There's 3 types of writers
1. Those who get thousand comments and review a day and will likely not notice the one with constructive criticism. Reader will complain then about author not interacting with them

  1. Those who are overly sensitive/due to childhood trauma and low self-esteem associate criticism with attack and aggresion. Will delete the review. Reader will complain about authors deleting rewievs and not wanting to improve.

  2. Unnoticed flops that check their chapters 4 times before posting it and would die for a honest feedback from the reader. Readers won't complain.
    They instead will be too busy messing with author 1 and 2 and ignore author 3 like everybody does.

Some of you gonna be really mad at me but it has to be said

    LostInFictions Sigh, I am not going to argue one of those points as I have no clue how someone can be delusional enough to think one human has the right to silence another for any reason.

    Secondly I already corrected the point and said the app was at fault for me not being able to reference your comment.

    Third I already proved both sides are at fault, I mean even if a person is depressed or has some other mental health issues that is no reason to delete a valid review, rather an excuse. If you are depressed or some other reason don't read it, if you read it and it affects your mental state, well that is your own fault. Just like how a mentally ill person who stops taking their meds and commits a crime is at fault, so is the author for reading it(hell if you can't handle it you should not being doing something like this in the first place).

        Constructive Criticism is good for writers. It lets them know which part of their writing needs improvement. No one is perfect. Even Stephen King or JK Rowling needs someone to critique their drafts.

        What's bad is how "some" critics execute and give it. Emphasis on "some" because not everyone is like that. My point is, there's a difference between being a good critic and being a rude commenter just for the sake of being rude.

        You can give a critique without sounding a total douche by doing the sandwich method. Start with what you like about the story, followed by things you don't like and need improvement, and lastly, encourage them to keep doing what they like while staying open to suggestions, because at the end of the day, everyone has their own preference and taste. They can either follow it or not. :)

          FunnyBuns I would rather refrain myself from replying because our viewpoints are poles apart to come to anything mutual. I said what I feel is right and I still stand by it.

              FunnyBuns or has some other mental health issues that is no reason to delete a valid review, rather an excuse

              Who decides what review is valid though?

                  FunnyBuns If you are depressed or some other reason don't read it, if you read it and it affects your mental state, well that is your own fault. Just like how a mentally ill person who stops taking their meds and commits a crime is at fault, so is the author for reading

                  Wow. I am not even amused. No wonder why this world is of the kind what it is.

                    Mamelunka Unnoticed flops that check their chapters 4 times before posting it and would die for a honest feedback from the reader. Readers won't complain.
                    They instead will be too busy messing with author 1 and 2 and ignore author 3 like everybody does.

                    Sigh. Truth has been spoken.

                      Juushirou delete he also deletes all bad reviews should i keep reading and not comment or report him

                      Curious. What do you want from this? As in the end result.

                          LostInFictions That is the issue here, your words are based on your feelings and are not logical. I hate to break it to you but the world doesn't care about your feelings, it operates on logic. It would be great if the world cared about your feelings I agree with you there, but it doesn't so you need to adapt. I will stop here because while I don't mind debating opinions, I don't want to discuss this with someone who thinks their emotions are valid reasoning.

                              FunnyBuns To me, your reasoning is invalid. To you, mine is. It's just the way one thinks I guess and you are right, it's more about emotions when I am talking but I don't think hurting people is logical either. Well, anyways, it was good to hear your perspective. : )

                                  FunnyBuns

                                  Logic and feelings are derived from the same source - a sense of ethics. Though that may differ a bit from place to place, often both come hand in hand.

                                  And just because you say that the world works based on logic, it doesn't mean that you automatically have the higher morale ground as you have implied.

                                  And logic here seems to question how you have come to the conclusion that LostinFictions was trying to silence you. All that was said was that 'one should not continue to escalate the situation by spamming'. Because, no matter how valid you make yourself out to be, the act of escalating a situation will likely lead to your loss in a court.

                                      kazesenken When did I ever say she was trying to silence me? I just said I don't understand people like her who think they have a right to silence people and I hope I never do.

                                      Also the one who escalated it is the one who decided to delete it. If it is deleted and someone reposts it just ignore it. Reposting something you feel was deleted and for an unjustified reason is a reasonable act and deleting it a second time is just provoking the person to repost it a third time and beyond. So if that is the case the author would lose because they provoked the reaction, unless of course the person is a troll.

                                          I will tell something. Review doesn't matter that much. Why? See this book, "Genius System Without Equal". See the overall rating, around 2-3 stars right? Now look closely, not at the powerstone, but at the number of people that supporting that book. That tab is showing how many people actually paying for that book. 1k something paying for a book that is rated 2 stars?

                                          FunnyBuns

                                          "I just said I don't understand people like her who think they have a right to silence people and I hope I never do."
                                          THIS^
                                          This statement from you just flat out says that you think that she is trying to silence people (like you). You might have interpreted the "you" as you personally, but I mean "you all, in general". But when did she say that she wanted to silence you?

                                          Her original statement:
                                          "That's your right but do not post them again and again if he deletes it because the way commenting is your right, deleting comes under his."

                                          • which means, you both have the right to post, but posting it over and over when someone is allowed to delete is not right.

                                          Why do you think that the author deleting the comment a 2nd time is the escalator? The author owns the work. He/She has the right to have whatever displayed on their own work, regardless of what a reader thinks. If it violates WN's guidelines then they will do something about it.

                                          Taking your logic, then it would be ok to:
                                          - Write whatever slander you feel like on a person's house, just because "you" feel that it's justified.

