Life In 19x19

Cassandra wrote:If you wanted a reviewer to completely work through your list, it would be necessary to pay her.

A paid-for review is potentially just as biased as one posted by the author himself.

Seriously, I find the title of this thread bizarre. Nobody can objectively review their own book, and nobody should lend such a review any credence whatsoever.

Fortunately, if the title were to change to "Life and Death Problems 1 - Summary" that would mostly solve the problem. Most of the content truly is a summary of the book, rather than a critical review. The only subjective parts that I would remove are:

* Printing: good
* Layout: good
* Editing: good
...
* Subjective Rank Improvement: +
* Subjective Topic Coverage: o
* Subjective Aims' Achievement: ++

And I don't even know what those last three mean.

It is not a summary. Maybe, if you dislike "review", a "description of intermediate length".

A self-review is not necessarily objective, and a review is not necessarily objective, either. Among the many reviews of go books I have seen, I do not recall one that would qualify as objective. I think so, because every reviewer makes a choice of what he does or does not discuss and how he evaluates those things he discusses, while he does not provide an objective framework for such evaluation.

The ratings are explained here:
http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/isbn.html

***

Regardless of the degree of subjectivity or objectivity of a review or self-review, reviews are open: each of their statements can be read, discussed, compared and possibly evaluated.

@tchan: I was not trying to correct you, I just posted the dictionary definition because I thought it would be useful to the conversation.

Merriam-Webster also has the example: <the doctor predicted a quick snapback for the rugged young soldier>