Battle of the Review Site Owners
It begins in the link above and ends rather anticlimatically at Ann Somerville's's blog where she described Jesse's posts as "muck-racking". After all, Jesse said of Ann, "I would not consider her a reviewer of value. After our exchange today - the first I've had, and hopefully the last - I see no reason to revisit that assessment"... oh wait.
EmmyG's outspoken reviews on MM romances are too hot for some people to handle.
This is why I personally prefer to do things my own way. Way less freebies than I would otherwise get, but I realized that some people's freebies can come with expectations that I may not want to meet. Some people view review sites as advertisement portals. I don't blame them because some review sites do behave this way, and also, at the same I also understand why some authors and publishers may expect some good things in return for their freebies. Again, some reviewers (not all, but some) behave in a manner that encourages such perception. I personally choose to strike out on my own to avoid dealing with such matters.
"I declare my book literary fiction and thus better than vampire romances and chick lit... and agents are the devil for preventing my book from reaching publishers whom I just know will love me!"
She was roundly beaten up in the comment thread and I'd feel sorry of her if she weren't so mulish about her post, but the comment thread is worth reading because we have authors and agents trying to tell her why and how publishing is first and foremost a business and not her ego-prop. The information they provided can be quite illuminating to someone who is not in the industry.