Ratings–Is It Really That Big Of A Deal?

[madelinemasoch]

I see a lot of ink spilled about ratings on this forum. According to my observations, most people who provide writerly advice on this forum do so according to what they think readers will like or dislike, what they think will go over well with them in any particular category, what they think will get a writer good comments and high ratings, and other things of that nature. One obvious question that arises here is, do these writers actually write like that–making significant story/content/plot choices in accordance with what they think will get them high scores and good comments etc.–when they sit down at the keyboard? I would say, doubtful! And if I would be right, that would be a good thing.

However, how much does it really, truly matter, how high the ratings are that we get? It's like an album or even a song or a movie or even a TV show episode or for God's sakes even a BOOK or an essay perhaps getting panned by the critics when somebody writes a story that gets below a 4.5 rating. It's a minority of readers who rate stories just as it's a minority of audience members in general who are professional critics and reviewers in the entertainment industry as a whole. Whackdoodle might as well be our equivalent of Siskel and Ebert (and in this analogy I'm David Lynch, obviously). I hope you pick up what I'm putting down here.

How many pieces of art were panned by critics when they came out and then went down as (cult, if that) classics after the artist passed away? Nietzsche is one of the most influential philosophers today, but was relatively unknown and obscure while he was actually publishing and alive (bad editors abound, I know). You get panned by critics and you just move on to the next story. What I'm essentially saying is that I refuse to play the game according to the rules of "what scores well." Just as I refuse to play the game of romance and sex in general according to the rules of "what scores well." Why? Because I'd rather be thought-provoking and interesting than suffocated, formulaic, and sterile.

Somebody will popularize Eleanor Winter once I'm dead.

 

[alohadave]

It's a nice ego boost and an endorphin rush. It doesn't mean much else to me, other than it's interesting to see what readers like.

We don't have much else to gauge reception to our stories, so obsessing over it is not surprising.

 

[Voboy]

We don't have much else to gauge reception to our stories, so obsessing over it is not surprising.

This.

 

[SimonDoom]

No. It's not that big a deal. Many authors worry way too much about ratings.

What matters to me is writing the stories I want to write, and doing the best I can in writing them, and then finding as big an audience as I can for them. That, to me, is what this is all about. Everything else is a side show.

My experience, having published 59 stories here, is that ratings, while nice, have less to do with my sense of "success" than other things.

 

[gunhilltrain]

I see a lot of ink spilled about ratings on this forum. According to my observations, most people who provide writerly advice on this forum do so according to what they think readers will like or dislike, what they think will go over well with them in any particular category, what they think will get a writer good comments and high ratings, and other things of that nature. One obvious question that arises here is, do these writers actually write like that–making significant story/content/plot choices in accordance with what they think will get them high scores and good comments etc.–when they sit down at the keyboard? I would say, doubtful! And if I would be right, that would be a good thing.

However, how much does it really, truly matter, how high the ratings are that we get? It's like an album or even a song or a movie or even a TV show episode or for God's sakes even a BOOK or an essay perhaps getting panned by the critics when somebody writes a story that gets below a 4.5 rating. It's a minority of readers who rate stories just as it's a minority of audience members in general who are professional critics and reviewers in the entertainment industry as a whole. Whackdoodle might as well be our equivalent of Siskel and Ebert (and in this analogy I'm David Lynch, obviously). I hope you pick up what I'm putting down here.

How many pieces of art were panned by critics when they came out and then went down as (cult, if that) classics after the artist passed away? Nietzsche is one of the most influential philosophers today, but was relatively unknown and obscure while he was actually publishing and alive (bad editors abound, I know). You get panned by critics and you just move on to the next story. What I'm essentially saying is that I refuse to play the game according to the rules of "what scores well." Just as I refuse to play the game of romance and sex in general according to the rules of "what scores well." Why? Because I'd rather be thought-provoking and interesting than suffocated, formulaic, and sterile.

Somebody will popularize Eleanor Winter once I'm dead.

Thank you for comparing us, if only indirectly, with Nietzsche. I wonder what he'd write if he was moved to write for a site like this. What would he even think of amateur erotic literature sites?

You are correct in that chasing popularity for its own sake is not worth it. Some writers think there are "formulas" for gaining high scores. Lots of incestuous sex, probably with some kinks added, probably does work. Look at the most viewed story list.

