The SCOURIES reader – for both fans and serious scholars…

[Guest]

I usually just lurk on "Scouries World" (the Prime Directive, dontcha know) but I'll wade in here. I value red H's for one reason--it's evidence that what I wrote reached members of a certain subset of readers and moved them enough to express approval by voting. We could (and I hope we don't) devolve into a discussion about the level of sophistication of the readers--I suspect it's across the board, although it certainly could be, and likely is, skewed. I've read stories with red H's that I thought were horrible examples of writing, but the author undeniably did his or her job: writing something that resonated with the audience.

I've likewise read "Editor's Choice" stories that are, to my mind, sub-par. In these cases, the authors reached an audience of one, or two.

Folks, I like positive feedback, in whatever form (assuming I believe that what I've written deserves it). That said, I value the comments and e-mails I receive from readers more than votes or colored letters. However, I'll take colored letters along with the rest.

I won't, however, indulge in the pathetic fallacy of artificially inflating my vote totals or posting comments anonymously on my own stories. I also won't indulge in the shameless self-promotion that I see exhibited by a selected minority on Lit. That, it seems to me, combines all the desperation of a four-year-old shouting, "Watch me, mommy! Watch me!" with the unbridled 80's greed of "He who dies with the most toys/money/reads/votes, wins."

And please don't talk to me about the value of advertising. I work in advertising. Differentiating oneself, or one's "brand," does not require a pronounced lack of taste and manners. Such is the refuge of those who lack imagination.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

Damn the grapes are awfully sour in this thread!

 

[cloudy]

Damn the grapes are awfully sour in this thread!

If that was (partially) directed at me, I'd like to respectfully point out that Sarahhhhhhh and I (among others) have a history that you would know nothing about since it occurred before you appeared.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

If that was (partially) directed at me, I'd like to respectfully point out that Sarahhhhhhh and I (among others) have a history that you would know nothing about since it occurred before you appeared.

Actually, no... I didn't even scroll back that far...

Just generally... Scouries' energy seems to feed that part of people or something.

I've felt the pull of it myself... certainly not above it.

Just an observation.

 

[scouries]

life is good

CLOUDY QUOTE If that was (partially) directed at me, I'd like to respectfully point out that Sarahhhhhhh and I (among others) have a history that you would know nothing about since it occurred before you appeared

Sweetie, that was the old cloudy posting, not the new and improved version.

But, seeing you did bring it up (and because it was before my time too and you didn't mention it when we were trying to help you), why don't you fill us in.

This isn't one of these strap-on stories is it? I understand back in 2003 and 2004 that the lovely sarahhh couldn't be seen without one. OK, it didn't work out, but that doesn't mean the young lady isn't a wonderful author.

Forgive and forget...

...the sun is shining...

..***** is good...

...tomorrow is another day...

Dr. Jim

 

[drksideofthemoon]

It's not fully a question of cheating (although I think it happens to the extent that people can get away with it--there wouldn't be all that sweeping otherwise). A significant proportion of any of the voting in a contest here is done purely on the buddy system--they would vote up their buddies' laundry lists and down their nonbuddies' masterpieces. The only contest that has any meaning in terms of story quality is one that is judged blindly.

Again, the E is the only distinction here actually gauged to the story content and not obtainable by hook and by crook.

You can yammer otherwise, but reality is reality. And, like with Starrker, you seem to put a lot of energy into a topic that you claim means nothing to you.

You're the one putting up all the fuss. It's been stated here before, the E is given out to stories that site owners personally like. That's it. It's not a stamp of approval. It's not an indication of above average quality. Just that they liked the story. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Show me one contest that has been rigged. The "buddy" vote is maybe good for 2 or 3 votes. I know that I've never been approached to vote or to read a certain story during a contest, have you?

 

[drksideofthemoon]

Damn the grapes are awfully sour in this thread!

We should have a fine crop of vinegar....

 

[sr71plt]

Basic advertising. Will a reader gravitate to a story with some sort of distinction note next to it over others? Yep, basic consumer behavior. They will gravitate to anything that is somehow distinguished over others--including negative comments. I seek as many readers as possible, although, like Gnome I'm not interested in slapping book covers all over my postings (not that this bothers me--it's legitimate advertising, I think). So, I'll go with tried and true advertising principles that seem to work for me.

The Lit. Web site owners understand these commercial principles, and, as the owners, who see everything go by, they reserve the right to give a leg up in reader gravitation to stories they like. It's their Web site and it works for augmented attention to authors and the reading of their stories. All fine with me. Just sour grapes of those who haven't received that advantage--and who pretend they don't care--or an understanding shortfall of how promotion work. (It's irrational to go to the effort of getting stories posting but showing no interest in whether they're read. Although, truth be known, I've certainly seen some irrational behavior of that sort here.)

