Scoring, the Universe and You... me.. and everybody else

[Max ODrive]

Ok.. I submitted a story.. Click, click, click.. Erotic Coupling, Office sex type story.. Not a great work, but OK stuff.. I expected anything from a 4.5 to a 4.6 out of it..

It scored consistently in that range, working its way up to a 4.56 with 54 votes, give or take, on 13k views... I was like.. "thats cool"

Now, a few days ago, the votes DROPPED to 48 votes and the score JUMPED to 4.68, I'm like "wtf".. but I remembered this thread:

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=547006

So I'm like "wellll.. ok.. I can see the trolls screwing with scores".. and let it go..

But today, I check the stats..

Its got a 4.79 with 43 votes and 13243 views..

Now I've got a couple other submissions.. "This Morning" and "Win Some" have been up since 2001.. and since I've submitted the new stories the last couple of months, they've collected a few more views and one or two more votes..

TM is a 4.54 on 41 votes and 13.6k views.. about where I expected Click to be.

Win Some is a 4.72 on 425 votes and 139.4k views and is, even if I am blowing my own horn, a good story.

But I >know< for a fact that Click is NOT better than Win Some!!!!

(I can see you now, sitting there going "He's complaining about a 4.79???)

Now.. with ALL that said.. the point is, WHERE do you draw the line at screwing around with scores?? What's the criteria used to determine if a vote is a bogus vote?

I know enough about computers and programming to know that a simple check of the IP address associated with a vote can be checked and automatically rejected so a second vote won't even register, but once the vote is in the system, how can we as writers be ensured that the vote is a legit, or illegit, vote?

I don't MIND having a low-scoring story.. that shows me I need to make improvements.. what I DO mind is having a story that is unfairly over or under rated. That doesn't do me any favors as a writer, since I know for a fact that my writing skills, while improving, are not at the same level with Click as they were with Win Some.

We as writers have very limited access to the stats. We can't see what the last few votes were, we can't see how many votes were from anonymous peeps versus members, or male versus female.. there's nothing we can do to analyze what votes we're getting so we can modify our styles to address different audiences, etc.. All we can see is the score, how many votes and how many views. Those of us that have multi-page stories can't even tell if people go to the next page or not, so we have no idea if we've held someone's interest enough to "turn the page"..

So, at what point do you quit messing with scores and say "Ok, this is the score the story should have"?? Maybe you should have a scenario where users have to log in to vote to ensure the voting is 'honest' and auditable..?

I dunno.. I do know that it appears the system thats in place now isn't working right..

 

[mjl2010]

There's a new thread like this every other week. Basically it would seem, according to what I've read on other threads, it goes something like this...

They do sweeps to rid the scores of one bombs, double votes and votes by people who didn't read the story. They seem to do this by the following means...

Tracking the IP address of the votes. Voters who consistently drop one votes on stories might be flagged and their votes get expunged automatically. this is also how they tag double votes.

Votes on stories that were not open long enough to read the story. Slightly unfair because some people print them out to read later, then come back and vote. But some people open a story, drop to the bottom and vote. Typically voting a one.

There's probably more to it, but these seem to be the consensus on how votes get swept. Having your friends vote two or three times to push up the vote, will only get those votes swept off on the next sweep.

I think a lot of people agree, the voting system needs an overhaul. Getting all those people to agree on a system of voting is probably impossible. Since this is a free site supported by sponsors and run by the people who own it, there probably isn't a lot of left over time to straighten out the problem areas.

After a while, you don't pay so much attention to the votes as you do to the meaningful feedback you get.

MJL

 

[Max ODrive]

Thanks for that reply, and trust me.. I get all that.. and its a sad testament that our world is such a sad place where someone actually gets a thrill out of going around nuking a score on a story simply because its been posted.

I also understand that there's a certain group that'll vote 100% on a story simply because someone has the brass to even post one up. I'm not sure which group is worse, the nukers or the artificial inflators.

Regardless of their motive, the end result is the same. The final score is skewed.

Now, I don't put much stock in the scores other than as a general measurment of how the overall story went over. But I do use the score in that respect. We get so little verbal feedback otherwise that, even though its bound to be inaccurate at some level, the score does have a certain amout of relevance.

I also get the fact that this is a free site, and that we don't have to pay to post or read, which is a great thing. There are far too many "pay" sites out there with unbearably crappy content, that sites like Lit are almost unique in the level of good content and the quality of the site itself. For that, the owners get the undying, eternal gratitude of anyone who likes to read Erotica and for those of us who enjoy writing it.

Maybe at some point in time, they can go overhaul the voting system. Even though I don't use it except as a baseline, I know there are those out there who put great stock in the scores. The only reason I bring it up at all is for the simple fact that I know that my current posting isn't quite the same caliber as one of my earlier ones...

