Counterflag please


Bara medlemmar i LibraryThing kan skriva.

Counterflag please

okt 27, 2014, 7:45 pm

I flagged the review when I saw that the first two paragraphs matched the description.

Later I realized that there is also a review there.

okt 28, 2014, 5:27 am

no flags showing.

okt 28, 2014, 6:36 am


aug 17, 2015, 12:11 pm

I flagged this author picture as it is lableed incorrectly

After more looking, it appears Ned Dorff is a fan and the person who took the author's picture at a book event.

nov 18, 2015, 3:28 pm

Counterflag this cover flag

I flagged it before I discovered it should be separated.

nov 23, 2015, 5:10 am

No flags now so hopefully sorted.

feb 25, 2016, 5:08 pm

Please counterflag these covers:

I flagged them before I saw that there was an improper work combination.

feb 25, 2016, 5:46 pm

That shouldn't matter. If you flagged them as inappropriate for the work and then separated them they should revert to the old work.

Redigerat: mar 14, 2016, 7:33 pm

>10 wifilibrarian: The second link is missing the "s" and should probably be:

No flagged reviews remain in any case. :-}

mar 14, 2016, 9:11 pm

>11 Lyndatrue:

There are still tons of flagged reviews for it!

Redigerat: mar 14, 2016, 10:16 pm

:-{ I was only looking at the German ones (I set it to German ages ago so that I didn't have to look at reviews that had spoilers). Off to do more counter flagging...

Okay, *now* I think they're gone (off all the languages I could figure out). I left some that I agreed with.

apr 21, 2016, 11:31 am

I flagged tonydal's review when I found that the link was broken. Neither flag seems entirely appropriate. Apologies to the reviewer.

apr 21, 2016, 11:35 am

>14 RobertDay:

All his reviews are broken links. I'm leaving him a comment, but I don't really think it will do much good, as he doesn't seem to have added or reviewed books for a very long time. Nevertheless . . .

aug 26, 2016, 4:20 am

*coughs* Someone has a grudge, or what? Because there is literally nothing one could argue that this is not a review.

aug 26, 2016, 8:15 am

Flags seem to be gone.

aug 26, 2016, 12:37 pm

>16 .Monkey.:

I see one thumb, no flags.

jan 24, 2017, 11:31 am is flagged as a "not a review"? This is the first time one of mine has been flagged. Not sure why.

jan 24, 2017, 11:43 am

>19 flying_monkeys: Seems to be fixed. Some people flag reviews they don't agree with.

jan 24, 2017, 12:03 pm

Ok. Fine. I updated my review of Animal Farm a little to make it more of a review. Counterflag please?

jan 24, 2017, 12:06 pm

>21 lesmel: de-flagged and good now

jan 24, 2017, 12:08 pm

There must be someone or someones going through and flagging any review that they don't agree with, because I'm seeing a few valid reviews being blue flagged...

jan 24, 2017, 1:08 pm

Redigerat: jan 24, 2017, 2:25 pm

>24 2wonderY: I would say so. And also the other review on that book: "Could not get into it."

Those are both good now.

jan 24, 2017, 3:28 pm

>24 2wonderY:

Doesn't matter if it's a valid opinion or not. It's a valid "LT review", and has already been counterflagged.

jan 24, 2017, 11:28 pm

>20 MarthaJeanne: Ah, I see. Thanks for taking a look at it.

jan 25, 2017, 2:48 am

>24 2wonderY: But someone keeps flagging it. I suggest adding something to it.

jan 25, 2017, 9:11 am

Is there a reason the multiple reviews from kdf_333 on are red flagged? They seem to have a problem with their import process or something; but you can't prove they don't have multiple copies of the book.

Redigerat: jan 25, 2017, 9:32 am

>29 lesmel:

I don't see any abuse there. I've counterflagged them.

I've also noted, and counterflagged, a lot of unwarranted blue flags on that member's reviews.

jan 25, 2017, 11:20 am

Is anyone else noticing text relating to GPL3.0 and FTC regulations attached to reviews?
Perhaps the chilling one is the GPL3.0 since the text they quote says it overrides the TOS of any website for that review...

jan 25, 2017, 11:51 am

>31 gilroy:

Noticing it where?

Redigerat: jan 25, 2017, 1:14 pm

>32 lorax: Guess I should link to one example that I've seen, huh?

