Comments vs scoring vs Author's feelings

[Lifestyle66]

Actually I did serve in the Army. I was both enlisted and officer. (I went to OCS). I was in Military Intelligence as an interrogator as an enlisted man. In language school I met a few special forces guys, plus a few other very interesting individuals. (Like top officers) After my discharge , I went to nursing school and some of my clinicals were at an Army base. I was an RN, so I know a little about that, too..
RN's in the military are officers. In the civilian world, there is a thing called licensing.

18Z5L W8

It:s just a story. So don't get too wrapped up in the details.

As I said in the PostScript, it's in memory of those gone but not forgotten.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

It:s just a story. So don't get too wrapped up in the details.

Go back and read the opening post of this thread. Stories should only be permitted on Lit when written to GL's liking.

 

[Gamblnluck]

Go back and read the opening post of this thread. Stories should only be permitted on Lit when written to GL's liking.

I don't know where you got that impression. I pointed out a story that got a great reception that DID NOT have those things many authors here claim is needed to satisfy LW readers. Lifestyle asked me to read a story and give him an opinion. I did. I've read some his other work as well.
Another of his stories deserved a far higher scoring than it got. I could not figure a reason for the low score.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Another of his stories deserved a far higher scoring than it got.

I've had a few people tell me that I deserve much higher scores than I get. Even one of my haters has told me this.

But do I really? If we believe that the score should indicate quality of prose and/or storytelling, then we can argue yes I deserve better scores. But scores really only indicate a positive or negative reception from the readership. Scores indicate popularity, not quality - or at least quality is only indirectly indicated by it's (very low) inclusion in the readership's rubric.

Now if our scores were determined by a panel of 3 ~ Stephen King, Margaret Atwood and Douglas Adams ~ I'm sure that I would score much higher. But would it make me any more popular here? Not really. I'd get a few more clicks due to the higher scores, but then a bunch more disappointed readers because I didn't mount unicorn B onto big cock A within the first 5k. I would still not be a popular writer by any stretch.

And what are the scores for? To show potential readers which stories they would be more likely to enjoy. A high scoring story by me would not do that, so in that sense, I would not 'deserve' high scores.

Remember writers, the scores aren't there to reward YOU. They're there to show the readership which stories are POPULAR. That's it.

 

[Gamblnluck]

I've had a few people tell me that I deserve much higher scores than I get. Even one of my haters has told me this.

But do I really? If we believe that the score should indicate quality of prose and/or storytelling, then we can argue yes I deserve better scores. But scores really only indicate a positive or negative reception from the readership. Scores indicate popularity, not quality - or at least quality is only indirectly indicated by it's (very low) inclusion in the readership's rubric.

Now if our scores were determined by a panel of 3 ~ Stephen King, Margaret Atwood and Douglas Adams ~ I'm sure that I would score much higher. But would it make me any more popular here? Not really. I'd get a few more clicks due to the higher scores, but then a bunch more disappointed readers because I didn't mount unicorn B onto big cock A within the first 5k. I would still not be a popular writer by any stretch.

And what are the scores for? To show potential readers which stories they would be more likely to enjoy. A high scoring story by me would not do that, so in that sense, I would not 'deserve' high scores.

Remember writers, the scores aren't there to reward YOU. They're there to show the readership which stories are POPULAR. That's it.

I agree with much of what you said. Problem is you are not being graded by your old English teacher.

Stories starting with flowery descriptions may or may not catch the reader's attention. You want to set a hook with the reader. I personally hate the one that begin like a resume. "My name is Bob, I am six three weigh 250 or hard lean muscle that my wife loves to press her 36DD's against. I went to school at......"

I am astounded by those stories that do start either way and personally, I think many readers barely read it.

I also don't try to describe everything like painting a picture. I want to give the reader a quick visual and move into something that catches his/her attention. Part of the reason is where I choose to write. The majority of my stories are in LW, and Reluctance.
My recent advice to my editor, who is wanting to write a story is 'set the hook' early. If you'd like a few examples of what I mean read the first couple paragraphs in "Slip of the Tongue", or "Fragile Male Ego" or "Cuckold's Anonymous".

Yeah, I totally agree a score is more of a feeling of desirability. I've said it several times and many here disagree. You have to resonate with the reader. Say something to get him involved. And what does is very different among categories.
I don't write in several categories because I can't relate to the readers. I recently analyzed my own stories. I tend to have some degree of submission and dominance in the story. Why? Not because those are necessarily my own kinks. But because they are emotional.
A well put together description gets good grades in English class, but not here.
The main thing is know your reader. If the hole is round, don't push a square peg into and complain. Put that square peg where the hole is square.