Anyway.. even a flawed system is better than no system.. so until the time they can go through it and make it what it needs to be, I suppose we can muddle through..

 

[snooper]

... But I >know< for a fact that Click is NOT better than Win Some!!!! ...

I beg to differ (without having read either) and I assert that all you ">know< for a fact" is that you like it better.

... What's the criteria used to determine if a vote is a bogus vote? ...

To start with, if you try to vote a second time on the same story with the same userid it will be rejected, and a message comes up "you already voted on this story".

IPs are a red herring since many users have an IP assigned dynamically at the time of logging on to the Internet. There is a German site which hosts railway pictures and which limits free downloads to a certain number per IP per day and it is very annoying not to be able to download something in the evening, knowing that in the early morning the next day it will be available.

... We as writers have very limited access to the stats. We can't see ... how many votes were from anonymous peeps ... Maybe you should have a scenario where users have to log in to vote to ensure the voting is 'honest' and auditable..?

See above. Logged on is a prerequisite of voting (or it used to be).

I dunno.. I do know that it appears the system thats in place now isn't working right.

I have been a member here now for many years, first as Charmbrights and now as Snooper (don't ask - it's a long sad story) and one thing I have learned is that the owners of this site (since the last take-over) are very professional and will not change anything that is not guaranteed to make them more money. Voting is free and authors are not being put off by the voting system in significant numbers.

There's a new thread like this every other week. ...
I think a lot of people agree, the voting system needs an overhaul. Getting all those people to agree on a system of voting is probably impossible. ...

This is also a real problem.

... After a while, you don't pay so much attention to the votes as you do to the meaningful feedback you get.

Sound advice.

 

[mjl2010]

I beg to differ (without having read either) and I assert that all you ">know< for a fact" is that you like it better.

To start with, if you try to vote a second time on the same story with the same userid it will be rejected, and a message comes up "you already voted on this story".

IPs are a red herring since many users have an IP assigned dynamically at the time of logging on to the Internet. There is a German site which hosts railway pictures and which limits free downloads to a certain number per IP per day and it is very annoying not to be able to download something in the evening, knowing that in the early morning the next day it will be available.

See above. Logged on is a prerequisite of voting (or it used to be).

I have been a member here now for many years, first as Charmbrights and now as Snooper (don't ask - it's a long sad story) and one thing I have learned is that the owners of this site (since the last take-over) are very professional and will not change anything that is not guaranteed to make them more money. Voting is free and authors are not being put off by the voting system in significant numbers.

This is also a real problem.

Sound advice.

Being logged on is not a prerequisite for voting. Thus the huge number of "Anonymous" votes that get posted.

Further, it is true that lots of IP addresses are assigned dynamically, but... If you have say dialup, dial in and spend an hour one bombing stories, they are all going to have the same IP. So it is one way to tell. There is nothing to prevent someone from voting twice. Later it gets swept. Maybe you can't vote twice in a row if you're logged in, I've never tried it. But you can vote more than once as anonymous. It just gets swept later.

MJL

 

[mjl2010]

We as writers have very limited access to the stats. We can't see what the last few votes were, we can't see how many votes were from anonymous peeps versus members, or male versus female.. there's nothing we can do to analyze what votes we're getting so we can modify our styles to address different audiences, etc.. All we can see is the score, how many votes and how many views.

Actually, if you keep track of your average vote score, you can get a pretty good idea of what people are voting. To make it simple, suppose you had five votes and a score of 4.8. You therefore had four- (5) votes and one - (4) vote.

Simple math. (4*5) + (1*4) = 24. 24/5 = 4.8

Now along comes Mr. Hairy Troll. He skims the story and decides to one bomb you along with a NANANAANA Public Comment.

Now you've got six votes and a score of 4.17. 24 + 1 = 25. 25/6 = 4.16666.... = 4.17.

The math gets slightly more complicated if you get more than one vote at a time, but you can still get a fair approximation of what people are voting.

Further, the more votes you get, the harder it is to skew the score in either direction. If you've got a score of 4.75 and 100 votes, That means your average vote has been, 4.75. 4.75*100 = 475.
475 + 1 =476 476 / 101 = 4.71. 475+5 = 480 480 / 101 = 4.752 = 4.75.

Since the 5 was so close to the average score anyway, it had less of an effect on your total average than the one did.

Ok so your 100 vote story has a score of 4.75. You don't pay attention for a few days and come back to see your score is now 4.61 and you've got 104 votes. A considerable drop for only four votes. Although there are better ways, the easiest in this case is to do a little Brute Force math. Assume all four votes were the same and they had to be lower than the average of 4.75.

So try (3) first. 3*4=12 12+475 = 488 488/104 = 4.692.
So no, they were lower than (3's).
(2) votes would give you 8+475=483 483/104 = 4.644.
Uh oh. Some trolls were around and one bombed you.
475 + 4 = 479. 479/104= 4.605 = 4.61.

