red H

Just a heads up. The moderators on here will fuck with your head, so watch out. They set up hundreds of accounts and manipulate and mess with the scores and your private messages. Notice how the people responding to your thread sound like they've been around here for awhile, when their accounts are actually brand new.

Author Beware. These moderators have a lot of fun messing with people, right Librastud.

There is no moderator here in the AH.
 
and you're assured of this how? Don't tell me you actually trust anyone on here enuff to believe their bullshit.

I don't remember you being this paranoid.

New tattoo idea for you.

http://t3.***********/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRsXjsik2k-ewIomX8BuNEnfRgWWfzRRKxgbd2xP-3lIyVfjmtx
 
Just a heads up. The moderators on here will fuck with your head, so watch out. They set up hundreds of accounts and manipulate and mess with the scores and your private messages. Notice how the people responding to your thread sound like they've been around here for awhile, when their accounts are actually brand new.

Author Beware. These moderators have a lot of fun messing with people, right Librastud.


Fucking bingo!

You finally hit it on the head.
 
First one to respond to SL's accusation

First one to respond to my reply.

You always seem to be right place, right time, don't you?

Goes a long way to prove the theory.
 
As far as Red H's go, it's all bullshit anyway. The weight to scoring is bogus, as giving a 5, doesn't carry the same weight as a 1 has.
To get a 4.5 avg with 10 votes or more, isn't that hard, it's the 1 bombs and the weight to how far a score can drop, yet a 5 doesn't counter it to bring it back to the original score.
I can write at that level all day, that much I proved to myself. Keeping the coveted little icons is sketchy, depending on trolls and asshats. Most lists don't reflect the true worth of stories and therefore basing anything on the system used in here is very inaccurate.
As an amateur, it's nice to see those little rewards to know we are getting better, but the real world works nothing like it does in here.
 
You can probably gain appreciation for having anything above a 4.0 by considering that you have to have more 5 votes than anything else to get anything about a 4.0.
 
You can probably gain appreciation for having anything above a 4.0 by considering that you have to have more 5 votes than anything else to get anything about a 4.0.

I've come to think the same way. A 4 is a damn good vote.
 
You can probably gain appreciation for having anything above a 4.0 by considering that you have to have more 5 votes than anything else to get anything about a 4.0.

I don't follow that. 99 4s and one 5 will get you a 4.01.
 
"New accounts"?

There's only one poster on the thread with less than a year under his or her belt.

The average # of submissions across posters on the thread is 85.5 ( at minimum 750 word count that's 64k words )

The average # of posts per user is over 8000.

And there are at least 4 posters on the thread with alternate/combined pen names ( some, more than 1 ) which pushes the submission # even higher in reality. My personal word count across all three pen names is approaching 2 million on Lit alone, and should easily be over that bar with stories exclusive to other sites.

Even stripping out the posters with curve bending post counts or submission counts, it's still a damn lot of posts and a shitload of words worth of story submissions.

That's a pretty ambitious "smokescreen" to throw up just to fuck with a random poster here and there.
 
because 99 x 4 = 396. 396+5= 401. 401 (total score) Ă· 100 (votes) = 4.01

It's not that complicated really. :)

Yes, I'm capable of calculating a simple average, thanks :) What I was questioning there is the idea that 99 4s & 1 5 = "more 5 votes than anything else".
 
Just a heads up. The moderators on here will fuck with your head, so watch out. They set up hundreds of accounts and manipulate and mess with the scores and your private messages. Notice how the people responding to your thread sound like they've been around here for awhile, when their accounts are actually brand new.

Author Beware. These moderators have a lot of fun messing with people, right Librastud.

Not sure how I got involved in all of this.
 
Last edited:
Just a heads up. The moderators on here will fuck with your head, so watch out. They set up hundreds of accounts and manipulate and mess with the scores and your private messages. Notice how the people responding to your thread sound like they've been around here for awhile, when their accounts are actually brand new.

Author Beware. These moderators have a lot of fun messing with people, right Librastud.

Nah. Trolls maybe.

As far as Red H's go, it's all bullshit anyway. The weight to scoring is bogus, as giving a 5, doesn't carry the same weight as a 1 has.
To get a 4.5 avg with 10 votes or more, isn't that hard, it's the 1 bombs and the weight to how far a score can drop, yet a 5 doesn't counter it to bring it back to the original score.
...

There's no weighing, it's straightforward math.
 
As far as Red H's go, it's all bullshit anyway. The weight to scoring is bogus, as giving a 5, doesn't carry the same weight as a 1 has.
To get a 4.5 avg with 10 votes or more, isn't that hard, it's the 1 bombs and the weight to how far a score can drop, yet a 5 doesn't counter it to bring it back to the original score.

I have always had an obsessive personality. When I was in elementary school, I was obsessed with baseball, and baseball statistics. With televised games, every time a player bats, his batting average is displayed--updated to his last at bat. I used to try and guess the players' averages before they were shown, based on his last posted average and his latest at bat. I found that a hit drove an average up more than an out dragged it down. I played around with those numbers for quite a while, and ultimately determined that averages like to be close to the midpoint of the number range. Since batting averages are in the .000 - 1.000 range, .500 is the midpoint, and players are typically between .200 and .350. Therefore, a hit (1.0) will bring it up more than an out (0.00) will bring it down.

The same is true with story scores on Lit., although it works in the opposite direction. The range is 1-5. Therefore the midpoint is 3, and scores are typically between 4.00 and 4.99. A score below the average will drive the average down faster than a score above the average will raise it. That's why it takes more 5s to overcome a 4, and why 1s and 2s do so much damage. The score wants to settle in around 3, and it resists attempts to raise it above that level.
 
The scores are likely a bit skewed.

I've read several story series on this site that were below 4.00 and were still quite good. Alternately, a couple of the so-called "top writers" here do nothing for me at all and I have no idea why some of them are so highly rated.

If a story is good enough for me to vote, I vote what I think it should be. If it has multiple chapters and a couple of them aren't as well-written as the previous ones, my vote will reflect that.

I think the fans can be a little over-eager to ensure that their favorites authors get to the top, regardless if what they recently wrote isn't all that great.

Just my two cents.
 
The scores are likely a bit skewed.

I've read several story series on this site that were below 4.00 and were still quite good. Alternately, a couple of the so-called "top writers" here do nothing for me at all and I have no idea why some of them are so highly rated.

If a story is good enough for me to vote, I vote what I think it should be. If it has multiple chapters and a couple of them aren't as well-written as the previous ones, my vote will reflect that.

I think the fans can be a little over-eager to ensure that their favorites authors get to the top, regardless if what they recently wrote isn't all that great.

Just my two cents.

fans?

where?
 
Back
Top