Just to clear things up, because of the way GR formats editions, I didn't realize that the paperback edition had an actual description. I was responding to the original list of advanced praise excerpts in the description on this edition, which has since been changed to an actual description. That seems to have caused some confusion. That's what the sentence below is commenting on.
Huh. Turns out the paperback edition actually had a description. original response to the reviews in the description pane in lieu of an actual, you know, description
the blurb sucks and is total bullshit because it's not a blurb. I don't want any of that advanced praise mumbo jumbo. Don't goddamn tell me what to fucking think; I can think for myself, fuck you very much.
Also, it's against GR's Terms.
Edit: Seeing as the above was perceived as an attack, let me rephrase:
I think this blurb sucks and is bullshit because it doesn't qualify under what I think a blurb should do (i.e. be a short description of the story). I don't want any of that advanced praise mumbo jumbo. I dislike it because it presumes to tell me what to think of the story before I read it, and I don't want any other goddamn person to tell me what the fuck to think; I can think for myself, fuck you very much (which I direct to the Advanced Praise entity itself, addressing its existence where I do not want it, and not the author or any of the affiliated persons).
Also, advanced praises are still against GR's Terms, so they shouldn't have been here in the description. Someone wants to put them in the beginning of the story? Fine. You're allowed to do that. I'll still ignore it and comment on how they annoy me in the beginning of my review because they would be in the text of the work and I, as a reviewer in my reviewing space, would be entitled to comment on that however I wished