The text at the top of this review talks about the GPL3.0 license.

The text on the end of this one speaks of the FTC regulations of reviews for compensation.

Redigerat: jan 25, 2017, 1:24 pm

As far as I am aware*, GPL isn't going to supersede the TOS for any service like LT. A person has to accept the TOS to use the service which means you waive some rights. LT does have an option for not allowing LT to use reviews in a 3rd party manner.

I use "**This was an advanced reader copy won through the LibraryThing Early Reviewers program.**" for my FTC compliance statement.


jan 25, 2017, 1:39 pm

>33 gilroy:

Random people writing a thing in a review doesn't make it true.

jan 25, 2017, 3:27 pm

>31 gilroy:, et al.

I saw that, and did a bit of googling. As far as I can tell, the license that person is referring to is a software license, that is "is intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change all versions of a program". See

It doesn't seem to have squat to do with what you post on a website.

Redigerat: jan 25, 2017, 3:47 pm

If you live in the US, and need a FTC compliance statement for an ER book, the bird notice you get once your review is properly credited is supposed to be sufficient.

jan 26, 2017, 5:26 am

Got an answer to my own question from the person who I spotted the GPL notice. It's all to keep people from stealing his/her reviews. They just didnt realize that GPL 3.0 existed. :)

>37 MarthaJeanne: The one using the FTC notice isn't posting an LTER review.

sep 21, 2017, 10:46 pm

The German language cover has been flagged as inapplicable, but Kampf is indeed the German version of this novel.

okt 2, 2017, 12:50 pm

okt 2, 2017, 12:51 pm

okt 2, 2017, 1:52 pm


sep 28, 2018, 9:36 am

Someone has flagged my review of the audio version of Dancing at the Rascal Fair. Granted, I did not finish listening to that version, but I explained why in the review. Please counterflag?

sep 28, 2018, 9:42 am

>43 MrsLee:

Done. That's a weird flag. I have seen people flag as "not a review" reviews where the writer hasn't finished the book, but how it's a TOS violation I can't imagine.

(I think that when the review discusses why the book wasn't finished, that's still a review, and certainly more useful than "Loved it!")

sep 29, 2018, 10:52 am

>44 lilithcat: Thanks I didn't see what sort of flag it was. That is weird.

okt 11, 2018, 9:33 am

Well, I've earned a blue flag, although, I do believe I wrote a review, however controversial it was. On A Grave Talent by Laurie R. King.

Funny thing is, when I read the review, I had to laugh because my thinking has changed so much between now and then. I'm not changing my review, because it was how I felt when I read that book, but I did edit it to reflect that times and minds can change, even mine.

okt 11, 2018, 9:45 am

>46 MrsLee: Your flag is gone.

I've got one on I'll add a few words to make it clear that I didn't finish because of the quality of the book.

okt 12, 2018, 8:33 am

>47 MarthaJeanne: Looks like the flag is gone. lol, short and to the point review. I like it.

I do apologize for not adding the links to the reviews I asked for help on. Will do so in future.

okt 12, 2018, 10:31 am

For this it's quite easy to find.

Redigerat: dec 28, 2018, 5:07 am

Someone's blue-flagged one of mine that was short but as far as I'm concerned counts as a review under the "no" guideline:

What is the current view on blue-flagging reviews that are simply links to reviews elsewhere:

(Hi. I used to be very active in the "be vewy vewy quiet I'm hunting spammers" groups, but I've had health problems for the last few years and dropped out of a lot of my online hangouts.)

Edit: Someone's counter-flagged already, thanks. :-)

dec 28, 2018, 5:33 am

>50 JulesJones: If the link doesn't work, it's flaggable. If the link works and goes to an actual review, not flaggable.

dec 28, 2018, 6:07 am

I counter-flagged earlier, but talk posts weren't working for me.

jan 28, 2019, 10:34 pm

>53 amanda4242:

Perfectly valid. Looks as though it's now been counterflagged.

But here's a weird one: Absolute stunner. The casting of Nellie Dean as the narrator was a stroke of genius by Brontë.:

feb 18, 2019, 1:51 pm

>56 amanda4242:

That's just ridiculous. It's like someone is stalking you or something.