But not to worry, the next time they sweep the votes, they'll knock those off and your score will jump back up to 4.75.

MJL

 

[Max ODrive]

Snoop...

Read both and come back and talk to me.. we'll go from there on which is the better story..

Win Some was written in 2001 when I was "in the groove" writing.. Descriptions were clean, characterizations were well done.. I received feedback describing my writing style for it as either Robert Heinlein or Harold Robbins.

Click was my first posted work in over 6 years of hiatus. I know that the descriptions weren't nearly as clean, and my characterizations left something to be desired..

But, I'll let you be the judge..

And, so you have no excuse...

Win Some
http://www.literotica.com:81/stories/showstory.php?id=18422

Click
http://www.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=333290

 

[snooper]

... Ok so your 100 vote story has a score of 4.75. You don't pay attention for a few days and come back to see your score is now 4.61 and you've got 104 votes. A considerable drop for only four votes. Although there are better ways, the easiest in this case is to do a little Brute Force math. Assume all four votes were the same and they had to be lower than the average of 4.75.

So try (3) first. 3*4=12 12+475 = 488 488/104 = 4.692.
So no, they were lower than (3's).
(2) votes would give you 8+475=483 483/104 = 4.644.
Uh oh. Some trolls were around and one bombed you.
475 + 4 = 479. 479/104= 4.605 = 4.61.

But not to worry, the next time they sweep the votes, they'll knock those off and your score will jump back up to 4.75.

There is an easier way to do this.

4•75 × 100 = 475
4•61 × 104 = 479•44

Increase in voters = 4
Increase in total votes = 4•44

Average new vote = 1•11 - I deduce that they didn't like your story, for whatever reason.

In defence of 1 bombing, I do not think that disapproving of (say) incest stories in general means that someone holding that view is not justified in voting a 1 against any story which contains that, especially if it is in some other category.

Many members here are dead against pre-teen sex stories, and would vote 1 or complain if one appeared here - is that a non-valid response?

 

[mjl2010]

There is an easier way to do this.

4•75 × 100 = 475
4•61 × 104 = 479•44

Increase in voters = 4
Increase in total votes = 4•44

Average new vote = 1•11 - I deduce that they didn't like your story, for whatever reason.

Yes your method is better than mine. If I'd given it some thought, I probably would have done that. I didn't think about it much.

In defence of 1 bombing, I do not think that disapproving of (say) incest stories in general means that someone holding that view is not justified in voting a 1 against any story which contains that, especially if it is in some other category.

Many members here are dead against pre-teen sex stories, and would vote 1 or complain if one appeared here - is that a non-valid response?

If someone is dead set against Incest stories, then they shouldn't go read incest stories. Thats just common sense. The fact is, there are some jerks out there who get off on bombing peoples stories. I've gotten their feedback comments in my email. They open a story, skip to the end and vote one. Sometimes leaving a nasty or rude comment. Why would you defend that?

As far as the pre-teen sex story is concerned, The owners of this site try to keep it legal. Pre-teen sex stories, regardless of whether you like them or not, are illegal. So in the interests of keeping the site operating, they prohibit them and remove them when/if they sneak through. The people who like to read here, will tell the owners if they see such a story. Their motivation being that they want the site to stay up.

I can't see your defense of one bombs in any good light. An actual vote of one, because someone thought the story was so poorly written as to be unreadable, or the story was such a turnoff, is completely legitimate. I have voted one on stories I thought deserved it.

After writing all this, I think you confuse one-bombs with legitimate votes.

MJL

 

[snooper]

... If someone is dead set against Incest stories, then they shouldn't go read incest stories. ...

Sorry - I worded it badly. I was thinking of the case where someone reads (say) a First Time, or a Loving Wives and it turns out to include incest. In that case I think an incest hater is justified in giving a 1 vote, and the author suffers because Lit does not use the widely agreed multiple categories such as MF, inc, dad, dau, and so forth, used on many other sites.

...As far as the pre-teen sex story is concerned, The owners of this site try to keep it legal. Pre-teen sex stories, regardless of whether you like them or not, are illegal. ...

Actually written words about child sex, even if they advocate it, are not illegal in most of the countries where Lit readers are, and certainly not in the USA. If anyone is claiming that it is illegal in the USA I would be grateful to be pointed to the relevant statute.

... in the interests of keeping the site operating, they prohibit them and remove them when/if they sneak through. ... Their motivation being that they want the site to stay up. ...

The use of pressure by bigots to try to close down sites like this is often cited as a reason for this rule. The existence of many other sites which do allow under age stories and which operate in the USA demonstrates that this rule is not actually necessary, though I agree it is entirely at the discretion of the owners.

