The SCOURIES reader – for both fans and serious scholars…

Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m not sure where, when or why the red H’s originally arose. Did the H at one time represent a ‘hot’ story? Hot in the sense of sexually hot?

RTFM, n00b. ur n0t l33t!

If so, why do so many authors who don’t even attempt to write sexually hot stories get so upset if their story doesn’t get an H?

Like you're getting upset? Furthermore, nice way to assume your interpretation is the going one. Those are some spiffy tunnel-vision glasses you've got on.

I mean you wouldn’t think someone who’s written a ‘Non-Erotic’ or ‘Sci-Fi’ or ‘Essay’ category story would care if his story got an ‘H’. But Christ, do they ever!

Like you?

Why don’t you just put the numerical rating (i.e. 4.61) next to every story and the number of votes the rating is based on (i.e. 42) and leave it at that. Just imagine how much crying we’ll do away with.

Like yours?

(To the person who wondered why I didn’t post my scores: Of my 47 presently posted stories on Lit all but four have little red H’s. You can find the actual score for any story by looking them up one by one on the various category alphabetical lists.

Way to not answer the question! Please do not post replies on this thread doesn't apply when you're replying to someone else, does it?

I must admit, (as another rude but observant poster pointed out) my masterpiece, Literotica’s #1 best seller for 2006,

Is this some new Literotica: For Pay site that I wasn't told about? Holy shit! Link plz. Furthermore, 'masterpiece'? Please post actual, structured critique that proves that, and please provide evidence that this critiquer is not a sockpuppet.

is one of the four poor H-less orphans. However I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out that over 5,000 members of the electorate have seen fit to award this tale a perfect ‘5’. Which means it has received more ‘5’s’ than my next six most popular stories combined. It has also received more ‘5’s’ than any Literitica story in the history of the site. Hard to be angry knowing that!)

5 doesn't equal perfection, I was told. It equals an 80% rating. Furthermore, that is not a sign of perfection, but appeal.

Rob Schneider movies appeal to a lot of people too. So I guess that makes you the Rob Schneider of Lit! Congratulations!
 
scouries said:
SUGGESTION #4 – Why not give a detailed reason when you Reject a Story

I’ve had about 13 out of the 58 or so stories I’ve submitted to Literotica rejected. Some have been rejected up to five times!

Wonder why.

I’m always surprised when one is rejected. I think I understand Literotica’s rules and while I may not agree with them I do try to write my stories to conform to them. When a story of mine is rejected I rush to try and find the problem and correct it. My stories have been rejected for the following reasons:

*Poor Grammar
*Underage Characters
*Snuff Scene
*Wrong Category
*Bestiality

... not surprised.

But when one of the censors rejects a story they don’t provide very specific details – instead there is a line that asks something like ‘is there an underage character in this story?’ or ‘is this in the right category?’ or ‘does this story include bestiality?’ Shit, if you’ve read the story and decided it needs rejection why not be a little more specific?

Because you're a "good enough" writer that you shouldn't need your hand held, right?

Strangely at least nine of the thirteen stories I’ve had rejected were subsequently accepted without me making any changes at all! I just resubmit them with a note like ‘I looked for the underage character and don’t believe there are any of them in this story– I’d be happy to change something if you have some specific problem – please advise’. One of two things happens; one, usually the story is accepted without comment, or two, it’s rejected again but with again no highlighting of the exact problem.

So you're resubmitting by breaking the rules, without conforming to them, and simply hoping that your rule-breaking and your abuse of the site flies under the radar. Awesome! Why not mail the mods explaining exactly that, Jim?

I believe it would save me time and worry, as well as save your censors time, if they were quite specific when they reject a story. Something like, ‘Sally is only 16 years old when she has sex with Arthur in the middle of page two in your story – this is unacceptable and must be changed,’ or ‘it is not okay for Sally to have vaginal/penile intercourse with the dolphin in the second paragraph’.

What does that say that 'underage' and 'bestiality' do not? Don't you know what you wrote? Or is it simply Mad Libs: Porn Style, and you don't know the story until it's fully written and submitted on the site? I am confused!

I’ll then be able to immediately address the problem instead of slogging through ten thousand words trying to figure out what I’ve done wrong.

Why should the site's admins cater to you, especially when you freely admit to knowingly breaking the rules? You wreck it for the people that do follow the rules, and do make the effort.