Flag is gone now, though.

feb 18, 2019, 1:58 pm

>57 lilithcat: I don't think it's personal; I think it might be an obsessive Bronte fan who doesn't understand why the flag keeps disappearing. Perhaps I should edit my review to include a link to LT's review policy and quote the part regarding what a blue flag is for.

feb 18, 2019, 2:06 pm

The funny thing is that your review now has 4 thumbs up, which it probably wouldn't have except for this topic. (A lot of people seem to think thumbs up counterflag.)

Redigerat: feb 18, 2019, 2:14 pm

Here's another few that deserves the counter flag. Same book.

Suspect this is either someone who feels reviews must be more than a line or two and are marking them as such.

feb 18, 2019, 2:11 pm

>58 amanda4242:

I expect you're right, that it's not personal, but how annoying!

feb 18, 2019, 4:31 pm

And this (both kinds of flag)

feb 18, 2019, 4:48 pm

>62 karenb:

And both gone now.

feb 19, 2019, 4:42 pm

Oh, for pete's sake. I've counter-flagged it.

feb 19, 2019, 5:02 pm

>65 lilithcat: Thanks again! I've edited my review to include a link to the review help page and quoted the section about the proper use of blue flags.

feb 19, 2019, 5:16 pm

>67 lilithcat:

Let's hope that helps.

feb 19, 2019, 5:30 pm

>67 lilithcat: Fingers crossed.

feb 19, 2019, 7:04 pm

I've counter-flagged it.

feb 19, 2019, 9:22 pm

Okay, that's it.

I'm going to email lorannen to see if there's anything that can be done to stop this nonsense.

Redigerat: feb 22, 2019, 2:22 pm

feb 22, 2019, 2:06 pm

>71 lilithcat: Got your email! Looking and will reply shortly.

>72 karenb: We call this "Rule 386" in our house.

feb 22, 2019, 2:21 pm

>53 amanda4242: and further update: Yeah, that's real weird. I've got to do some digging to find out who's doing the flagging here. I'll keep you posted!

feb 22, 2019, 2:23 pm

>53 amanda4242:

And, I should say, an excellent review. Pithy!

feb 22, 2019, 2:31 pm

>75 karenb: Not sure I follow you on this one: Looks like actually not a review to me?

feb 22, 2019, 2:33 pm

>74 lorannen: Thank you! I haven't seen any flags in a few days, so maybe whoever was flagging finally got the message.

>76 karenb: Thanks!

feb 22, 2019, 2:37 pm

>78 amanda4242: At first glance, I suspect what's happening is the person is going through all reviews of a given work, and flagging those they think don't measure up. Still, a lot of them are flagged incorrectly! Once I've got the data on whether it's consistently the same member or not, I'll know more.

feb 22, 2019, 2:45 pm

>72 karenb:

This one: is pretty clearly a TOS violation. The "reviewer" says This quote is from the Stanford University Library's 1966 edition that I pulled from Google Books.

feb 22, 2019, 3:42 pm

>77 lorannen: Sorry, I meant to include that one in a "maybe" group.

>80 lilithcat: D'oh! How did I miss that? Thanks.

feb 22, 2019, 6:57 pm

>82 amanda4242: I've counter-flagged but the blue flag is still there. Are there multiple flags?

feb 22, 2019, 10:28 pm

>82 amanda4242: The flag is gone.

mar 20, 2019, 4:11 pm

Perhaps because I refused to finish the book?

apr 1, 2019, 11:17 am

Not my review, but this one does qualify as a valid review.

There are a couple others on the same book that need to be counterflagged as well...

apr 1, 2019, 1:56 pm

Also not my review but this one does qualify as a valid review:

Guess I'm on a review anti flag catch today, as more along this book are probably better than a blue flag...

Redigerat: apr 1, 2019, 2:00 pm

>87 gilroy: Aah jeez. That book has dozens of reviews that need to be counterflagged.

apr 1, 2019, 2:21 pm

>88 norabelle414: Still trying to figure out the one that starts : SEE SOCK PUPPET

apr 1, 2019, 2:23 pm

>89 gilroy: That one hurts my head too.

apr 1, 2019, 4:02 pm

Not my reviews.

