Checking On New Story Status

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Back in 1993 the state hired Ross Perot to design a new computer system that tied all the disparate agency systems together. That is, the Department of Health could talk to Rehabilitation and Vocational Rehab and Economic Services and Corrections and FDLE and Attorneys General and District Attorneys and Fish & Wildlife, etc., cuz we all interacted. And EDS made the biggest mess imaginable. It only cost 3 billion bux.

Then in 1995 they hired others to fix the mess, and in 2005 it still didn't work, Most of the sheriffs and police departments said FUCK YOU. The problem was gnats ass size agencies that tweaked the system in the dark of night. And every agency had a small nest of programmers trying to justify their jobs. Some fool linked my computer to ALL the welfare accounts in the state, one night, and I deleted them. hahahaha WTF IS THIS? D-E-L-E-T-E. Someone made me like MASTER OF THE UNIVERSE in error.

 

[sr71plt]

http://farm1.staticflickr.com/97/252849242_373d779ccd.jpg

I'm not surprised. The nutshell version is that you are using possible future bells and whistles (and having some pied piper success with folks on the thread, I'll admit) to avoid seeing and dealing with the reality of the present. Which sort of lacks credibility--or, at least, it should--since part of the reality of the present is the existence of hints at future bells and whistled that have been no more than hints for at least seven years.

 

[Laurel]

Actually, no. I'm not sure what your point is at this junction other than to argue. I feel I've explained the situation pretty clearly. I don't really have any interest in arguing with you. Sorry! Enjoy the bunny with the pancake

 

[sr71plt]

Well, there you go then. I had let it go. Then the pied piper arrived.

I guess then that there would be no utility in taking the time and effort to make a list enumerating what is broken and needs fixed or dropped and PMing it to you if you're busy sticking your fingers in your ears and going lalalala.

 

[patientlee]

Actually, we're in the process of reworking that. The idea of "Favoriting" an author will likely be a thing of the past because it has no meaning. Instead, readers will be able to "Subscribe" to an author, which means they will be made aware of any new stories by that author and - once we have author comment boards - any new comments by that author.

As for story and poem submissions, in the future there will be two main lists: a Favorites list, and a Reading list. Right now, many readers are using the Favorites list as a To-Read list. This will hopefully end this and make the Favorites list more accurate.

Additionally (and this is all non-final so the specifics could change with implementation), readers will be able to create their own lists of stories, which they will be able to share publicly, with Friends, or keep private.

I LOVE the to-read list idea. Sounds like the Goodreads app.

 

[MeredithEighty8]

Actually, we're in the process of reworking that. The idea of "Favoriting" an author will likely be a thing of the past because it has no meaning. Instead, readers will be able to "Subscribe" to an author, which means they will be made aware of any new stories by that author and - once we have author comment boards - any new comments by that author.

As for story and poem submissions, in the future there will be two main lists: a Favorites list, and a Reading list. Right now, many readers are using the Favorites list as a To-Read list. This will hopefully end this and make the Favorites list more accurate.

Additionally (and this is all non-final so the specifics could change with implementation), readers will be able to create their own lists of stories, which they will be able to share publicly, with Friends, or keep private.

Love what's in the works and have fingers tightly crossed that it finally materializes.

 

[sr71plt]

$ 45,835,692.00

That's the current estimated worth of Literotica: $ 45,835,692.00.

http://www.worthofweb.com/website-value/literotica.com

Does that make it worth cleaning up and maybe even augmenting the staff a bit?

I was bowled over, incidentally, by Laurel's declaration that she worked eight hours a day on the Web site. I had assumed it was much longer. Who doesn't work eight hours a day? I work at least twelve hours a day, every day, on my craft.

 

[TxRad]

That's the current estimated worth of Literotica: $ 45,835,692.00.

http://www.worthofweb.com/website-value/literotica.com

Does that make it worth cleaning up and maybe even augmenting the staff a bit?

Estimated worth and actual profits can be a very large difference.

From what was said by laurel, they are trying to clean up something that started out hodge podge. Which ain't easy in most cases. I've worked with computer controlled equipment that was all bubblegum and bandages. It was a bitch until we just junked it and started from scratch with a solid platform. In this case it would be almost impossible to start over from scratch. Too much data and too many different data bases.

So the bottom line is to do what you can with the system until you can get it changed. One change effects the whole and is a trickle down effect. The wonkiness we see ever so often is proof of that. So you do workarounds and keep the main parts working until the new changes do away with some of the problems.

Some here seem to think the little stuff is the most important. Sorry but the whole of the site is the most important. Getting everything to work together. Doing that will solve a lot of the little stuff.

 

[sr71plt]

Estimated worth and actual profits can be a very large difference.

From what was said by laurel, they are trying to clean up something that started out hodge podge. Which ain't easy in most cases. I've worked with computer controlled equipment that was all bubblegum and bandages. It was a bitch until we just junked it and started from scratch with a solid platform. In this case it would be almost impossible to start over from scratch. Too much data and too many different data bases.

So the bottom line is to do what you can with the system until you can get it changed. One change effects the whole and is a trickle down effect. The wonkiness we see ever so often is proof of that. So you do workarounds and keep the main parts working until the new changes do away with some of the problems.

Some here seem to think the little stuff is the most important. Sorry but the whole of the site is the most important. Getting everything to work together. Doing that will solve a lot of the little stuff.

Well, no, that's not the actual problem. The problem is "I don't understand what you mean by nonfunctional parts; the Web site is fully functional."