So please, for all of our sakes, talk to your censors and get them to be a bit more specific in future.

Read: I'm too lazy to edit my own stories. I want the editors to do it for me.
 
scouries said:
I’ll then be able to immediately address the problem instead of slogging through ten thousand words trying to figure out what I’ve done wrong.
If your readers have to do it, why shouldn't you?

In fact, I know it's not my thread, but let me help you:

SUGGESTION #5 – Why not force all authors to read their own stories before submitting?

I'm not sure how to enforce this, but maybe with some sort of questionnaire, or making them include an abstract with the submission, but I'm certain it would reduce scouries' complaints by at least 50%. It's worth a shot!
 
So how are exams going, fcdc? I hear they can get pretty stressful, and people find all kinds of outlets. :)
 
jomar said:
So how are exams going, fcdc? I hear they can get pretty stressful, and people find all kinds of outlets. :)

They were done at 10:10 today!

You didn't see the dancing musical band of pandas in the authors' thread? :( Sad now.
 
Scribbled said:
Funny, you sure don't sound like a total newbie.

Thanks for the compliment. Check my postcount when that post was made, though.

I know how to write reasonably coherently, sound smarter than I am, and snark at the self-righteous wonders.

It's a gift - and a curse.
 
fcdc said:
They were done at 10:10 today!

You didn't see the dancing musical band of pandas in the authors' thread? :( Sad now.

Congrats! I like dancing panda's - I'll check them out. :D
 
fcdc said:
Oh, by the way: I am not turned on by incest at all, and I am a passable fiction writer at best (my background is in screenwriting), but I will bet you any amount of money that I could write a more accomplished story than your first one, with that as the subject (after finals). Care to bet?

What do you mean by "more accomplished" exactly? A higher rating? More votes? Or what?
 
Scribbled said:
What do you mean by "more accomplished" exactly? A higher rating? More votes? Or what?

Votes/ratings on here pretty much mean diddly-squat. I'm actually published, as in on paper. Scouries is only published here and other sites where quality isn't really monitored, per se.

I'm sure she meant "more accomplished" as in written better, more literary, etc. What scouries writes is purely stroke, and not very good stroke at that. As proof: anyone who draws out words like "I'm cuuuuummmmmiiiiiinnnnnggggg" is a pretty piss poor writer.
 
cloudy said:
Votes/ratings on here pretty much mean diddly-squat. I'm actually published, as in on paper. Scouries is only published here and other sites where quality isn't really monitored, per se.

I'm sure she meant "more accomplished" as in written better, more literary, etc. What scouries writes is purely stroke, and not very good stroke at that. As proof: anyone who draws out words like "I'm cuuuuummmmmiiiiiinnnnnggggg" is a pretty piss poor writer.
Oh, I won't say Scouries is a poor writer so soon. Look at all his reviews of his own masterpieces, one has to be very courageous to do such things. So I think "poor" would make an inappropriate word here. May I suggest using something else like "having a mental malfunction?"
 
cloudy said:
Votes/ratings on here pretty much mean diddly-squat. I'm actually published, as in on paper. Scouries is only published here and other sites where quality isn't really monitored, per se.

I'm sure she meant "more accomplished" as in written better, more literary, etc. What scouries writes is purely stroke, and not very good stroke at that. As proof: anyone who draws out words like "I'm cuuuuummmmmiiiiiinnnnnggggg" is a pretty piss poor writer.

Well, congratulations on being published. What is the Amazon.com link?

Do you think that the majority of readers come to Literotica for "more literary" stories?
 
Scribbled said:
Well, congratulations on being published. What is the Amazon.com link?

Do you think that the majority of readers come to Literotica for "more literary" stories?

Look under "Coming Together." I have stories in three of the volumes. I'm sorry, you're just not that important to me for me to spend the time finding a link for you. You want to see? Look it up yourself.

As far as the majority of readers goes: I don't care. My readers like what I write. That's all that matters. Just an FYI: I've won several awards here (one of my award winners has been pulled for publication), unlike scouries, and included in those is one year-end Reader's Choice Award, so I'm not just talking out of my ass, like you and like scouries.

:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Scribbled said:
Do you think that the majority of readers come to Literotica for "more literary" stories?
No, she doesn't think that, and she knows for a fact that most Lit readers do not seek long and build-up stories. But she writes build-up stories anyway.

