Lucy and I were going through the Roadmap today (for those that don't know, we have a public roadmap to show what we're working on - you can find it in the "more" menu on the app in the top left of the navbar, or linked in the footer on web) and realized we've had a few requests for quarter star ratings. We said we'd let the community weigh in and make a decision, but the feedback thus far has been split. So, we're opening up the convo now!

Should Pagebound have .25 star ratings?

Pros: You can get granular with your ratings, you decide if you want to use the quarter star system or not (if you don't like them, you can continue to use half stars), many folks have personal rating systems that involve quarter stars

Cons: Since we have sub-ratings on PB, there is additional cognitive load to rating things like plot and quality with quarter stars (we think only having quarter stars for overall rating would be confusing and look like a bug). It could potentially discourage people from adding sub ratings if they feel paralyzed by the granularity

Very curious to hear what you all think!

”Dumb used to mean mute. Unable to speak. It’s a silent waiter.” This was something she’d learned from Charlie. Her partner was a walking encyclopedia of obscure facts.

…obscure… facts? eve… you gotta read a book or something girl

edit: because i don’t want to spam the forum with silly things eve says – but just a bit later on when she sees a line of ants marching in one direction and wonders if it’s normal ant behavior? eve. c’mon. have you seen ants out in the world before??

i wish the old house map had a better description – i assume it's provided for accessibility, but it doesn't seem to do its job of providing access to the map's information to those who can't view it? like for example, why would you (poorly) summarize the notes visible in the image instead of providing a transcript? it's like if you wanted to know what a paragraph says, but instead of getting a text-to-speech reading of it as-is, you get an inaccurate ai summary that obfuscates what's being conveyed in the actual text. for example, a few notes in the image appear as follows:

one typewritten note, numbered with a handwritten "27", has a bold arrow scribbled in pen pointing to a heavily circled closet on what appears to be a blueprint of the old house, titled "ground plan". note 27 reads: "open and shut this closet door three times, take ten paces backwards, wait for five minutes, the door will now open to a staircase."
there's another bold arrow that winds its way from this note to the next one, also typewritten, but numbered with a handwritten "28". it reads: "staircase will lead you to the basement of a romanian psych hospital. be careful not to be seen by staff (difficult to escape after that)." an arrow points from this note to a circled staircase on a different floor plan, presumably of the psych hospital, as the plan includes a numbered key of locations listed in romanian.
another of these notes, numbered "11", includes an arrow pointing to an X scribbled heavily over a building on what appears to be a city map. it reads: "malignant presence dwells in this underground shopping mall, be very quiet when moving through. avoid eye contact. if eye contact is made, do not blink. back away slowly, and do not show anxiety."

in the description that the book provides, these notes and their relationship to one another are described as follows: (emphasis mine)

"…The map appears to depict an old house and its surrounding area, with a focus on hidden pathways, secret doors, and enigmatic directions. Arrows and circles are drawn over the map, connecting different sections and suggesting movement or exploration. The background includes fragments of architectural floor plans, street maps, and handwritten notes. Some notes provide specific instructions, such as opening and shutting a closet door three times, taking ten paces backward, waiting for five minutes, after which the door will open to a staircase. Another note mentions a staircase leading to a basement and warns about a foreman who should not be seen. The map also includes cryptic symbols such as X marks, circles, and directional arrows, which indicate key locations or actions."

what? this is so vague and doesn't render the information in these maps and notes well at all. it mentions "handwritten notes", but the notes are all typewritten. it redundantly mentions that circles and arrows are drawn over the map twice without providing any additional meaningful details about what they might actually mean in context.

when it goes from describing the instructions for finding the hidden staircase, and then immediately describes another note mentioning "a staircase leading to a basement", it makes it seem as though these might be two different staircases in different contexts, even though that actual image with the notes makes it abundantly clear because of the numbers and arrows that the two staircases being described are one and the same. also, it entirely leaves out that the basement is specifically the basement of a romanian psych hospital. if you couldn't view the image itself and were relying on this description, you might assume it just lead to the basement of the old house.

and where did this mention of a "foreman who should not be seen" come from? it's described as being included in the second note about the staircase leading to a basement, but if you read that note in the image provided, what it actually described is a staff that you should not be seen by, not a foreman who should not be seen by you. there's another note – a different note than the one about the staircase leading to a basement, instead describing an underground shopping mall – which describes a "malignant presence" that you should not make eye contact with and in that sense should "not be seen", but again, it's not described as a foreman. there's no mention of a foreman in any of these notes!

there's a fourth note that i didn't transcribe that isn't mentioned at all in the description, as well as a part of a handwritten key converting letters to symbols, as though it's to help decode an encrypted text written in those symbols. even if all this is just for flavor and these details aren't relevant or necessary for the rest of the novel, it's pretty interesting to pore over, and it's such a shame that readers who can't see the provided visual have to rely on a vague description that doesn't truly allow them to explore the strange content of this first document. i appreciate the intent to make this map accessible, but good intent alone doesn't grant access to the content of the map… a better description would.

not to like, come out the gate being harsh on this book or anything, personally i’m really intrigued by this document and i’m digging its inclusion! i just wish we thought a little more about what accessibility actually means when it comes to things like writing up image descriptions.

I’m curious, how do you guys rate books? I know everyone is different and for some people 3 stars is super low and for others is above average.

For me: 5 is I absolutely ADORED it, maybe it’s not objectively perfect but it is perfect TO ME. 4 is amazing book, loved it. 3 is it was… good! A fine book. And then 2 is I didn’t enjoy it all that much.

I give a lot of books 3.5 because that’s like right between loved and just good. And I don’t think I’ve ever given a book a lower rating than a 2 because that would mean I absolutely hate it and honestly, I don’t think I hate most things. Some people are haters, I’m an enjoyer! I usually always find something I like.