And if you insist on referring to discussion of the workings of advertising theory on story Web sites as trolling, you've rendered the definition of trolling meaningless--and show the level of your sophistication.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

Basic advertising. Will a reader gravitate to a story with some sort of distinction note next to it over others? Yep, basic consumer behavior. They will gravitate to anything that is somehow distinguished over others--including negative comments. I seek as many readers as possible, although, like Gnome I'm not interested in slapping book covers all over my postings (not that this bothers me--it's legitimate advertising, I think). So, I'll go with tried and true advertising principles that seem to work for me.

The Lit. Web site owners understand these commercial principles, and, as the owners, who see everything go by, they reserve the right to give a leg up in reader gravitation to stories they like. It's their Web site and it works for augmented attention to authors and the reading of their stories. All fine with me. Just sour grapes of those who haven't received that advantage--and who pretend they don't care--or an understanding shortfall of how promotion work. (It's irrational to go to the effort of getting stories posting but showing no interest in whether they're read. Although, truth be known, I've certainly seen some irrational behavior of that sort here.)

And if you insist on referring to discussion of the workings of advertising theory on story Web sites as trolling, you've rendered the definition of trolling meaningless--and show the level of your sophistication.

Well, I guess I'm outside of the bell curve. I've never read, or not read a story based on its having, or not having "H, "W", or "E" after it.

I can understand you being proud of your "E's", why is it so difficult for you to understand that there are people like me who could care less about them. I know who I am, and what I am, and I'm happy with that. I don't need a letter beside my work, or a comment from someone to feel good about myself.

And why is it irrational to post a story here, but not care if it gets read or not. For me, the enjoyment is in the writing, if someone reads it, and likes it, then that's fine. If no one reads it, that's fine as well. I simply don't care.

Just don't accuse me of having sour grapes because I don't conform to your beliefs.

 

[sr71plt]

Well, I guess I'm outside of the bell curve. I've never read, or not read a story based on its having, or not having "H, "W", or "E" after it.

I can understand you being proud of your "E's", why is it so difficult for you to understand that there are people like me who could care less about them. I know who I am, and what I am, and I'm happy with that. I don't need a letter beside my work, or a comment from someone to feel good about myself.

And why is it irrational to post a story here, but not care if it gets read or not. For me, the enjoyment is in the writing, if someone reads it, and likes it, then that's fine. If no one reads it, that's fine as well. I simply don't care.

Just don't accuse me of having sour grapes because I don't conform to your beliefs.

Yes, I do think you are outside the bell curve. I thought you were irrational when you pulled your stories in a huff and I think you are irrational now. What we don't seem to agree on is who is trying to force their own views down the throat of others.

If you stop trying to shove your views on it, I certainly won't continue to give my views--I've never brought mine up out of the blue; I've always only trotted my understanding of story promotion rationality out when I see you and others denigrating the promotional hooks on this site out of what I think is pretty irrational behavior--and, in some, yes a defensiveness over what they don't have.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

Yes, I do think you are outside the bell curve. I thought you were irrational when you pulled your stories in a huff and I think you are irrational now. What we don't seem to agree on is who is trying to force their own views down the throat of others.

If you stop trying to shove your views on it, I certainly won't continue to give my views--I've never brought mine up out of the blue; I've always only trotted my understanding of story promotion rationality out when I see you and others denigrating the promotional hooks on this site out of what I think is pretty irrational behavior--and, in some, yes a defensiveness over what they don't have.

You have to understand, I wasn't in a huff when I pulled my stories. I took my time, at first I just asked Laurel to pull Montana Summer for editing purposes. About two weeks later I deleted them completely from the site. About two or three weeks after that I pulled the rest of my work.

Since then, I've been slowly re-releasing some of it under D_K_Moon, with the comments and voting turned off. And, I'm happy with the results thus far.

I've never denigrated anything, all I've done is give my personal opinion, nothing more, and nothing less.

 

[sr71plt]

You have to understand, I wasn't in a huff when I pulled my stories. I took my time, at first I just asked Laurel to pull Montana Summer for editing purposes. About two weeks later I deleted them completely from the site. About two or three weeks after that I pulled the rest of my work.

Since then, I've been slowly re-releasing some of it under D_K_Moon, with the comments and voting turned off. And, I'm happy with the results thus far.

I've never denigrated anything, all I've done is give my personal opinion, nothing more, and nothing less.