 

[Gamblnluck]

I just read a 20K word long story by MelissaBaby called 'Lake Effect". It garnered a 4.81 rating in Novels. The language was simple, the paragraphs and dialog to the point. There was no flowery descriptive passages. And the sex appeared almost at the end of the story. But the story was great and fully deserved the rating.
It hit the key points that I think most stories need.
First and foremost it caught your attention. The reader was immediately pulled into the story. You understood the characters not by the author describing them, but by their actions and thoughts.
Secondly and most important, the story resonated with the reader. There were characters of various ages and backgrounds, yet the reader could understand each one of them. Their actions ran true to their character. And the characters acted like logical people.
I was glad to have found it.

 

[MelissaBaby]

I just read a 20K word long story by MelissaBaby called 'Lake Effect". It garnered a 4.81 rating in Novels. The language was simple, the paragraphs and dialog to the point. There was no flowery descriptive passages. And the sex appeared almost at the end of the story. But the story was great and fully deserved the rating.
It hit the key points that I think most stories need.
First and foremost it caught your attention. The reader was immediately pulled into the story. You understood the characters not by the author describing them, but by their actions and thoughts.
Secondly and most important, the story resonated with the reader. There were characters of various ages and backgrounds, yet the reader could understand each one of them. Their actions ran true to their character. And the characters acted like logical people.
I was glad to have found it.

Thank you very much for your kind words, here and in the story comments. I'm glad you enjoyed my story.

 

[M_K_Babalon]

However, even one person casting a vote on one story is still a comparison. He is comparing his reading experience to his previous reading experiences and basing that on his own criteria.

I don't think this is that common. I've never heard anybody here, or elsewhere say they vote this way. I know I don't do it. And I don't think it's giving the story it's own merit. Maybe some amount of folks do vote like that and as much as I don't think there's really a right or wrong way to vote, but that seems like the shitiest way to do it.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I don't think this is that common. I've never heard anybody here, or elsewhere say they vote this way. I know I don't do it. And I don't think it's giving the story it's own merit. Maybe some amount of folks do vote like that and as much as I don't think there's really a right or wrong way to vote, but that seems like the shitiest way to do it.

There is no other way to do it.

How do you know how good anything is? By comparing it to other similar things and rating it as better or worse.

 

[SmilingLez]

Stories
are like echoes;
if they stir something
inside,
they’re worth five stars

 

[Voboy]

There is no other way to do it.

How do you know how good anything is? By comparing it to other similar things and rating it as better or worse.

Except there's evidence that a number of people don't vote like that. "Is it good, better, or best?" might make sense to you and me as a voting criterion, but plenty of people don't vote like that here.

I've had a reader telling me I'd been downvoted because I missed an opportunity to comment on elements of Hispanic culture and ethnicity in American sexual life. That's literally what the commenter told me in a very lengthy bit of feedback. He announced he thought my story was interesting, entertaining, and technically excellent, and he even told me it would have been a 5* on its own merits, except that sadly it missed an opportunity for social commentary he wished it would have had. He told me he took off another star because it was in a contest, and he felt it evoked the theme poorly (which I think is more understandable).

So he nailed it at three stars. That story is currently sitting above 4.8, because the other 432 voters obviously used a different set of criteria than he did.

Pick any thousand readers here, and I'd bet real money that the other 999 of them would never downvote a story because it didn't address Hispanic culture (which, frankly, I am not interested in exploring. I was writing smut, y'see).

At least that voter came by and explained himself. But there are another 999 criteria that other voters use that might be utterly opaque to me. Sure, a lot of readers are giving 5* because they really think it's a top story, but I always assume a number of them just mash the top vote if they passed a happy few minutes, regardless of how good the story might otherwise be. We know other voters downvote because they disagree with the sex acts depicted, or they're upset that pregnancy risks weren't addressed, or for a HOST of other reasons we'll never know.

I think it's simplistic to assume every voter is comparing our works to anyone else's works. Frankly, some of them are clicking that fifth star with cum all over their hands, because our words just made them orgasm; they could give a shit less about the more objective merits of the piece. They're not "comparing" that story to anything: they're just voting with their post-nut clarity.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Except there's evidence that a number of people don't vote like that. "Is it good, better, or best?" might make sense to you and me as a voting criterion, but plenty of people don't vote like that here.

They do, they just don't realize it. This is science. This is physics. When we judge we are measuring and all measurements are comparisons. There is no other way possible.

I've had a reader telling me I'd been downvoted because I missed an opportunity to comment on elements of Hispanic culture and ethnicity in American sexual life. That's literally what the commenter told me in a very lengthy bit of feedback. He announced he thought my story was interesting, entertaining, and technically excellent, and he even told me it would have been a 5* on its own merits, except that sadly it missed an opportunity for social commentary he wished it would have had. He told me he took off another star because it was in a contest, and he felt it evoked the theme poorly (which I think is more understandable).

