Wanted your thoughts on the sixty-character limit.

[DarkCosmos]

I'm sure I'm not the first one to bring this up, but I'll go ahead and ask. Am I the only one here who wishes he had a few more characters to play with for that short descriptive sentence you put below a new story/chapter? I'm not saying I need to write out an entire synopsis in that little space, but just like...twenty more characters. Just enough for me to finish my descriptive sentence without having to chop it up into clunky bits.

Sixty characters just feels restrictive. I get it's literally supposed to be one sentence maximum to describe the story or chapter you just posted, but if that one sentence is all I get to hook a new reader's attention, then I could make it a lot cleaner and a lot more descriptive if I had, say, ninety characters to play around with. Or hell, even just eighty.

But maybe that's the point. Maybe you're supposed to get creative in how you sell your newly published work in sixty characters or fewer. Though I will say, in practice, this does seem to make the descriptors feel a bit samey and choppy. Maybe it's a technical issue, and I'm complaining about something that simply cannot be changed realistically. I haven't ruled out that possibility, though I haven't seen any posts suggesting that's the case either.

So what are your thoughts? Are you for the sixty-character limit? Or are you like me and wish you had juuuuust a little bit more room on that box to play around with? If you're for the sixty-character limit, what's your reasoning? I'm genuinely interested in hearing both sides of the table here.

 

[Voyeurkenneth]

For sure, I think we'd all prefer the option for more characters. It seems like ~100-110 characters would neatly align with 2 full lines of text when viewed on a typical smartphone.

 

[dirk2024]

So what are your thoughts? Are you for the sixty-character limit? Or are you like me and wish you had juuuuust a little bit more room on that box to play around with? If you're for the sixty-character limit, what's your reasoning? I'm genuinely interested in hearing both sides of the table here.

I'd like to say "more is always better" but sure as I do that, someone will come along and shoot that down.

But yeah, there are times when I could use a little more space.

 

[OddLove]

I personally don't use it as a description. It's just an extension to the title of the story. Something you can throw a small catchy phrase in. It would be interesting to have an option to write descriptions for our stories, but I'm not sure how that would work out with the current layout of the website. It might just work against the simplistic and straight forward aesthetics many people enjoy.

But on the other hand, having a real description, perhaps a drop down menus style or something would be nice. An opportunity to tell people more about what the story contains or what it's about. That could help readers find the stories they're truly interested in reading, as well as giving writers an opportunity to gain more readers.

 

[DarkCosmos]

I personally don't use it as a description. It's just an extension to the title of the story. Something you can throw a small catchy phrase in. It would be interesting to have an option to write descriptions for our stories, but I'm not sure how that would work out with the current layout of the website. It might just work against the simplistic and straight forward aesthetics many people enjoy.

But on the other hand, having a real description, perhaps a drop down menus style or something would be nice. An opportunity to tell people more about what the story contains or what it's about. That could help readers find the stories they're truly interested in reading, as well as giving writers an opportunity to gain more readers.

I hadn't even considered that approach. Realistically, I just want a bit more space because every time my sentence gets stopped right before the last three letters, I die a little inside.

 

[HordHolm]

But on the other hand, having a real description, perhaps a drop down menus style or something would be nice. An opportunity to tell people more about what the story contains or what it's about. That could help readers find the stories they're truly interested in reading, as well as giving writers an opportunity to gain more readers.

I think it's important to put ourselves in the position of readers. Something catchy and literary can be fun (and I've tried to use it on occasion), but... how does a reader differentiate between stories? Click on a category and there can be a dozen new stories every day. In some categories (e.g. Romance) it can be easier to predict subject matter, but others are very broad, and a subtitle which lets the reader know the subject matter can attract the right reader. In e.g. BDSM, what combination of B and D and S and M are we talking about? Is it femdom or maledom? This basic factors can be intrinsic to a reader. Even with something simpler like E & V, well, is it E or is it V?