And a good chuck of current nonfunctional parts could be solved--and time/effort saved--by merely dropping them. For instance, the nonfunctioning monthly and "annual bests" contests and sponsorship of a volunteer editor program that is more of a danger than assistance (people could just negotiate with each other on the editor's board without posters thinking that volunteer editors were somehow accredited by the Web site). Dropping a nonfunctioning program doesn't require future development (which is largely a panacea myth here anyway--enhancements here have been more talked about than done and those done, although nice, new shiny things, don't address what users asked for more often than not). It might leave some time to actually open those e-mails that posters are urged to use that they then claim go to a deadletter office.

Oh, and a major aspect of the valuing of Web sites is the advertising money they are receiving--this is actual revenue, not future expectation.

 

[TxRad]

Well, no, that's not the actual problem. The problem is "I don't understand what you mean by nonfunctional parts; the Web site is fully functional."

It is perspective. The site is fully functional. The stuff you keep bringing up is non essential to the operation of the site itself. Its cosmetics to the operation of the site. Yes, it is a pain in the ass for us but getting the site cleaned up is exactly what they are trying to do from a programmers point of view.

They have priorities and you have different priorities.

 

[Laurel]

That's the current estimated worth of Literotica: $ 45,835,692.00.

http://www.worthofweb.com/website-value/literotica.com

Well golly, if it's on the Internet, it must be true.

 

[sr71plt]

Well golly, if it's on the Internet, it must be true.

I'm sure you use the stats when it's convenient for you.

 

[sr71plt]

And I hope, Laurel, that you didn't read my post before I added to it--some fixing of the current nonfunctional parts (e.g., the monthly and "annual best" contests and the sponsorship of a volunteer editors program that is actual damaging to unsuspecting writers asking for help) don't need any technical enhancements. They just need to be dropped. They are dead.

 

[Laurel]

This site says Lit's only worth $1,050,814
http://www.yourwebsitevalue.com/details/l/i/t/literotica_com.html

I like your site better.

 

[sr71plt]

This site says Lit's only worth $1,050,814
http://www.yourwebsitevalue.com/details/l/i/t/literotica_com.html

I like your site better.

Fine. I protect and keep clean what I have that is valued even at $1 mill. I don't fool myself about what currently needs attention to enhance the value.

 

[Laurel]

Holy crap! This site says Lit's worth $54.00!
http://www.urlappraisal.net/search.php?textSearch=literotica.com&searchSubmit=Appraise

 

[sr71plt]

Holy crap! This site says Lit's worth $54.00!
http://www.urlappraisal.net/search.php?textSearch=literotica.com&searchSubmit=Appraise

So, part of the shell game is to say that maybe it's only worth $54?

 

[Laurel]

This site's nicer. It says Lit's worth $ 4,932,360.00. Much better than $54.00.
http://www.gositevalue.com/www/literotica.com

 

[sr71plt]

It is perspective. The site is fully functional.es.

A site is not fully functional when a bunch of folks are saying that they punch given contact buttons that go nowhere--and that the regular users have come to believe this enough to spend a large chunk of their time here passing on the "secret contact" number that is the only one they believe works.

 

[sr71plt]

This site's nicer. It says Lit's worth $ 4,932,360.00. Much better than $54.00.
http://www.gositevalue.com/www/literotica.com

Well, sure, we could take an hour to average them all out. That would be better than actually doing anything.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

LITs worth what you can collect for it. Appraisals are bullshit. And the value of a venue can go to Hell in no time. Like the Washington Post.

 

[Laurel]

So, part of the shell game is to say that maybe it's only worth $54?

Oh totally. That's exactly what I'm saying.

This may sound like crazy talk, but is it possible, maybe, that random sites on the Internet make things up based on no inside knowledge? That maybe - just maybe - the only true worth of anything is what someone else is willing to pay for it?

I know. It sounds crazy.

And it's also irrelevant to the discussion of the future of the site. But that's not your point isn't it? Your point is to be insulting. Your repeated implications that we don't work hard enough, digs at our financial situation (about which you have no knowledge whatsoever, and it is - no offense - none of your business), your implications that I'm lying about things, etc. It's all a bit - I dunno, rude.

Which is why I'm not going to engage you anymore.

Sorry. I tried.

 

[TxRad]

Oh totally. That's exactly what I'm saying.

This may sound like crazy talk, but is it possible, maybe, that random sites on the Internet make things up based on no inside knowledge? That maybe - just maybe - the only true worth of anything is what someone else is willing to pay for it?

I know. It sounds crazy.

And it's also irrelevant to the discussion of the future of the site. But that's not your point isn't it? Your point is to be insulting. Your repeated implications that we don't work hard enough, digs at our financial situation (about which you have no knowledge whatsoever, and it is - no offense - none of your business), your implications that I'm lying about things, etc. It's all a bit - I dunno, rude.

Which is why I'm not going to engage you anymore.

Sorry. I tried.

Now you know what we put up with nearly every day.

 

[sr71plt]

Now you know what we put up with nearly every day.

Yes, it's so hard to remain in a self-delusional fairytale world on an Internet discussion board when someone insists on interjecting common sense.

 

[sr71plt]

Oh Your point is to be insulting.

No, Laurel, that's been your point on this thread--in the wake of years and years of my being supportive of you and the Web site on this forum.

I have been trying to point out where the Web site, as it exists, needs to be cleaned up. And I've even pointed to dead programs that you could drop with a single message.

Tell me who is being stubborn and insulting.