The article is right that Goodreads is used as "an organizational tool to keep track of what you've read" (or what you're planning to read). But that's actually a bad thing. Selecting books should have an element of randomness to it.
I think that would have to be at least part of the reason why they didn't call it "a selection tool to keep track of what you want to buy."
Comments
I think that would have to be at least part of the reason why they didn't call it "a selection tool to keep track of what you want to buy."
But Goodreads is that, it has a to-read and have-read list.