I am really quite unsure of what people on this site want anymore. I review as I was taught by publishing houses, and try to be objective as possible. When I give a four star review, sometimes the author of the piece becomes incredibly ballistic. In my opinion, no one, not even myself, writes five star work all of the time. In fact, if I have an off day (I write every day), some of my work is of two or even one star quality.

Then I encounter the reviewer who always reviews beyond his ability. I have people try to review a work of mine in Spanish or French when they don't read those languages. How on earth is that of help to me? Sure, the "reviewer" receives his member dollars, but I thought reviewing was supposed to concern itself with the piece.

Then there are a few reviewers who are constantly cruel, not only to me, but also to all. One of these reviewers opined that because I wrote notes on my work, that made it not a good work. When I challenged her on it, she posted a manipulative essay trying to arouse sympathy for her and obviously did not state what my real objection to her review was. (She thought I was upset she gave me four stars! Goodness, I have been ripped apart by professional critics enough not to become upset by THAT. I was very upset she didn't review the piece at all.)

I am left to wonder, especially with the departure of two very fine writers, if people really want professional criticism on this site. I am quite torn. I have been rewarded Reviewer of the Month once every year since I joined and in January of 2009 garnered 28 votes for that award. Yet often when I give less than five stars, I receive a not so nice reply back.

So I am asking you, the members on this site, what you want in a review. I know what I want, which is academic criticism that is honest and capable. However, is that what you all want? I truly want to know.