Authors, How Do You Feel About Three-Star Ratings?

I don't know exactly how to view three-star ratings. If there was a written review attached, they'd be more clarifying, but Kindle readers in particular tend to award star ratings only, because Kindle makes it so easy to do. Just jam your finger on a star and be done with it. 

I've adopted a more realistic view of written reviews. They're not necessarily easy to write, and the process demands a thoughtful evaluation of a book; not just "Ehh, it was okay". 

That said, I am surprised that more of my ebook readers haven't bothered to even rate my novel. Even I would be willing to put forth the "effort" once I finished reading a book, and I can be a lazy lump.

So, taking that into consideration, I should be grateful for any rating. But I'd still love to know what a three-star rating signifies.

Google says:

The Official Definition: Goodreads formally labels 3 stars as "liked it," sitting right in the middle of a 5-star scale (1 = didn't like it, 2 = it was ok, 3 = liked it, 4 = really liked it, 5 = it was amazing). 

The "Average" or "Meh" View: Many readers treat 3 stars like a school "C" grade or an "it was just okay" review. To these users, 3 stars means the book was readable or interesting enough to finish, but ultimately forgettable or flawed. 

The "Solid and Good" View: Other readers use 3 stars as their default rating for a standard, enjoyable book that met expectations without blowing them away. 

The Author Perspective: Because online algorithms (like Amazon's) heavily favor 4-star and 5-star reviews for visibility, authors often view 3 stars as a neutral-to-disappointing rating that hurts a book's promotional momentum, even though the reader technically enjoyed it.

It's up to the individual reader, I guess. But I tend to view it as being a "meh". Of course, I'm known for my over-sensitivity.

While three-star ratings are open to interpretation, an author is able to see the ratings history of readers who awarded them. My three-star rating (without text) is from a person who reads romance exclusively. Therein lies my continuing problem--making it clear that my novel isn't a romance. I don't know what I can do about that. The book is categorized as women's fiction, the cover doesn't feature a couple, the title only refers to "herself"--there is no "himself". Even the blurb, I believe, lays out what the story is about. But people will do what they do.

At least with my only other three-star, the reader did include a text review. She didn't connect with the MC who "only does things because she does them". That's fine. Everyone has their own perspective. When they say a book isn't for everyone, that's absolutely true.

So, does an optimist view a three-star rating as, "They liked it!", while the pessimist concludes, "It wasn't worth my time writing it"? 

And does a fatalist think, "It doesn't really matter"?

The very last review I've gotten (on both Amazon and Goodreads) was on August 14, and I had to scratch and claw to get it (book blogger). So the reviews/ratings that are out there are about all I'm going to get.

I still wish my Kindle readers would jam their finger on a star--any star.