titles there. They've got hundreds and it's all completely free.
See: www.bookbub.com.


----------



## Philip Overby

Just signed up. I'm interested to see what jumps out at me. I tend to look for stranger fantasy as of late (in the vein of China Mieville or Chuck Wendig) so I'm not sure how much of that is really available.


----------



## Chessie

Phil, you like Steampunk, right? Try the Flashgold series by Lindsay Buroker. She's all Indie and is pretty successful at it, been following her blog for some time. She also writes urban fantasy.


----------



## BWFoster78

Graylorne said:


> I just found a website that appears to do what Dark One proposed.
> 
> Awesome Indies



Thanks for the link.  I checked it out.

The first question that came to my mind: Are the books really quality?

I browsed until I found a book (scifi) that met my tastes and bought it off Amazon.  After I finish the book I'm reading, I'll move that one to the top of the list.  Granted, it's a small sample size, but, considering I chose almost at random, it should give me some indication of quality level.

My second thought: It seems highly unlikely that anyone is going to stumble across your book and decide to buy it because of a seal of approval.  What seems more likely is that a reader will find the site and choose to buy a book featured there (as I did).  It seems like the site, therefore, would be of more use to me as both a reader and author if they gave me descriptions of all the books instead of just the new ones.  Am I really going to click through to Amazon for every title based solely on a title?


----------



## Graylorne

I posted this link it primarily as an example of what the discussion was about. 

I've no idea what AI's history of reviews is or the size of the organization. Perhaps the titles on their site are the only ones with a seal? 

Looking through it, I noticed that the lady who seems to coordinate things and several of the reviewers have the AIA seal themselves on several titles of their own. 
One reviewer's name I recognized because she is a book blogger who did a review of _Rhidauna _via my last book tour.

So I don't know if this is It, or can become It. But there are a lot of good ideas involved and perhaps, if enough people would use a seal like this, it would grow into a useful thing.


----------