That said, if readers are going to vote - and at least a few always will - then I'm going to be curious about what they've done. Yes, comments are a better indication of what a reader truly thinks, but those are scarce. I'm only human, and if somebody praises my work (it could be on any of the on three sites I joined), then I'm going to feel good about it.

 

[Zootonius]

One obvious question that arises here is, do these writers actually write like that–making significant story/content/plot choices in accordance with what they think will get them high scores and good comments etc.–when they sit down at the keyboard? I would say, doubtful! And if I would be right, that would be a good thing.

For myself, I write stories that turn me on. And for better or worse, many readers have given my stories good rating, simply because many readers here get turned on by what I write. I guess what I'm saying is the too many readers here want to be turned on. And their are few writers here that can elevate this genre to something more fulfilling.

My take, write what you like, critics be damned.

(And having had two glasses of wine this evening, I'm not sure if I made my point.)

(Herman Melville wasn't appreciated in his day either)

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Will Smith spent a period as the most successful actor at the box office for 7 or 8 years in a row.
It came out that he and his agent found a formula of sorts, things the high grossing movies had in common and he'd only sign to do movies that followed the formula.
It worked, he had a string of hits that made a ton of money, he made a ton of money and was regarded as box office magic.

But I don't think anyone ever regarded him as one of the great actors of his generation. There is no Casablanca or Saving Private Ryan in his filmography. He'll be a footnote in 30 years.

I'm sure you could do something similar here, figure out the most popular tags and follow the "formula". You'd write a ton of strokers and appeal to the masses, but it would most likely be forgettable stuff, even if it's highly rated.

That said, if a story is getting consistent 2s and 3s, it probably isn't that good, and you ought to stop and consider why and what you need to work on as an author. (Of course if you get all 4s and 5s you need to consider what you need to work on as an author too, it's just not as pressing a concern).

Accept whatever feedback you can get, but write the story you want to write.
I put an angle in my Holiday Contest story that I knew going in would guarantee I had no chance of winning (and no I didn't think I had a great chance without that angle). But it was a story I wanted to tell, and the fact it would draw some instant 1 votes doesn't bother me.

If anyone is curious...
https://www.literotica.com/s/a-snowy-christmas-journey

 

[madelinemasoch]

That said, if a story is getting consistent 2s and 3s, it probably isn't that good, and you ought to stop and consider why and what you need to work on as an author.

Why do you assume that? I write within 3 ratings for the most part and I don't believe what I write "isn't that good." Could it be that we automatically assume things like ratings are objective quality indicators without putting much more thought into that assumption?

 

[NotWise]

Ratings are no more or less important than you make them. I regard them as fairly important. If you don't, then that's fine, too.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Why do you assume that? I write within 3 ratings for the most part and I don't believe what I write "isn't that good." Could it be that we automatically assume things like ratings are objective quality indicators without putting much more thought into that assumption?

Ratings are inherently subjective. There is no objective way to grade quality in art. Some aspects are objective, spelling, and grammar for example, but content is inherently subjective.
That said, if your audience consistently gives you a low score isn't it reasonable to think there is a valid reason for it?
"Isn't that good" might be an overly broad statement, but we ought to at least consider that the audience's rating of our work means something.
It's certainly true that some author's works have been unappreciated in their time, but those are rare exceptions.

If you don't care about ratings that's fine, as others have said it isn't the end all be all, but it isn't meaningless either.
I've looked for authors whose stories are consistently rated higher than my own and after reading their stories I've come to the conclusion it's because their stories are consistently better written than mine.
I'm not embarrassed or ashamed of that, it just means I need to work at my craft and improve.
Have you read stories in the categories you write in with similar tags that are rated significantly higher than yours? Is your honest opinion that your stories are as good or better than those?

I'm not trying to be hurtful, but one of the most difficult things for people to do is be critical of their own work. It's harder still when we are passionate about something.

 

[ronde]

I do look at my story ratings, mostly to see what type of stories my followers want to read. I also track my average story rating to see if I'm improving.

I tend to stay in just a few genre because those genre are what I understand and what I enjoy writing, not because those genre are what most readers want to read. I seem to have attracted some followers or like mind, so my ratings are pretty consistent, though they do vary by genre. The only thing I do try to achieve is a happy ending to each story unless I'm going to continue it at some future date. I think most readers like a happy ending. It does seem that happy endings generate higher ratings.

