What's a book cataloging site that's not complete shit?

i honesly dont care about shit reviewerz.nor do i look for them. good recommendation tool and diary imho

layout is dog shit ugly but thats my only issue

The only books I read in public are ones with almost offensively Christian titles to trigger people.

Librarything is a little bit better. Less social media oriented and more focused on archival but still has reviews and discussions.

>Here's a top tip: get hold of a hardback edition of one of these pompous books, cut out the middle couple of hundred or more pages of it, and then you can just put your usual, normal, real people's, non-hipster, pompless, friendly-neighborhood, genuinely readable, unpretentious, happybrow, fun, top-entertainment books inside it, so that people think you're ultra-hip and highbrow and can actually make sense of that wacko shit.

triggered.rar

The best Goodreads reviews aren't stupid teenagers reading 50 pages of Dostoevsky and moaning about "characters I don't like".

The best ones are when the kids are too stupid to even read mediocre YA.

All those women getting butt-blasted that there isn't enough women on the list.

>Perhaps a list for Genuinely Thought-Provoking Books or Deeply Intelligent Reading would have better diversity. I know several female authors that could wipe the floor with the competition in that case.

Why do they care? Do they think that other women's intelligence is an indicator of their own?

>a clockwork orange
>catcher in the rye
>jane eyre
>the trial
>god is not great
>the god delusion

what the hell is this list. it's like some guy just picked books that he knew were famous not strictly for their plot

>an insufferable book snob
You mean not a fucking idiot?

Every site will have retards, but you actually search for them instead of just ignoring. why

is it le fucking epikz to get pretend-mad like sjws?

goodreads.com/list/show/4093.Best_Books_of_the_Decade_2010_s

Use it for a cataloger and recommendations. Nothing else.
#wow

/pol/ will always be out to look for a chance to get offended just like sjws.

>nobody actually offered a better solution to goodreads

On that topic, how about a website for organizing shit but for movies?

letterboxd. Though, it's quite shit since they don't give you recommendations. Something like rym is ideal, as they also have upcoming work by artists you've liked.
We basically need rym for every form of art.

There's MAL for anime and manga.

Oh wait, you said "art". Nevermind.

filmaffinity

You do realize that you are voluntarily making public all the books you've ever read and your opinions on them? Big Brother could only dream of such unfettered access to your thoughts and inclinations.

>implying you need to rate the books

Rating books with a system so restrictive as a 1 to 5 star rating is a terrible idea.

this

I don't give a shit about reviews. Neither should you.

What the actual fuck

that's very great for you but I like to see some discussion about literature because I don't know anybody offline that i can discuss these things with

...

Women, ammirite?

This is actually a great book

No, LibraryThing was mentioned. It's much better in terms of cataloging.

>Check out people who've read 4000-6000 books.
>Airport novel/chick literature garbage.

reading lot makes you dumb?

It really is. I know Hart himself can turn people off because I hear he can be petty sometimes, but he is an excellent stylist and a very knowledgeable theologian.

Give me some cliffs about it.