On Saturday 24 February 2001 20:10, -kn wrote:
> >>>>> "Jim" == Jim Freeze <jim / freeze.org> writes:
>
> ..-
>
> | Hi all: I was just at Amazon looking at the reviews for Programming Ruby,
> | and frankly, they suck. To be more accurate, they are more negative about
> | Ruby than about the book.
> |
> | For example, here are three of the four reviews:
>
> (...)
>
> Hi,
>
> those critics were not very verbose, but if those people took the time to
> fill a negative review / opinion on amazon.com probably is there something
> in the way ruby is perceived that triggers those reactions. It would be
> interesting to investigate that.
>

Well, based upon my exprerience designing, building and managing virtual 
communities, being subscribed to _tons_ of mailing lists (mostly technical 
but a varying range of subjects) it is more likely a probelm with the 
reviewers than with what is being reviewed. Only one of the three listed was 
in any way a "qualified" review. Frequently, the negatives on anything show 
up first (I've attended a _ton_ of project meetings too!)  to be followed by 
more reasoned analyses of the pros and cons. 

Frankly, I don't put too much stock in reviews by non-professionals (and even 
with them have to consider how they are paid, and who pays their bosses) but 
most of them _do_ try to provide some justification for their conclusions and 
in the context of greater issues beyond the subject at hand. I'm more likely 
to be influenced by DDJ, Linux Journal or the IBM publications regarding 
computers and technology than by anything I might see at Amazon's site. 

Regards,

Kent Starr
elderburn / mindspring.com