Pithy but still a review:

Also an original review, not sure why it's flagged:

Redigerat: maj 14, 2019, 9:52 am

>93 MarthaJeanne: The second one still needs some help.

maj 14, 2019, 10:00 am

>92 2wonderY:

All flags are now gone.

maj 14, 2019, 5:40 pm

>92 2wonderY: First one has a blue flag again.

maj 14, 2019, 5:41 pm

>95 lesmel: And gone again...

maj 22, 2019, 10:22 pm
Several of this user's reviews have been marked as both "not a review" and "abuse of terms of service". Am I missing something? I did a bit of Googling and I can't detect any plagiarism.

maj 22, 2019, 10:32 pm

>97 norabelle414:

That's very odd. I can't find anything that suggests a TOS violation, either, and they are certainly reviews!

Redigerat: maj 24, 2019, 10:38 am

Several of this user's reviews have been flagged "not a review," but I feel like "I read this a long time ago and remember not liking it" and "I quit reading after seven pages" both qualify under Lt's standards.

(Some definitely are not, though.)

jul 15, 2019, 9:03 am

And now we have a Counterflag feature. Hoorah!

I came across it when I read this review of Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice but apparently authored by Anna Quindlen, who apparently wrote an introduction to one edition:

"OMG! I couldn't stand this book. It was horrible! I couldn't visualize a darn thing."

That had been flagged, incorrectly IMHO, as "Abuse of terms of service", which I don't see at all. I suspect that the flagger reacted to a counter-intuitive misquote of the title/author entries and had a knee-jerk reaction. I've read Austen in the past and not got on with her. I've also seen misattributed works because of the book entry, especially audio books where the work is listed as authored by the voice performer.

I assume that the counterflag only serves to start some sort of positive/negative tally rather than give the opportunity for counterflaggers to add comments. I shall be interested to see how this works.

(Cross-posted from 'When is a review not a review?')

(Classic touchstone fail: 'Pride and Prejudice' is, of course, the example given for a title touchstone, but I got 'no results' on drafting this cross-post...)

Redigerat: jul 15, 2019, 9:24 am

>101 RobertDay:

Please link to the review in question. I don't think anyone wants to plow through the 1100+ reviews of Pride and Prejudice to find it!

And, unless that is Anna Quindlen's account, or the quote was merely part of a longer review written by the account holder, it is a TOS violation.

And now we have a Counterflag feature. Hoorah!

We've had it for a very long time. And, no, you cannot comment on other people's reviews. It simply makes the flags go away so that the review re-appears.

jul 15, 2019, 9:40 am

>102 lilithcat:

The user who wrote that review has cataloged the book as being written by Anna Quindlen, but that's not relevant to whether the review is a TOS violation.

Redigerat: jul 15, 2019, 9:43 am

>102 lilithcat: Sorry, Lilith, but I've never been able in nearly eleven years to figure out how to link to just one review. Not even my own. Here's the reviewer's reviews page, and you'll see that the review in question was posted just three days ago (and is still the top review by date of the 1100+ reviews of 'Pride and Prejudice').

The quote is posted is the totality of the review. And I'm reasonably certain that the OP isn't Anna Quindlen under another name.

And today is the first time I've seen the bright green Counterflag.

jul 15, 2019, 9:51 am

>104 RobertDay: Next to the date on every review is a little icon that looks like a chain; if you click that it takes you to a direct link for that review.

jul 15, 2019, 10:27 am

>104 RobertDay:

Thanks, your original post wasn't clear. I thought you meant that the review was a quote from Anna Quindlen

jul 15, 2019, 4:26 pm

>105 norabelle414: Oh, that. I'm certain I've been told that before, but I sometimes get these Homer Simpson moments when a new bit of information pushes an old bit out.

>106 lilithcat: No probs, Lilith. I suspect the OF (Original Flagger) thought that, too.

Redigerat: jul 15, 2019, 5:45 pm

Not sure I'm in the correct Talk topic, but here goes....

In Zeitgeist, under the recent firsts heading in Reviews, there are several posts that do not appear to be reviews at all. Just lists of star categories followed by a star rating by the member, xKEEFx

I did flag them as 'not a review' because I was under the impression there is supposed to be some commentary, no?
Apologies if I am mistaken.

jul 15, 2019, 6:03 pm

>108 SandyAMcPherson: is the link to those reviews.

It's interesting. If it were just stars, then clearly those wouldn't be reviews. But now we know that if there are three stars (for example), the book was found to be "Enjoyable; informative". Now that, alone, would be a review. Is it "not a review" because there is extraneous material?

