I made the mistake of looking up my books on Amazon and found this stunner:
Andrew Gelman is the worst writer I’ve read thus far in the Political Science field. The book was painfult to read, he never made his point, it was incredibly redundant. This book should not be a book, it was an article unnecessarily stretched out for a book. Not for Political Scientist at all, nor for anyone with sincere inquiries about the paradox of voting in the States.
This sort of thing doesn’t really bother me (much)—the wonderful thing about the Web is that people can broadcast whatever they feel. What surprised me, though, was that this reviewer gave our book three stars! What would it take to get one or two-star review under these standards?