[PNewling]

Not that this is the perfect fix, but at least for sci-fi books you can usually look the Hugo Award winners[0] for ones that are solid. Not all of them are my cup of tea, but I have found that I definitely love some of the series that are found there. I'm sure there are other award types per genre that could help point you to some as well. Not that these can't be gamed, or sponsored or whatever, but at least it is a good starting point that is (¿maybe?) less prone to bot bias campaigns.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Award_for_Best_Novel

[nomdep]

That was true until 10 or 15 years ago. They have been riddled with (accusations of) bias and fraud since then

[exmadscientist]

The Hugo and Nebula winners (and shortlists, do not forget those) aren't perfect, but they're almost always worth a look. Pretending that they're total garbage is doing yourself a disservice.

[megmogandog]

Wow, I hadn't heard about the fraud in 2024, which I looked up in response to your comment. That's troubling to say the least.

Bias, though, is going to be inevitable and the Hugos are going to represent the taste of the Worldcon voters. It seems like overall there's been a happy confluence for awhile now between their taste and general sf taste.

I've discovered three of my favorite contemporary sf authors through recent Hugos: Ann Leckie, Arkady Martine, and Tamsyn Muir. I've read other recent nominees where I was unmoved or even questioned their inclusion.

I've also read a decent selection of historical winners, by no means exhaustive or even the majority, and the worst was without a doubt Hominids by Robert J. Sawyer.

[sdenton4]

I strongly support this! For the last few years, I've been signing up as a Hugo voter, and read a bunch of great stuff that I otherwise would have missed. Sometimes the best books are a bit divisive, but still make the shortlist. (Saint of Bright Doors, for example...)