Yes, so he judges it worse because of the flaw that he saw (at least flaw as perceived by him), compared to other stories that he judged better since they did not have that flaw. It is a comparison.

So he nailed it at three stars. That story is currently sitting above 4.8, because the other 432 voters obviously used a different set of criteria than he did.

Of course. As I have already discussed (rather thoroughly) above, everyone has their own criteria, but everyone still makes their own judgments. These are still comparisons.

Pick any thousand readers here, and I'd bet real money that the other 999 of them would never downvote a story because it didn't address Hispanic culture (which, frankly, I am not interested in exploring. I was writing smut, y'see).

So? How does that make any of their votes not comparative judgments?

I think it's simplistic to assume every voter is comparing our works to anyone else's works.

They can't not. The brain is simply a logic engine that compares stuff to establish reference for defining things. These definitions are judgments which in turn are measurements. It's all done by comparing.

 

[Voboy]

The brain is simply a logic engine that compares stuff to establish reference for defining things.

Well, BF Skinner has entered the chat. But several of his ideas have been debunked as... simplistic. Which they are.

We'll agree to disagree. I do agree that humans are basically pretty simple organisms, but I don't buy that they behave logically. I think the world has given us ample evidence to suggest that they do not.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

We'll agree to disagree. I do agree that humans are basically pretty simple organisms, but I don't buy that they behave logically. I think the world has given us ample evidence to suggest that they do not.

So if someone votes your story a 5, regardless of the reasons why, how do we know that it is a good score?

 

[SmilingLez]

Except there's evidence that a number of people don't vote like that. "Is it good, better, or best?" might make sense to you and me as a voting criterion, but plenty of people don't vote like that here.

I've had a reader telling me I'd been downvoted because I missed an opportunity to comment on elements of Hispanic culture and ethnicity in American sexual life. That's literally what the commenter told me in a very lengthy bit of feedback. He announced he thought my story was interesting, entertaining, and technically excellent, and he even told me it would have been a 5* on its own merits, except that sadly it missed an opportunity for social commentary he wished it would have had. He told me he took off another star because it was in a contest, and he felt it evoked the theme poorly (which I think is more understandable).

So he nailed it at three stars. That story is currently sitting above 4.8, because the other 432 voters obviously used a different set of criteria than he did.

Pick any thousand readers here, and I'd bet real money that the other 999 of them would never downvote a story because it didn't address Hispanic culture (which, frankly, I am not interested in exploring. I was writing smut, y'see).

At least that voter came by and explained himself. But there are another 999 criteria that other voters use that might be utterly opaque to me. Sure, a lot of readers are giving 5* because they really think it's a top story, but I always assume a number of them just mash the top vote if they passed a happy few minutes, regardless of how good the story might otherwise be. We know other voters downvote because they disagree with the sex acts depicted, or they're upset that pregnancy risks weren't addressed, or for a HOST of other reasons we'll never know.

I think it's simplistic to assume every voter is comparing our works to anyone else's works. Frankly, some of them are clicking that fifth star with cum all over their hands, because our words just made them orgasm; they could give a shit less about the more objective merits of the piece. They're not "comparing" that story to anything: they're just voting with their post-nut clarity.

IMHO, you are looking at the down vote (aka average) the wrong way. Your story reopened the reader's old wound (as a minority) of not being seen - he couldn't relate. He felt this 'omission of self' and had to "verbalize" it. His statement was global outrage (what about me) vs a single story "attack". Perhaps he will start writing as a way to be heard and recognized. Only time will tell. Generic stars mean nothing - you got 5 star feelings

 

[Voboy]

So if someone votes your story a 5, regardless of the reasons why, how do we know that it is a good score?

We don't. All we know is that it's a 5.

We have no idea where that 5 came from. Maybe it was logic. Maybe it was emotion. Maybe it was the voter's thumb hitting the wrong star.

I am not one who uses scores as an end-all, be-all qualitative measurement, largely because I recognize people are NOT voting logically. It's true that, in my subjective experience as a READER, higher-rated stories have usually been pretty good. But that could easily just be my own confirmation bias, too. I don't even know all the hows and whys of my OWN votes!

 

[Voboy]

IMHO, you are looking at the down vote (aka average) the wrong way. Your story reopened the reader's old wound (as a minority) of not being seen - he couldn't relate. He felt this 'omission of self' and had to "verbalize" it. His statement was global outrage (what about me) vs a single story "attack". Perhaps he will start writing as a way to be heard and recognized. Only time will tell. Generic stars mean nothing - you got 5 star feelings

Not really. I'm just pointing out that that downvote was not a logical comparison. It was a function of that voter's emotion.

 

[SmilingLez]

Not really. I'm just pointing out that that downvote was not a logical comparison. It was a function of that voter's emotion.