Umm, no. Do you forget that I was there at the time? You may have intended to pull them for rework, but what you presented to the forum was a "I'll pull my work if Scouries isn't gotten rid of" power maneuver. That didn't work then and it didn't work the next time it was tried, either. I posted several times when it was happening that this was irrational response--and only belatedly did you come up with the "going to pull them anyway" explanation. But if pretending helps, go for it. It remains, however, an example of irrational reader development strategy.

And, yes, you do constantly denigrate the suggestion that the rating system has value for authors--each time a poster mentions it, you come on and say "Well, I . . ." Which, yes, brings me on saying "Well, rational promotiong . . ." So, it's all just cause and effect--but it's driven mainly by your shoving of really strange promotional practice, I think, after having unsuccessfully tried to use your stories as a political weapon on the forum.

Looking forward to the release of the Montana Summer book, however, as you jerked off access to it on this site.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

Umm, no. Do you forget that I was there at the time? You may have intended to pull them for rework, but what you presented to the forum was a "I'll pull my work if Scouries isn't gotten rid of" power maneuver. That didn't work then and it didn't work the next time it was tried, either. I posted several times when it was happening that this was irrational response--and only belatedly did you come up with the "going to pull them anyway" explanation. But if pretending helps, go for it. It remains, however, an example of irrational reader development strategy.

And, yes, you do constantly denigrate the suggestion that the rating system has value for authors--each time a poster mentions it, you come on and say "Well, I . . ." Which, yes, brings me on saying "Well, rational promotiong . . ." So, it's all just cause and effect--but it's driven mainly by your shoving of really strange promotional practice, I think, after having unsuccessfully tried to use your stories as a political weapon on the forum.

Looking forward to the release of the Montana Summer book, however, as you jerked off access to it on this site.

I never presented any threat to the forum, or to the operators of the site. I simply asked Scouries to remove me, and my work from his list, and when he refused to, I pulled my work. I never made any contact with the people in charge of the site with the exception to have them pull my work. I don't dislike Scouries, I don't agree with his methods, but I do get along with him.

There was no power maneuver. I don't denigrate the rating system, my position is that Lit hasn't shown the ability to provide accurate and meaningful numbers when it comes to the question of scores etc.

If you knew me, you would realize that I am probably the most apolitical person on the site.

Well, the first three chapters of Montana Summer on on Lit. Don't look for the book anytime soon. Selena has more than enough real writers who want to be published, she doesn't need one that doesn't want to be. So, for the time being I have pulled out of Excessica.

 

[sr71plt]

IWell, the first three chapters of Montana Summer on on Lit. Don't look for the book anytime soon. Selena has more than enough real writers who want to be published, she doesn't need one that doesn't want to be. So, for the time being I have pulled out of Excessica.

Aw, don't be coy. It's no secret that Montana Summer was a top "read" here and that its fans (who I don't think received much regard/consideration when it was pulled--you could just as easily have edited off line without pulling it until it was ready to submit. Another rationale shortfall, I think) frequently ask where it went. It obviously will be a good draw at eXcessica.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

Aw, don't be coy. It's no secret that Montana Summer was a top "read" here and that its fans (who I don't think received much regard/consideration when it was pulled--you could just as easily have edited off line without pulling it until it was ready to submit. Another rationale shortfall, I think) frequently ask where it went. It obviously will be a good draw at eXcessica.

I was quite uncomfortable with the popularity of Montana Summer. I think only about two people have asked where it went in the six or seven months it's been gone.

No, it won't be a draw at eXcessica, I've pulled out.

 

[sr71plt]

I was quite uncomfortable with the popularity of Montana Summer. I think only about two people have asked where it went in the six or seven months it's been gone.

No, it won't be a draw at eXcessica, I've pulled out.

Only two? I've noted where it went to more than a half dozen myself--and there have been others that someone else had responded to first. I'm sure someone else here will verify that.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

Only two? I've noted where it went to more than a half dozen myself--and there have been others that someone else had responded to first. I'm sure someone else here will verify that.

Oh, I don't think that's important, I'll certainly take your word on it.

 

[Just-Legal]

Sweetie, that was the old cloudy posting, not the new and improved version.

Then I'll take the "old" Cloudy, full on and headstrong any day.

 

[cloudy]

Then I'll take the "old" Cloudy, full on and headstrong any day.

I haven't changed, that's just scours wishful thinking.

 

[Just-Legal]

I haven't changed, that's just scours wishful thinking.

I know And I'm glad.

 

[cloudy]

I know And I'm glad.

thanks, babe.

 

[ann_on_em_es]

scouries: Why is it that AHers always have to attack the popular author? The one who’s somehow forged a bond with the LITEROTICA reader. Is it simply jealousy?

