Ok, hmm...so I've read through this thread twice now. I will say that I am greatly guilty of reading stories without offering a review after I do so. I've seen comments from authors in this thread ranging from, to paraphrase, 'damn people piss me off telling me about what I write' to 'well, I appreciate a thoughtful review'. Having read stories, and having thoughts on most of them, my queries are chronicled below.

Rabbit wrote "golden Rule ---those that can write do ---those that can't usually become critics", which makes me think that offering a review is a bad, bad thing and that if one does take the time to generate an opinion, one can't put together thoughts in the written story form (which I happen to know "one" can, just hasn't done so here is all). But the furry author also remarked, "you are quite right Mad ----really a small percentage of the readers bother with a review ---I think most do not even look at the reviews", which almost leads me to believe that leaving a few words in the way of a review might not be so distasteful to the author. I also took note of what H Dean had to say. "You are right, of course...an initial review will often bring about reviews of similar nature. Unfortunately, people don't want to be the first to break stride and would rather offer a half assed review than offer their honesty. Also, offering a "real" review is often too much work. Laziness is high and productivity is low." Reading that, I actually do believe that honest, well thought out reviews are welcomed by the author. As I am a bit confused, could someone please comment on which way this train of thought travels?

Mad Lews delivered the following: "Still the story has nearly thirty five thousand hits and only ten reviews so you have to figure the bulk of the people reading it aren’t interested in the reviews...". On the other side of the coin I now toss is Aussiegirl with "I think it all depends on the way the review is written too. I find that if the reviewer adds positives as well as negatives, it softens the review. Writers need to know what they have done well as much as they need to know the areas that need to be improved." I must ponder...are the readers the intended target for the review(er) or is it the author that is in the line of fire? I ask because, in my role of reader-only at the moment, I do not look at the reviews myself. I look for specific content most days. Other days I will look at the brief description of the story, and if it slams up against me the proper way, I'll take a look. So if I do combine readership with reviewer status, how should a reviewer, potential or otherwise, aim that particular set of review words? At the reader or the author? Perhaps both? Anyone with ideas about all that?

And to Ashtree and jamb who were bothered by certain words, maybe you can take solace in the fact that they are just that...words? No real power to them unless you allow it. ~thinks of past criticism and shudders~ Well, for the most part anyway.

All my best-
tessa