I disagree. IMHO an artist's greatest reward is seducing feelings (positive and negative) out of another person. The generic star rating system is just puffery (aka "Look at me, aren't I special, 5 star reviews") YMMV

 

[Gamblnluck]

When we judge we are measuring and all measurements are comparisons. There is no other way possible.

I'm not sure everything in scoring is a comparison to all the rest. I personally like listening to Roger Whittaker sing. I also like to hear Roy Clark and Jimmy Buffet. I'd have to rate most of their songs a high 4 or a 5 because they struck me as damn good. I'm not comparing them even subliminally to other artists/singers. And while I can tell you many things I like about each of those artists, chord construction or beat is not one of them. Those things a music theory instructor might teach is NOT on my repertoire to tell me if I like the song, and if it hit a chord (pardon the pun).

 

[Gamblnluck]

So if someone votes your story a 5, regardless of the reasons why, how do we know that it is a good score?

Because that story resonated with the reader. You made him feel good with your story. It is like a comedian getting laughs with his jokes. If I laugh and think a routine by Henry Cho is great, I am not necessarily comparing him to Jeff Foxworthy. My laughter is the score.
I might laugh just as hard with Jeff Dunham who is a different brand of comedian, but there is no comparison between the three. It is how their routine hit me.
Had to do an edit here: I find Kathy Griffin to be insufferable. I would not listen to her if I got free tickets to her performance. It simply grates on my nerves. Still, I don't make a comparison of her with the others, I simply do not like her nor her comedy. Others apparently do, because she is worth some 40 million dollars.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

We don't. All we know is that it's a 5.

Okay, this statement is false, because otherwise you would not use scores as an indicator of a better story, yet you state below that you do.

It's true that, in my subjective experience as a READER, higher-rated stories have usually been pretty good.

Now, it's 100% up to you what makes a story a 5 or a 4 or a 1 or whatever, but if you are striving for a higher score in any way - and in any way includes "I don't care about the scores but it's kinda nice when they are higher." then you believe that a higher score is better.

You also admit in your statement that a higher rated story tends to be better "usually pretty good". Therefore you equate a higher score with a better story. This is the comparison that you are making when you see the score. You compare the higher score to your experience in reading higher scored stories in the past and judge that this story is more likely to be a better one than to be a poorer one.

And even if we do not equate any story or writing quality to scores, the score itself has its own merit. Which is a better score, 4.39 or 4.69? Why, 4.69 of course. That;s obvious. Why? Because compared to 4.39, 4.69 is higher. That is the measurement.

Here is another example. If I write a story and post it in Romance and it scores 4.25, we would say that this is a poor score (a terrible score, really). Why? because compared to all the other stories in Romance, 4.25 is a very low score. We're not judging the content of the story (heck we haven't even read it!), just the score itself. 4.25 in Romance is unequivocally a poor score. But if I write a story and post in Loving Wives and it scores a 4.25, we would say that it's a good score. Why? Because compared to all of the other stories in LW, 4.25 is quite high.

The point is, that the only way that we can tell whether the score is good or not is by comparing it to other scores. It is not possible to make any judgment without comparing.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I personally like listening to Roger Whittaker sing. I also like to hear Roy Clark and Jimmy Buffet. I'd have to rate most of their songs a high 4 or a 5 because they struck me as damn good. I'm not comparing them even subliminally to other artists/singers

Yes, you are. You may not be thinking of other singers when you listen to them, but when you do you are having an experience that is more enjoyable than listening to (insert some singer that bores you or annoys you). You may not realize this but this is what you are doing.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Not really. I'm just pointing out that that downvote was not a logical comparison. It was a function of that voter's emotion.

It may have been an emotional response, but reading is inherently an emotional response. The judgment itself, based on emotion or not (and it should be based on emotion, "I love this movie, it makes me cry every time!"), is a comparison to other works. This one gets me all emotional, that one is meh, so this one is better. It's all just a question of one's personal criteria for 'good' or 'bad', and what is a set of criteria? It is a set of standard with which to compare against.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Because that story resonated with the reader. You made him feel good with your story. It is like a comedian getting laughs with his jokes. If I laugh and think a routine by Henry Cho is great, I am not necessarily comparing him to Jeff Foxworthy. My laughter is the score.

Yes you are. Your laughter is the score and if Henry Cho gets big laughs, then in comparison to many other comedians who do not make you laugh, he is much better (at least to you).

"You don't got two quartahh!?"

 

[Gamblnluck]

Yes, you are. You may not be thinking of other singers when you listen to them, but when you do you are having an experience that is more enjoyable than listening to (insert some singer that bores you or annoys you). You may not realize this but this is what you are doing.

So every time you kiss your significant other, you are comparing that kiss with every other lover you may have had? Each time you have sex, you subliminally rate that orgasm or lack of one with all your other lovers?
I don't buy it.