Not all readers use tags to find stories. Some go on title and subtitle, and making at least the descriptive subtitle, well, descriptive, can be a blessing for some readers.

 

[SkyBubble]

Sixty characters just feels restrictive.

It does seem a bit tight, but they don't want your descriptions to go on and on.

 

[DarkCosmos]

It does seem a bit tight, but they don't want your descriptions to go on and on.

And like I said originally, I'm not asking for the power to right a full-blown synopsis beneath my title. I just need like...ten to twenty more characters max. It's the difference between. "Kimia has a very special surprise for her husband when he gets home." And "Kimia surprises her husband." If I could just get a bit more meat on that wing, it would look a lot juicier.

 

[Actingup]

There's a great related thread that started when @bridgetrose suggested adding a story summary. Some of us concluding that expanding the story descriptor would really help.

 

[LisaMayTurner]

Stop using smartphones and write as language should be expressed. Constraining expression and stunting meaning and imagination into tiny lines of writing is restrictive; especially if people allow technology to force them to do so.

 

[SkyBubble]

And like I said originally, I'm not asking for the power to right a full-blown synopsis beneath my title. I just need like...ten to twenty more characters max. It's the difference between. "Kimia has a very special surprise for her husband when he gets home." And "Kimia surprises her husband." If I could just get a bit more meat on that wing, it would look a lot juicier.

I agree with that. Sometimes the perfect, pithy but full, blurb is 65-70 characters. I'm not suggesting we go full 280-character Twitter post.

 

[stickygirl]

The format may be a hand-down from the book publishing word, but I'd want a longer synopsis before I'd take out my credit card. The stories are free at Lit but time is money. I stopped browsing Lit titles years ago because, two paragraphs in, they were seldom my thing. I buy second hand books and regularly donate ones I don't like to a charity shop.

I was recently asked to supply 30 words to describe a work. I think it was coined as a lift-description: the amount of time you had to describe your work to a stranger between floors. ( You guys call them Elevators - soz )

The problem with Lit is that many of its peculiarities were pushed onto them by early technology. To go back now and change the format would disadvantage older works and they simply don't have staff to edit changes to a 100k's of titles.

 

[DarkCosmos]

The problem with Lit is that many of its peculiarities were pushed onto them by early technology. To go back now and change the format would disadvantage older works and they simply don't have staff to edit changes to a 100k's of titles.

Maybe I'm just not quite understanding what you're saying with this. I get the part with Lit being the product of older technology. But how would adding say...twenty more characters to the length of the descriptor sentence disadvantage older works? And why would they need to change anything to those 100K+ titles. Not being fascicous here. I'm genuinely curious.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Absolutely need longer. 60 characters can barely fit a complete sentence! Minimum 100, probably 200, maybe even 400 or 500 characters.

Could be 1 character per 1% of your word count, minimum 100, maximum 500.

So that would mean that:
~ any story 10k words or less would be allowed the minimum 100 characters
~ any story 50k words or more would be allowed the maximum 500 characters
~ a story of say ... 19.3k words would be allowed 193 characters

Dunno, maybe that's too complex, but it would allow longer epic stories to write up 60 or 80 words like the back cover of a novel while vignettes which don't need that use up less space.

 

[stickygirl]

Maybe I'm just not quite understanding what you're saying with this. I get the part with Lit being the product of older technology. But how would adding say...twenty more characters to the length of the descriptor sentence disadvantage older works? And why would they need to change anything to those 100K+ titles. Not being fascicous here. I'm genuinely curious.

Authors are not be permitted to edit older titles because everything on Lit has to be screened/checked. So extra description space for newer titles would appear to give them an advantage. I say 'appear' because some authors would claim it was unfair, while others would shrug it off.
Would an extra 20 make much difference?

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Authors are not be permitted to edit older titles because everything on Lit has to be screened/checked. So extra description space for newer titles would appear to give them an advantage. I say 'appear' because some authors would claim it was unfair, while others would shrug it off.
Would an extra 20 make much difference?