Other than that, I just appreciate the ratings for what they are. Given that very few readers actually rate a story, they tell me that I'm reaching at least some of the huge Literotica audience and that some of them like my work enough to rate it.

 

[RejectReality]

Don't automatically assume that because people are suggesting what does or doesn't work in a category that they're suggesting you follow some formula.

When the likely reaction to an idea is negative, another category may be less hostile to the content, or perhaps an entirely different venue may be an option. If you're going forward, you should be at least prepared for the less than positive reaction you're likely to encounter.

When someone suggests something that goes over well in a category, it's not telling you to change your story to include it. It's simply information.

Virtually nobody is making suggestions with the idea that you should fit your story into some mold. Write the story, then figure out where to place it, and prepare yourself for negative reactions if necessary.

Scores matter to some extent. Because of the H, having it or not dramatically affects how many people will click your story. Having a score high on page one of a toplist can dramatically increases your readership. Losing that placing can severely stunt readership going forward.

Beyond those two things, your title and description are infinitely more important. If it's above 4.5 but below whatever the first quarter of the toplist page 1 is, your score will have basically no effect on readership. That's the area where people have the most useless frustration with score drops. Going from 4.75 to 4.55 is a heart-wrenching drop, but it's not going to change who will click the link.

You can glean a little about how you're doing in the category in question from the score. ( Comparing across categories is a fool's errand. ) There's a lot of potential aberrations that can skew it, but time and enough data points smooths some of that out. Combining score with the other metrics provides a little more insight.

Score is in no way a mark of quality or even enjoyment, but it has its uses and effects.

 

[StillStunned]

I think it's inherent in the act of publishing to want your works to be well received. Not writing per se - we all write what we want - but as soon as you decide to post your stories on Lit, or self-publish on Kobo or Kindle, or find a traditional publisher and get your dead-tree book out there, then you're doing this because you want others to read it.

And our writings are products of our minds: our imagination and our mastery of language. When people like our stories, that's confirmation that what we've produced is good. A less-than-favourable rating, on the other hand, implies that someone thinks either one of those factors is not as good as we think. That hurts, to a greater or lesser degree. And a red H is a confidence booster, or a bit of encouragement. Nothing more, nothing less.

Ask yourself this: without the rating system, what other way would we have of getting feedback on our stories? Comments? Please, those are a percentage of a percentage of views. Story discussion here in the AH? That either limits it to the AH regulars, or else the AH would be flooded by the thousands of other Lit writers. So either too few opinions to be indicative, or too many to be useful.

Me, I write what I want. Sometimes that's strokers with a broader appeal, sometimes that's longer and more involved stories and chapters. And sometimes it's something quite experimental, just because I want to try, and ratings bedamned.

Still, it's always nice when the score goes up, and painful when it goes down.

 

[Britva415]

Scores get attention. Anyone who's interested in more people reading their work has a reason to be interested in the scores.

 

[PennameWombat]

As others have said, ratings aren't life and death, but they exist. I don't want to engage in long conversations about my story, but I absolutely do crave some level of response. But that doesn't mean I want, need or expect every rating to be a '5'. And they're what the site offers, so I try to glean what I can. I'm also happy to get comments, but for me those are mostly few and far between.

As to writing to a formula? That, in my case, is laughable. I've never figured out a formula, and anything anyone has told me (whether here or in the big bad world), I'm not capable of doing it anyway.

But I have written to Category. Oh, shudder. Yeas. If you look at my stories, you'll see they definitely cluster. SpecFi (SF&F, NonHuman and EH), Group, Anal, Mature, E&V and Fetish (pegging and breast milk). Many of my ideas come connected to a Category, because, well, that's the way I think. I might tweak a story to flip to one or the other, a couple of my Anal and Group stories could've gone into E&V, just depending on my mood where to tweak them. But it wasn't for scores, per se, but whether or not I felt it would better fit to one audience or another. And who knows, maybe I was wrong on that aspect. Shrug.

I also give my Followers enough credit that they either follow me because they like similar subjects, or they can choose what they like from my works as they get published. So I appreciate them, whatever their reasons.

And, in a couple of cases, I did feel kinda chuffed when I topped the 30 and 12 Month Anal and Mature Toplists for a while. And I certainly feel chuffed as I currently have a NonHuman story in the first 30 on the 30 Day toplist. And it's a one-off, not Chapter XXX in an endless series . Does that mean it's a 'good' story? I dunno. I do know that its readers here enjoy it. I won't bullshit you, does kinda make me feel good.

