It is indeed irrational to pass judgment over something without having read it, but the modal qualifier in this context specifies that her character "MAY BE an improvement on the original," which I don't judge to be impermissible, considering I haven't heard good things about the story. I can't see how that could be construed as a (direct) dig at Twilight, but then, I may be under an authorship bias.

(As for not reading Twilight, well, to be more accurate, I have come up with an informal probability estimate based on multiple secondary and tertiary sources, indicating the likelihood of my deriving more fun and profit from reading, say, Jane Austen than Twilight. Accordingly, I have arranged my reading list in that order: Don't attempt Twilight till you have exhausted the best Jane Austen has to offer.

Do you feel that this guess of mine is rooted in misperceptions? At the risk of jumping to conclusions myself, your rebuke could be taken to (indirectly) imply that I have underestimated my chances of liking it. Moreover, I have this less-than-entirely-rational tendency to favor strong personal recommendations over judgments supported by diffuse criteria like one or two reviews obviously prioritizing entertainment value over accuracy and what I've been told in passing by such-and-such people. Bear in mind, it is invariably the participants whose personalities enliven a romance and make it interesting for me, and it is already established that I'm not enamored of Bella or Edward as portrayed in the opening chapters of Luminosity.

Still, don't hesitate to speak your mind. Maybe I've misjudged them from limited exposure, or maybe I'll like something else about the story. If you do recommend Twilight and I hate it, I promise not to hold it against you. I will only inform you that in this case, you've misjudged the compatibility of that novel with my tastes. Either way, the answer may provide you with a data point to help improve any future recommendations.)