Book reviews are for the readers. They always have been. And they are also extremely subjective. If you didn’t like a book, that is completely your opinion. Other people can share your opinion, but you are not “correct” in your opinion. And other people aren’t “wrong” for disagreeing with you.
Now, if you rate a book one star because you didn’t like it. That’s fine. If it wasn’t your cup of tea, if you didn’t like the style, if you didn’t gel with the characters, etc. Those are all perfectly acceptable reasons to not like a book. And by all means, rate it whichever way you want.
However, if you rate a book one star and your review says, “I don’t like vampire books.” And there was no way you could have picked up the book without knowing it was going to be full of vampires, I don’t think you deserve to put a one star review on that book. If you don’t like vampire books and you purposefully read a vampire book, that is completely your own fault and the book’s rating shouldn’t suffer because of your poor choices. You are allowed to not like vampire books – but don’t read them. Don’t pick them up, don’t buy them, don’t read them, and definitely don’t review them.
Also, I don’t understand the way people rate things in general. I know there isn’t a defined code anywhere – or if there is, no one at all sticks to it. But when I read a glowing review about how much a person loved a book and for all intents and purposes tells me it’s a great read – why did they only give it two stars?
Make it make sense.
Anyway. This was just a little rant. I would never hate on someone for their opinion of a book, but I wish there was a more standardized practice with the star rating part of things. And don’t pick up vampire books if you don’t like vampire books.