 

[AchtungNight]

People need to realize categories are organization for stories, not demands. I want to write a fantasy about famous people, it belongs in Celebrities. It doesn’t matter how popular my subjects are. A or B list, the story stays where it is.

 

[BobbyBrandt]

I believe the use of scores and feedback for a story posted on Literotica as the only benchmark for quality or success is a mistake.

This site has an audience that is broad and diverse, but it retains an underlying commonality of readers being drawn here primarily for erotic content. Reader acceptance of and expectations for stories here can be quite different than those on other sites and their feedback will reflect those differences.

I'm a storyteller. I know that my stories are not for everyone and I'm fine with that. However, I don't judge the success of my storytelling solely on the reception it receives here. I have a couple of stories here that never broken into the 4-range but have been extremely well received elsewhere. Conversely, the same stories that have received mediocre responses on another site have often done much better on Literotica.

That tells me that sharing a story around the right "campfire" can produce different results.

Good is good and bad is bad. Just be certain that you have more than one source for determining which applies to your stories.

 

[TheRedChamber]

I've decided that a portfolio with a 50% H ratio is a good thing to aim for.

I should be picking up a fair few H's just by writing well the stuff I want. If I aimed for 100% (or 90%) or whatever, I'd be unnecessarily fretting over stories which just wiff by a few decimal places or afraid to take risks. If I never got any H's then I'd be quite demoralized.

 

[nice90sguy]

My story ratings really matter to me unless they're low.

 

[SimonDoom]

Scores get attention. Anyone who's interested in more people reading their work has a reason to be interested in the scores.

I don't find this to be true, and I think this is a widespread belief that is somewhat exaggerated. If your story ranks high enough that it remains at the top of a list, then it will catch attention; otherwise, I'm not sure it makes as much difference as people think it does. I have some stories that continue to get good daily view numbers despite not having great scores. I think the reason for that has more to do with the subject matter, the title, and the description than with the score.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Scores get attention. Anyone who's interested in more people reading their work has a reason to be interested in the scores.

Precisely. We can debate exactly how much impact in that sense scores have, and I also believe that the aforementioned impact isn't uniform across all score ranges, but it is there and it is significant. Among other things, that is why many among us fret about scores. They influence the very reason we publish here, our desire to be read by as many people as possible.

 

[Gamblnluck]

Why do you assume that? I write within 3 ratings for the most part and I don't believe what I write "isn't that good."

Your ratings are in the high 3 and low 4's range. Anything that gets a 3.5 and above is doing well. Your stuff is good. I have a few issues with some of it as I've told you before.
An author that is consistently getting 2's and low 3's is writing for an audience of one.
Ratings (and to some degree, comments) here is like applause to an actor or laughter to a comedian.
That being said, I don't write to gain the approval of a certain audience. I tell the story in the best way I can and put it where it belongs for the audience there.

 

[Gamblnluck]

I have some stories that continue to get good daily view numbers despite not having great scores. I think the reason for that has more to do with the subject matter, the title, and the description than with the score.

Initial views yes. But are you getting comments? You draw them in with the title but do they read the whole thing and do they approve or not. That is the issue and one that is hard to tell unless you count votes very closely. Once you get a few hundred scores, they dont change much.

 

[samhasstories]

Ratings are feedback, and feedback is nice. Especially when it's positive (or, on the other hand, constructive, but ratings don't really have that capability).

I don't write for ratings - I barely give them a second thought at all until my work is posted. But once the work is posted, ratings are the best tool I have to gauge whether people are enjoying what I've written. So, yeah, they matter to me. I want people to enjoy my work. But take them away and I'd still write, and still post, and the content of my writing would likely not change at all.

 

[Britva415]

I don't find this to be true

Really? But you also find

If your story ranks high enough that it remains at the top of a list, then it will catch attention

We're saying the same thing.

There are other ways ratings help get eyeballs, besides that, too. When a reader finds a story and looks at the author's other ones, seeing a decent amount of H's is more compelling than not seeing a lot of them. It doesn't have to be wall-to-wall, but zero, or one-in-twenty, isn't a good impression. So, H's get eyeballs on an author's other stories.

"People eat with their eyes."