There are writers who actually want to write stories which will be enjoyed and remembered and discussed on for much longer after it reaches a reader. Those writers don't want their stories to be just a cheap-and-easy stroke that can get some miserable person off on a Saturday night without a date. They want the stories to remain in the minds of the readers who actually seek a good piece of literature. They want their stories to be helpful to someone, either making them feel better, or giving them hope, or condolences, etc.

Those writers don't write for votes, they write because it makes them happy. Maybe when you stop thinking like a miserable person who hasn't got laid in God knows how long, and start appreciating real works, you'll know what I've been talking about here.

P/s: I keep saying "those writers" because I haven't had any story submitted yet, but when I do, I'll be proud if I get counted in that group.
 
FatDino said:
No, she doesn't think that, and she knows for a fact that most Lit readers do not seek long and build-up stories. But she writes build-up stories anyway.

There are writers who actually want to write stories which will be enjoyed and remembered and discussed on for much longer after it reaches a reader. Those writers don't want their stories to be just a cheap-and-easy stroke that can get some miserable person off on a Saturday night without a date. They want the stories to remain in the minds of the readers who actually seek a good piece of literature. They want their stories to be helpful to someone, either making them feel better, or giving them hope, or condolences, etc.

Those writers don't write for votes, they write because it makes them happy. Maybe when you stop thinking like a miserable person who hasn't got laid in God knows how long, and start appreciating real works, you'll know what I've been talking about here.

P/s: I keep saying "those writers" because I haven't had any story submitted yet, but when I do, I'll be proud if I get counted in that group.

Thank you, Dino. :rose:

And, you're exactly right. My goal isn't to get someone to stroke off to what I write. If they do, fine, but that is the furthest thing from my mind.

My goal is to eventually make a living from writing. Stroke won't do that for you.
 
cloudy said:
Thank you, Dino. :rose:

And, you're exactly right. My goal isn't to get someone to stroke off to what I write. If they do, fine, but that is the furthest thing from my mind.

My goal is to eventually make a living from writing. Stroke won't do that for you.
Anytime, love. :)

Of course I'm right. I'm always right when I decide to speak up. ;)
 
cloudy said:
Votes/ratings on here pretty much mean diddly-squat. I'm actually published, as in on paper. Scouries is only published here and other sites where quality isn't really monitored, per se.

I'm sure she meant "more accomplished" as in written better, more literary, etc. What scouries writes is purely stroke, and not very good stroke at that. As proof: anyone who draws out words like "I'm cuuuuummmmmiiiiiinnnnnggggg" is a pretty piss poor writer.

I meant "more accomplished" in any way at all it is defined. As you said, cloudy, scouries' stroke is not very good stroke at that. "I'm cuuuuummmmmiiiiiinnnnnggggg!" is like a bat between the legs, and is less arousing than, you guessed it, Danny deVito. ;)

Hypothesis: An erotica story that is better written will be more arousing than an erotica story that is written far less competently, even without all else being equal.

PS I am also published. Three WGA-registered screenplays, two stageplays produced with a full cast and crew, multiple stories in lit mags (some university-related, some for-pay), American Fellowship of Poetry. Currently in independent legal research that I will seek publication for around December. Working on one novel at the moment, historical fiction, which is about 75% done and which I will start shopping when I return from Chile. All of which are worth a damn sight more than scouries' highest rating here. When it comes down to brass tacks, for actual publishing stats: 5,000 readers is a small readership indeed.
 
sweetsubsarahh said:
I am still laughing, FC.

:D

(And congratulations on finishing finals!)

ah, yet another for-real published author shows herself. :D
 
fcdc said:
PS I am also published. Three WGA-registered screenplays, two stageplays produced with a full cast and crew, multiple stories in lit mags (some university-related, some for-pay), American Fellowship of Poetry.

And how would one find out more information on your considerable achievements?
 
sweetsubsarahh said:
Did I just flash my tits 'er somethin'?

:cathappy:

(Hey - but Mrs. Giggles actually liked my story. That should be suspect, yannow?)

She didn't like mine - I don't think. "Native mumbo-jumbo," if I remember right. :D
 
Scribbled said:
And how would one find out more information on your considerable achievements?

Just what is your problem? You're awfully damn pissy when someone disagrees with you.

Jealous much?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top