Some feel that Goodreads' dominant position, coupled with limited development by Amazon, has prevented better tools emerging for personalized book recommendations. Goodreads has also fallen under criticism from users who feel that the site is outdated and prone to frequent crashes and bugs, and that the recommendations are poor, frequently suggesting popular books at random rather than anything more personalized. Authors who are aware of the site have noted problematic qualities such as a lack of proper disambiguation for authors with the same name, rough drafts being catalogued to the site by virtue of having an ISBN, and an inability to list the author's preferred name for formerly pseudonymous authors who want to claim their pseudonymous works under their real legal name; Goodreads opts instead to list the pseudonym as the primary author, also displaying the early pseudonymous edition as the prominently displayed edition on Goodreads, even if this is no longer relevant. Transgender authors who previously published under "dead names", according to Goodreads, can contact the website directly to request exceptions. Some authors have criticized Goodreads's stance on functioning like a public library rather than giving authors any control over how their information is displayed, noting that for most authors, Goodreads is the first page people see when they search on a web browser. It has also been criticized that Goodreads allows both users and authors to post quotes attributed to an author without verification of any sort; removal of such quotes is left largely in the hands of volunteer "librarians", as authors have little to no individual control over quotes posted to their own profiles. Having false or invalid quotes removed can be a difficult process; problematically the quotes can be picked up by third-party websites like Pinterest and Instagram in the meantime, spreading invalid quotes attributed to the author even further, as Goodreads quotes bring a high amount of web traffic. Goodreads often refuses to remove quotes with "likes" from an author's profile, even if the quotes are false or invalid. Both authors and readers have noted an increase in political banter, trolling, cancel culture and cyberbullying afflicting the website. Goodreads has tried to address this, implementing rules such as only allowing reviewers to criticize a book itself, not author behaviour or political affiliations. Some users consider this decision to be a form of censorship.