So I am leaning towards counterflagging, but would like others' input.

Redigerat: jul 15, 2019, 6:10 pm

>108 SandyAMcPherson: Yes, those should be flagged IMO

edit to specify: It's not the extraneous info alone, it's the fact that those same words apply to every single book with that rating. To constitute a review, it should contain something other than 'my general review method'

jul 15, 2019, 6:09 pm

I also think these should be flagged.

jul 15, 2019, 6:15 pm

>111 SandraArdnas:

it's the fact that those same words apply to every single book with that rating

If all his reviews said simply, "Enjoyable; informative", without the rest, would you flag them?

jul 15, 2019, 7:40 pm

No, but they do not contain just that. Posting your general rating system over and over is not a review of a specific book. It's your rating system.

Unfortunately, even flagged it will still count as a review, so with books with only a few reviews you expect to read one only to discover there's one or two duds and no actual review. So I'm not entirely sure what purpose the flagging has. Presumably, when there are a lot of reviews, the flagged ones are pushed at the back of the line

jul 16, 2019, 9:26 am

>114 SandraArdnas: Yes the "not a review" flag pushes those reviews to the bottom of the list, but nothing else happens no matter how many flags a review gets.

jul 16, 2019, 2:00 pm

>109 MarthaJeanne: and subsequent remarks:
I did look at
and I'm in agreement with >114 SandraArdnas:, that it was a very unedifying to repeatedly show a rating system.

If someone wants to review their library/reading in such a manner, that (to me) isn't a problem. It is inappropriate when these ratings appear in "Recent Firsts" that I object. I use the "Recents" and "hot" reviews to stay au courant with what's generally newish on LibraryThing.

Maybe the "Recent Firsts" are selected poorly. Is it an automatic algorithm that needs redeveloping?

jan 24, 2020, 8:42 am

Redigerat: feb 26, 2020, 12:18 am

Yes, that's the same review from way back in >53 amanda4242:

feb 26, 2020, 12:39 am

That's odd. I don't seem to be able to counterflag at the moment.

feb 26, 2020, 4:29 am

>118 amanda4242: Someone really doesn't like your review. And now, thanks at least partly to them, you have 11 likes, so it's up between all the long 4 1/2 to 5 star reviews.

feb 26, 2020, 5:39 am

>118 amanda4242: Did >74 lorannen: ever get back to you? Or do we need to get kristie involved?

jun 23, 2020, 10:51 am

Hi, I've been here since 2006 and never used the talk feature before but I've suddenly been given a bunch of blue flags on reviews:

This one's admittedly short but I posted it because it's the only review on that work:

If you're feeling more flaggy than unflaggy then this is definitely not an LT standard review (I'm the only member who owns this book and I added it manually myself) so feel free to blue flag it as I can't do it myself:

jun 23, 2020, 11:40 am

>122 spiralsheep:

Y'know, I sometimes think people don't know what flags are for, because there is nothing about any of those flagged reviews that warrants one.

Short doesn't matter. Tim famously said that a review consisting of "No" was fine. (Of course, it was his own review!)

RE: the last one, just because I'm curious. What does the list of countries have to do with the pamphlet?

jun 23, 2020, 4:02 pm

>122 spiralsheep: What do you believe happened with your review of Persuasion? Did the staff send you a message about it?

jun 23, 2020, 5:49 pm

>122 spiralsheep:, >123 lilithcat: I assume that the pamphlet consists of poems about the countries of the European Union (and possibly others). This I have gleaned from your review. So in this case, the list is a perfectly good review, if a little telegraphic.

jun 23, 2020, 11:28 pm

>122 spiralsheep: All flags gone now!

jul 4, 2020, 8:50 am

We will never know why I suddenly had a blank review and a slew of blue flags. Fortunately it's more fun to speculate. I think it happens like this....

Once upon a time there was a blue demon-thing of unhappiness who hid inside a library-thing and spread misery by temporarily possessing people who are grumpy, out of sorts, or at odds with the world, and tempting them to stick mean blue pins into innocent reviews. Luckily inside this library-thing also lived a society of guardians clad in shining binary who had the power to magically erase blue flags of sadness using secret rituals involving special combinations of tapping and clicking. And so the people of the librarything lived happily ever after (or until the next time a blue demon-thing misbehaves).