So we'll keep the site archaic and obsolete for the sake of tradition. : / Never ever ever change any of the categories. : /

Times change. Technology changes. Users needs change. So should the site.

 

[BobbyBrandt]

I have never had a problem fitting a "description" of a story into the character limit here, but then again, I have years of experience creating blurbs, taglines, or catch phrases for my books in mainstream publishing. I typically have a tagline identified well before the book is ready for publishing, sometimes even before I finalize what the title is going to be. There are a number of good articles and YouTube videos on how to write taglines if you care to check them out.

I suggest that you focus on what you can control rather than seeking change in things that you can't. Learn how to create descriptions that fit the limit. It could benefit you more in the long run.

All that being said, just as with the character limit in the story title field, I imagine that Laurel has some slight flexibility to increase the limit in the description field by a few characters on a case by case basis. I've never needed an increase in the description field, but Laurel has given me a few more characters in the title field when I requested them.

 

[StillStunned]

If Lit increased the maximum to 80 characters, or 100, soon enough someone would be demanding 150, and then 200. But tens of thousands of writers have gone before us, and they've all coped with the 60-character limit.

Sometimes it's better to learn to deal with constraints than to demand change.

 

[ElectricBlue]

All that being said, just as with the character limit in the story title field, I imagine that Laurel has some slight flexibility to increase the limit in the description field by a few characters on a case by case basis. I've never needed an increase in the description field, but Laurel has given me a few more characters in the title field when I requested them.

She does indeed: not many characters, but a few. The field length criteria, so far as I can figure out, is to keep the sub-title as a single line on typical devices - so you maximise the number of story titles on a page.

People bitch and moan about the length of the "first page list" - as if scrolling down is a massive effort - so an extended sub-title field would exacerbate that "problem" by shortening the first page list.

As you say, the site has limitations, we all "suffer" in exactly the same way, nobody is advantaged or disadvantaged. Sure, "send money" would fix a shit ton of problems, but you'll notice, nobody ever does. It's a first world hassle, nothing more.

 

[Bazzle]

Think of it as the "abstract" in an academic paper.

The briefest of explanations of the paper ahead. Its difficult to write, but a necessity.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Sometimes it's better to learn to deal with constraints than to demand change.

This is not one of those times. Clearly in this day and age 60 characters is terribly restrictive. People always ask for more more more regardless. That doesn't mean that this small tiny thing that would have great benefit isn't worth asking for and having. We're not asking for a Ferrari, just a little electric motor for our pedal bike. 100 characters. Come on.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

She does indeed: not many characters, but a few. The field length criteria, so far as I can figure out, is to keep the sub-title as a single line on typical devices - so you maximise the number of story titles on a page.

But they just gave the stories on the story lists story cards and enlarged them and forced us all to scroll scroll scroll ... yet there is no room on that large card for an extra 40 characters ... or even a WORD COUNT?? Come on.

 

[ElectricBlue]

But they just gave the stories on the story lists story cards and enlarged them and forced us all to scroll scroll scroll ... yet there is no room on that large card for an extra 40 characters ... or even a WORD COUNT?? Come on.

I'm not saying it's right, wrong, or ideal. Just observing the rationale for the design decision, is all.

 

[iwatchus]

How about a compromise structure. You can enter longer than a line, but the default display cuts it off there and the user would have to hover. If you, as an author, think you need more length, you have it, but at the cost of your potential reader having to hover, which might alienate them. They could gray tint the background of the text that would only be visible by hovering.

 

[alohadave]

If Lit increased the maximum to 80 characters, or 100, soon enough someone would be demanding 150, and then 200. But tens of thousands of writers have gone before us, and they've all coped with the 60-character limit.

Sometimes it's better to learn to deal with constraints than to demand change.

Back in my day, I had to walk ten miles, uphill in the snow, both ways.

Or, I had to suffer, so you should learn to live with it, just like I did.

That's what that argument sounds like. Just because they had to deal with a limitation in the past does not make it something worth keeping.