My system takes a lot of inspiration from Goodreads, because I like the general feeling it associates with each star and I don’t want my rating to vary wildly from what I post there when I finish a book.
Technically, my ratings are on a scale of 1 to 10, but I prefer the reduced 1 to 5 so that half points mean more and are easier to quantify.
5 out of 5
Nothing is perfect, but this is as close as a book can get for my tastes. Any flaws are at most a nitpick here or there. A significant intersection of great writing, storytelling, and an enjoyable reading experience.
4 out of 5
A great book with some minor problems that hold it back. In many cases this can be a book I have really strong feelings about and had a lot of fun reading, but a few things in the execution or structure nagged at me.
3 out of 5
A good book overall, but with some more glaring issues holding it back. This rating is often a result of disharmony between enjoyment and critical assessment, representing either a book of recognizable quality that I didn’t enjoy reading all that much, or a more flawed book that was nevertheless good fun.
2 out of 5
A book that is at best just okay. Not without merits, but the reading experience as a whole trended more towards the negative and the writing had some severe flaws.
1 out of 5
A book that I flat out did not like. Little to no redeeming qualities, though it maybe includes some interesting ideas, concepts, or characters worth noting.
0.5 extra may be added to any rating level for a book I feel comes close to crossing into a higher tier, but doesn’t quite make it.
A 0.5 out of 5 rating would be a book that I actively hated yet finished out of pure spite (unfinished books do not get reviewed). This has yet to occur, but I figure I should account for the possibility.