Or, to put it another way, thank you all for your work in making LT a happier place to be.

jul 4, 2020, 9:50 am

>127 spiralsheep: If your review was blank, that would explain why people had blue flagged it. (Not saying they should have done so, but a blank box is definitely "not a review"). I'm just curious since you state in your review that the LT staff deleted it, what makes you think that.

jul 4, 2020, 9:56 am

>128 norabelle414:

Can't speak for >127 spiralsheep:, but if content was removed, only staff (or the reviewer) could do that, though it does seem odd that staff would have done so. Red flagging merely hides a review, it doesn't delete content. and blue flagging just groups those reviews if you sort by votes.

jul 5, 2020, 11:34 am

>129 lilithcat: Yes that's why I'm asking, I've never heard of staff removing the content of a review before

jul 5, 2020, 12:09 pm

It's amazingly easy to enter a review and then forget to save it.

jul 5, 2020, 12:12 pm

>131 MarthaJeanne: Yeah. I've also bungled html in reviews on occasion, which looks normal when I edit but displays blank when I save.

jul 5, 2020, 5:21 pm

Depending on when the review was written, it might also fall into the lost data hole from a few years ago.

jan 13, 2021, 10:15 am

Someone didn't like my negative review, or maybe to be charitable thought that reviews where you mention not having finished a book are invalid (along with content, not as the only thing), and flagged it:

jan 13, 2021, 10:20 am

>134 lorax:


I do think that some people assume you must have read the entire book for the review to count. I disagree strenuously! If the reviewer says why she didn't finish the book, as you did in your review, that's very helpful to potential readers.

apr 18, 2021, 4:22 am

apr 18, 2021, 4:42 am

apr 18, 2021, 4:51 am

There is still one review with both blue and red flags.

Thanks for dealing with the others.

apr 18, 2021, 5:10 am

>138 MarthaJeanne: Oops counter flagged for "not a review". Oddly, now I don't seem to be able to counter flag "TOS violation" though.

apr 18, 2021, 6:18 am

All good now.

I certainly don't see warning people that the ebook has illustrations over the text that make it impossible to read either as not a review or TOS violation.

I find the 'couldn't get through this' reviews very useful.

Redigerat: apr 18, 2021, 8:59 am

>140 MarthaJeanne: Agreed. I think I have a few of those too - and some I struggled through as a student, just because I had to.

ETA: I have a "This is PhD worthy?" and a "Total Rubbish" tag :)

apr 19, 2021, 10:47 am

Nicole_VanK (#141):

ETA: I have a "This is PhD worthy?" and a "Total Rubbish" tag :)

And how many times have you used those on the same work? ;)

Redigerat: apr 19, 2021, 12:30 pm

:D I'm surprised to say : just once.

Most of the pseudo-science / pseudo-history / subpar research reports in my collection was not presented as a PhD thesis, I guess.

apr 20, 2021, 4:09 pm

This work is flagged for spam, but an architectural firm has it cataloged probably as part of their firm's library. The user has been here since 2015 and I sincerely don't think this is a spam item.

apr 20, 2021, 5:07 pm

>144 gilroy: I just split the author, and LT has three other titles by that author split. Two from the same member, and one from somebody else.

apr 20, 2021, 8:54 pm

I've got another one that's not spam, it's a faulty upload that the user never came back to fix. This honestly does need the vote fixed as it's balanced. It's not spam.

Redigerat: apr 20, 2021, 8:55 pm

>145 MarthaJeanne: Hope that doesn't get all of those works flagged.

Redigerat: jun 14, 2021, 5:30 pm

I flagged my most recent review to test the Reviews page sort, and now I'm done.

Link deleted

Update: It's already cleared!

aug 24, 2023, 11:51 am

This venue image is receiving votes as a duplicate, but it's the only image for that venue:
Please consider voting No.

(I'm wondering if the votes are continuing to accrue due to the right-sidebar saying "Other Pictures" which is misleading when there's only a single image.)

aug 24, 2023, 12:11 pm

>149 Nevov:

I think there had been another image. Sometimes the uploader deletes the unflagged image.

aug 24, 2023, 12:19 pm

Thanks. Incrementing the image ID number by 1 does lead to a missing image.

aug 25, 2023, 11:24 am

New user didn't understand what they were doing, I suspect. Marked a book as spam, but it definitely is not:
Needs a few votes to save it.