For the record, I do not advocate sex with children, but I have written stories where people under 18 have had sexual thoughts, and even experiences. In the real world this happens, and people in my country can marry at 16, and younger in other countries (including parts of the USA). The tale of the wedding night of two such young people, both totally inexperienced (but in an arranged marriage intended to end a family feud) which I read once was hilarious, but would not be allowed on Lit. "Mom, he climbs on people," she whined.

 

[adetaildiva]

To start with, if you try to vote a second time on the same story with the same userid it will be rejected, and a message comes up "you already voted on this story".

I don't really want to wade off in to "math land", but feel the need to respond to this statement of Snooper's. I've re-read & re-voted on several stories. I've never gotten this message. Makes me wonder if things started out with that appearing & it just got abandoned. Not that it has anything to do with the discussion of this thread. I just wanted to point out that, like not having to be "logged in" to vote, this message doesn't happen regularly, if at all.



*backs out, retreating quietly from the evil math word problem thread*

 

[cloudy]

I don't really want to wade off in to "math land", but feel the need to respond to this statement of Snooper's. I've re-read & re-voted on several stories. I've never gotten this message. Makes me wonder if things started out with that appearing & it just got abandoned. Not that it has anything to do with the discussion of this thread. I just wanted to point out that, like not having to be "logged in" to vote, this message doesn't happen regularly, if at all.



*backs out, retreating quietly from the evil math word problem thread*

No, it still happens. I think that it didn't with you was probably some sort of glitch, or could be happening some other way.

 

[Max ODrive]

*waves at Diva*

Um.. actually... even with DSL and probably even cable modems, unless you're working from a "guarenteed" static IP address, even those providers will reallocate IP addresses after so long of a time..

I.E. at home, I've got AT&T's 6meg DSL pipe with a guarenteed static IP.. so if I tried to vote twice, especially close together time-wise, I'd expect to get that message..

However, at work, we've got an AT&T 3 meg DSL pipe, but with a dynamic IP address.. I know this because I set them up with PCAnywhere so they can remotely access, but I had to use a DynDNS addy with a tickler program on the server to update when the IP changes.. so, if I go to myipaddress.com and the address is different, as long as I'm not logged in, I can vote again..

And, there may be a 'time out' thing set to allow the same IP address to vote simply because of dynamic IP addressing.. Until everybody in the world has their own IP address, if you block any IP address, you're taking a chance on actually blocking a legit vote at some point in time..

But that brings me to an ancillary question that I'll take the opportunity to address (sorry.. no pun intneded...) in another thread..

 

[mjl2010]

I've got thirteen stories and poems up. One story without the pretty H. Neither poem has been deemed worthy of one. Of course, I'm not an educated literary genius like those who read the poetry stuff are.

What I've learned is...the votes don't mean that much. More or less I look for meaningful feedback from my peers here. I suppose I fit somewhere in the middle. I'm not the published genius yet, but I'm not the worst hack in the bunch either.

I came here mostly to learn and improve. A few steps forward. One back maybe. Then try again. Like a lot of people who write stories here, I'm losing the attraction of the votes. That said, it's nice when you make the rated top list and stay there a while. That's a true "Feels Great" feeling.

MJL

 

[adetaildiva]

*waves at Diva*

*waving back at Max* play nice, Max, or I'll ...... or I'll ....... um ........ I'll ....... well, I don't know what I'll do to you yet but, oh, boy, when I do, yeah, when I do, be afraid.

 

[CyranodeMelbourne]

Sweeping?

I ahve a story up with two votes but two views, which I find confusing (espeically as the 2nd vote dropped it to 3.5). Does that mean that a "Sweep" will kill those votes if there are no corresponding views? Personally, I wouldn't mind as I don't want random votes without people actually reading the story, but I can't see why people would vote without reading...

 

[evanslily]

I ahve a story up with two votes but two views, which I find confusing (espeically as the 2nd vote dropped it to 3.5). Does that mean that a "Sweep" will kill those votes if there are no corresponding views? Personally, I wouldn't mind as I don't want random votes without people actually reading the story, but I can't see why people would vote without reading...

As you've probably realised now, the votes tally is out of sync with the reads tally. The numbers don't get updated together. At times, I've had more votes than reads...

No one's quite sure how the sweeping system works--but no one's supposed to, otherwise we'd think up ways of getting around it, I s'pose! Random 'one bombs' will probably go in the event of a sweep--though I can't promise!

 

[cloudy]

As you've probably realised now, the votes tally is out of sync with the reads tally. The numbers don't get updated together. At times, I've had more votes than reads...

No one's quite sure how the sweeping system works--but no one's supposed to, otherwise we'd think up ways of getting around it, I s'pose! Random 'one bombs' will probably go in the event of a sweep--though I can't promise!

Votes are updated in real time and views are only updated a couple of times a day.

Sweeps will not only take out duplicate 1 votes, they'll also sweep duplicate votes of any kind.