                                          In reality:
                                          - "You" would be arrested for vandalism and sued in court. It does not matter how "true" you think the statement is, because "you" are the escalator. The question of the poster being a troll does not even need to come up.

                                              FunnyBuns LostInFictions does NOT think she has a right to silence people. Stop putting words in her mouth. Or do you have a problem with your reading comprehension?

                                              If you continually repost despite the author deleting your comment or review, you are harassing the author. You are committing stalker-ish behavior. This is illegal. I already explained it to you above, but you seem to have ignored me so that you can cherry-pick and interpret LostInFiction's post however you want. It doesn't matter if you think it's unjustified, you do not have the right to harass people. You are not being silenced, and if you are "provoked" into reposting, you are stalking someone online and harassing him/her. Period.

                                              What, if a girl hangs up on you because you called her, are you going to keep calling her a second time, a third time, and more? Because she has no right to "silence" you? Because by hanging up, she "provoked" you into calling her again and again? What kind of logic is that? You'll get arrested for stalking and harassing her. Or at the very least, she will receive a protection order from you. Don't misunderstand "freedom of speech" - it doesn't mean nobody can silence you or you can say whatever you want. If you say whatever you want, you have to face the consequences - freedom of speech doesn't save you from getting punched if you slander somebody in public. It certainly doesn't protect you from getting your comment or review deleted if the author is unhappy with what you said. It doesn't matter if you think it's unjustified, the fact of the matter is that you do not harass people just to...I don't know, because you are under some delusion that you have every right to free speech and you shouldn't be "silenced."

                                              Authors have the right to be protected from harassment. If it comes at the expense of "silencing," then so be it. Except that you are not being silenced. You already said your piece. You let the author know how you felt. So why are you so adamant on reposting your opinion over and over again? What are you trying to achieve through harassing the author?

                                                  kazesenken I can only roll my eyes and stop here. If you truly think the two equate then it would be a waste of everyone's time and my sanity to try and convince you the fact that you are wrong.

                                                  For the second part holy shit. You would actually compare criticism in a review to slander and vandalism? You have serious issues if you think the two can be compared.

                                                  BTW the author owns the work sure, but they don't own the webpage it is hosted on, it doesn't matter what the author thinks belongs on there if webnovel thinks it nothing is wrong with it being there than it is okay to be there. The fact that webnovel lets you repost it means it is okay to be there. They have the right to decide they don't want it to be there, but unfortunately, they don't have the right to decide if it belongs there, when deciding to post here they agreed to webnovels terms, not webnovel agreeing to their terms and if you truly think they do have the right to decide after my explanation than you are a lost cause. Ultimately if webnovel deems it doesn't belong there it doesn't, but the author has no right to say that a review can't be there, only that they don't want it there. I also feel I should mention that only applies to non-contracted works. When you sign a contract with webnovel they own the work and they can replace the author. In reality that is true with just about any work, a perfect example is Star Wars, George Lukas said what they wanted for the third trilogy is not what his creation is about and he refused to direct it, so Disney which owns the rights replaced him, and webnovel which own the contracted series can replace the current author.

                                                  Finally, it really depends on where you live. Where I live at least, I could actually be the one to sue the author for deleting my review as it is a violation of my freedom of speech, if the author sued he'd just be laughed at in secret due to thinking they can sue someone for exercising their rights while attempting to deny someone their rights.

                                                  People like you seem to be under the delusion that the author is always in the right. And I totally wasted my time on you so I need to go contemplate why I'm trying to explain simple things to morons.

                                                      FunnyBuns

                                                      FunnyBuns Finally, it really depends on where you live. Where I live at least, I could actually be the one to sue the author for deleting my review as it is a violation of my freedom of speech, if the author sued he'd just be laughed at in secret due to thinking they can sue someone for exercising their rights while attempting to deny someone their rights.

                                                      You have no idea what freedom of speech is. Go ahead and try it. You will get laughed out of court. I can guarantee you that.

                                                      Freedom of speech only protects you from being silenced by political organizations. Try that against an individual (like an author) or a private corporation like Webnovel, and you will get thrown out of court. Also, you will get counter-sued for harassment and you will be liable to pay for damages.

                                                      The First Amendment's freedom of speech right not only proscribes most government restrictions on the content of speech and ability to speak, but also protects the right to receive information, prohibits most government restrictions or burdens that discriminate between speakers, restricts the tort liability of individuals for certain speech, and prevents the government from requiring individuals and corporations to speak or finance certain types of speech with which they do not agree

                                                      If you don't have an understanding of how "freedom of speech" works legally, please don't talk nonsense. You are only making a fool out of yourself.

                                                          Tomoyuki Damn, why do you think I'm putting words in her mouth exactly? I'm totally not so I'd at least like to know where you got that misunderstanding?

                                                          I didn't see your reply, but honestly both sides are committing harassment, one side doesn't desire for their comment to be deleted and constantly deleting it is committing harassment. The legal definition of harassment is :the act of systematic and/or continued unwanted and annoying actions of one party or a group. So ultimately the one deleting the review is committing harassment if the one reposting the review is committing harassment.

                                                          By the way, I know the case you were talking about, but what you said is totally out of context, so I recommend you at least give context as it is not nearly as bad as you make it seem with your words. BTW what you are talking about was blown completely out of proportion by the author and he left out details while adding lies to make himself look like a victim. You weren't in the discord so you wouldn't know the whole truth behind it so you can't be blamed for that.

                                                              Web Novel Novel Ask