Redigerat: aug 25, 2023, 11:33 am

Det här meddelandet har tagits bort av dess författare.

aug 25, 2023, 12:22 pm

>152 gilroy: Seems to be saved.

aug 31, 2023, 4:49 am

Short and I probably intended to write more at the time, but still not flag worthy?

Redigerat: aug 31, 2023, 6:17 am

>155 reading_fox: All clear.

BTW I seem to have collected several flags, including red ones. Probably because I write short reviews, including for books I didn't finish and gave low ratings to. I think, or at least hope that they might help other readers.

Redigerat: sep 10, 2023, 12:52 pm

This author photo was originally a duplicate but now is the only photo in the gallery so could use some "no" votes: Edit: see reply below.

Redigerat: sep 10, 2023, 1:07 pm

>157 Nevov:

That's not why the painting (not photo) was flagged. According to the link given, the image is of one Fra Teodoro of Urbino, not Meister Eckhart. Both images in the gallery were flagged.

sep 10, 2023, 12:50 pm

Ah thank you for the clarification, and the comment on the image.

okt 12, 2023, 5:01 pm

Hi all - apologies if this isn't the right place. A handful of my reviews seem to have garnered blue flags (which, since some of them are on reviews where mine is the only / 1 of very few reviews), I assume was someone taking issue with my style and going on a flagging spree until throwing their hands up in disgust.

I would appreciate any appropriate counterflags.

okt 12, 2023, 9:09 pm

>160 Caramellunacy:

Flags seem to be gone now. I think that sometimes people flag review with which they disagree, which is not appropriate.

(And, yes, this is the right place to ask.)

dec 3, 2023, 10:17 am

This image is getting voted for removal:

But it's the author's own upload, from 2012. Ought we not flag the duplicate that got added last week for removal instead?

dec 3, 2023, 10:48 am

>162 Nevov: I'm confused. I don't see any duplicates. This appears as the sole image and I'm unclear why it was flagged at all

dec 3, 2023, 10:54 am

There are two on It is the original that was flagged, for some reason.

dec 3, 2023, 11:01 am

>162 Nevov:

Frankly, I don't think it matters.

dec 3, 2023, 11:05 am

>165 lilithcat: I think it’s polite to leave the first. As a member, they get a notice that it’s marked for removal.

dec 3, 2023, 11:43 am

If the first photo uploaded is flagged as a duplicate, I'll vote no. Because it isn't.

dec 3, 2023, 4:53 pm

If one of those images is the author's own, then they have copyright on it and the duplicate has been posted without the copyright holder's permission. Even if it's the same image. The poster of the duplicate could be posting it elsewhere, too.

dec 3, 2023, 4:59 pm

Good point. In this case, the original was uploaded by the author, so another reason not to flag it.

dec 29, 2023, 9:54 am

Upon checking on my reviews, I noticed one was flagged. When I went in to the reviews for the book, Zero K: A Novel, I noticed that all of the short reviews were flagged. I don't think any of them should be flagged.

Redigerat: dec 29, 2023, 11:38 am

Looks like you’re okay now.

Of course that made me curious about my 1,300+ reviews.

You can tell which ones have been flagged in the past, because the word “flag” migrates to the left.
Yes, they’re all very short reviews. Some members seem prejudiced against brevity.

I have one flagged at the moment. I just pointed to another member’s opinion and agreed:

It’s at the bottom, of course.

ETA: it’s a fun exercise to look at the list. It made me recall some very good authors I will follow up on.

Redigerat: dec 29, 2023, 12:12 pm

>171 2wonderY: You're OK now.

Mine looks pretty good. There is one flagged, but I rather agree that it isn't really a review, just an explanation to keep me in the ER program.

(And if the publisher doesn't like it: GOOD!)

jan 2, 12:13 pm

>171 2wonderY: Thanks! It still shows as flagged on my listing of reviews, but when I get to the work's page, there is no flag on the review itself. I noticed that there was a very short 3 star review that didn't get flagged - only the more negative reviews were flagged. I guess someone was triggered... Ha! Thanks again.

jan 19, 12:40 am

These two images are under risk of removal, being flagged as duplicates:
a venue -
an author -

But it looks like each of them is the only image now – possibly there were previously duplicates that got deleted, but these could use some 'No' votes to prevent them disappearing.