Perhaps you and BFW should ask yourselves the very same thing scouries. Why is it that the popular authors are attacked? You know what I am talking about so don't deny it. Perhaps before you defend one person, you should sit back and think about things you've said and done in the past, hmmm??

scouries: And why is it that it’s the female LITEROTICANS who are always leading the pack?

This sounds like jealousy. Why does it matter? This is a site that hosts erotic romance stories. A majority of the romance writers in the US, well really in the world, are female. So why should this site be any different? Most erotica is just romance with sex. I didn't say ALL, but most. And the most popular authors on this site write ROMANCE, hence they're women.

If you browse through other sites similar to Literotica, you will find that the most popular authors there are female as well. Maybe you can go harrass them and stink up their sites for a bit, I'm sure you'd be welcomed with open arms (and a can of industrial strength deodorant.)

So when are you and BFW setting the date for your next secret tryst? I know you're both giddy with excitement over seeing one another naked again.

scouries: C’MON LADIES, GROW UP AND START ACTING LIKE MEN. ITS TIME TO LEAVE SARAHHH ALONE!

And perhaps it's time for you to grow up as well, scouries! You aren't so quick to defend anyone else who's being harrassed, so what difference does it make to you?

 

[michchick98]

Jumping in here cause I have nothing better to do I agree completely. I actually delete all anonymous comments. The only ones that I keep up are from registered users.

Erin

I usually only delete comments that are negative. I think, however, the question of why there are anonymous comments allowed is based on the settings of each individual author. There are a few people whom I read regularly who do not allow anonymous comments, so therefore when someone wants to comment on a story, he/she needs to login/create a username to do so.

I did check this out on a few different authors. I allow anonymous comments on my stories and when I logged out, I would have been able to comment without logging back in. I went to another author (who is on my favorites list) who has anonymous comments turned off and I had to log in to comment. I didn't comment on any of the stories, I just viewed each page to see why the option to post anonymously was on some stories but not on others (by different authors, of course)

The only reason I don't turn off anonymous comments is the simple fact that I understand that there are many readers out there who prefer not to sign out a username and are happy with just reading and commenting anonymously. I don't want to take that "privilege" away from someone if they have something to say about my stories (be it good or bad). If it's negative, but said in a nice way, I usually leave the comments, but if it's just a "you suck and you write like a 3 year old" type comments, then I delete them without question and move on.

Sometimes I might even defend/explain why I wrote what I did if that particular person brings up something he/she didn't like in the story being commented on.

Confused now? Yeah, I confuse myself sometimes too.

Sheri

 

[sr71plt]

scouries: Why is it that AHers always have to attack the popular author? The one who’s somehow forged a bond with the LITEROTICA reader. Is it simply jealousy?

Perhaps you and BFW should ask yourselves the very same thing scouries. Why is it that the popular authors are attacked? You know what I am talking about so don't deny it. Perhaps before you defend one person, you should sit back and think about things you've said and done in the past, hmmm??

scouries: And why is it that it’s the female LITEROTICANS who are always leading the pack?

This sounds like jealousy. Why does it matter? This is a site that hosts erotic romance stories. A majority of the romance writers in the US, well really in the world, are female. So why should this site be any different? Most erotica is just romance with sex. I didn't say ALL, but most. And the most popular authors on this site write ROMANCE, hence they're women.

If you browse through other sites similar to Literotica, you will find that the most popular authors there are female as well. Maybe you can go harrass them and stink up their sites for a bit, I'm sure you'd be welcomed with open arms (and a can of industrial strength deodorant.)

So when are you and BFW setting the date for your next secret tryst? I know you're both giddy with excitement over seeing one another naked again.

scouries: C’MON LADIES, GROW UP AND START ACTING LIKE MEN. ITS TIME TO LEAVE SARAHHH ALONE!

And perhaps it's time for you to grow up as well, scouries! You aren't so quick to defend anyone else who's being harrassed, so what difference does it make to you?

Not really interested in the gender toing and froing, but two points.

First a point of order: of the top 50 "favorite" authors officially listed on this site (as of this moment--the list is dynamic), 28 claim to be male, 19 claim to be female, and 3 can't decide. So, the recordable evidence doesn't support the claim of a "popular" predominance of female authors, Romance writers or otherwise.

Second, I too wondered about that first Scouries comment. First, Scouries himself is a regular AHer, by definition, and, second, yes, he habitually attacks more than one popular author here himself.

Later: I can't resist, in the interest of fairness (and amusement), to point out that both Scouries and BOSTONFICTIONWRITER are included on that top 50 "favorite" list.

 

[Darkniciad]

As if completely opposing views within a couple of posts are anything new for scouries? *laugh*