It has been long since I posted a review. The main reason for it is that it has reached a point that many of the books I have interest in reviewing I have already done so. Now I more or less depend on what I read to make new reviews, and the process is obviously slower.
But on the other hand, there is another reason that I have just come to realize. It turns out my reviews are greatly biased towards books I've liked.
I do this on my free time, I do not get the books for free from the publisher, so I have no pressure to make good reviews, but there are some unexpected (for me) barriers that make the task of making bad reviews harder.
The obvious reason is that making bad reviews you are hurting someone else's feelings, and it is not very pleasant. Every book I'll review will have tons of work and love put into it after all.
On the other hand, there is a deeper reason: You usually don't read the books you don't like, and for me it is very difficult to review books I have not finished (or studied seriously).
Maybe I have an oversized sense of honesty, but it feels wrong to make a bad review of something you have not fully read.
Anyways, this turns out to be a disservice to my readers (as few as you may be). My main objective for writing this was to offer another point of view so someone searching for a book would make an informed decision, and the fact that I did not liked a book may be as compelling as the fact that I liked one.
In the future I'll try to improve on this things, and I will start making two 'bad' reviews. However, be aware that I will have yet another bias: I will only notice bad books from usually good publishers or hyped titles. Of course it will never cross my mind spend money on books I suspect before hand that do not deserve my money. So keep that in mind.