Full Review to come (maybe), but in short this was ~40 pages of an author whining about reviewers. Despite some truth to what he shows in examples, there is nothing new or insightful with his findings. There are no reasonable solutions offered either, just a lot of sweeping comments like "Amazon shouldn't allow..." or "reviewers should never...." about certain reviews he found objectionable. In truth, many of those examples are not allowed. Just report them. But others are far too difficult to measure, and his call to remove these reviews is only meant to put balm on an authors hurt feelings. He propses doing away with honest reviews that he deems to be too negative. And while he might find supporters, defining which reviews are 'too negative' would be highly subjective.
I will agree with him on the point that some reviews are harsh and ugly and fail to add even one possitive comment, but as long as they review the book, review sites will not delete or ban the reviewer simply because they hurt an authors feelings. And how would one even define and draw the line for these reviews? What defines acceptable? Who would get to play the rule maker in deciding which of these reviews should be deleted? Whose moral compass must reviewers follow? You won't find any good answers in this book.
Bottom line, this book read like an author who just needed to vent about his bad reviews, and by doing so ended up with a long blog post he decided to just publish as a book instead. I was hoping for something insightful, but after reading it I failed to see why anyone would want to pay to read this. But if you want to read about an authors total dismay with the review system in a pain-stakingly wordy tomb, this is your book.