daft question

[EddieTheBastard]

New(ish) writer here.

Added a new episode to my Kathryn series of stories and it got to hot - was pleased all going well - had done all the research - including get the assistance of a willing research assistant or two.

Then somebody gives it a one star (hated it) rating and the story drops its - but whoever did it didn't give any feedback at all - does this sort of thing bug other writers?

 

[MelissaBaby]

New(ish) writer here.

Added a new episode to my Kathryn series of stories and it got to hot - was pleased all going well - had done all the research - including get the assistance of a willing research assistant or two.

Then somebody gives it a one star (hated it) rating and the story drops its - but whoever did it didn't give any feedback at all - does this sort of thing bug other writers?

Yes, it's annoying but it comes with the territory. Laurel will occasionally do sweeps and clean out sketchy looking one votes, so you may see a boost in the score later on. Good luck with your writing.

 

[Hypoxia]

Why post a story to LIT when we don't get paid in valuta?

• Because the voices in our heads force us to tell tales.
• Because we're exerting ourselves artistically.
• To arouse and/or pissoff unsuspecting readers.
• They made their commercial hit so you can give them away now.
• For brownie points: views, votes, faves, comments.

That last gets tricky. Obsessing on brownie points leads to despair and madness. Very few authors here are universally loved. Most of us learn to grow thick skins to take our fair share of abuse, and not go nutz when fucktards attack us. They can't find us, so feh.

Forget the one-bombs. They're monkeys flinging feces at you.

 

[Emirus]

Then somebody gives it a one star (hated it) rating and the story drops its - but whoever did it didn't give any feedback at all - does this sort of thing bug other writers?

It’s very rare that anyone announces in a comment they’ve 1-bombed you but it does occasionally happen. But the announcement is always by Mr/Mrs/Ms Anonymous. Some of them will be stalkers or they may just get a perverse delight from making someone’s much wanted red H disappear.

All you can hope for is that it will disappear in a random sweep but whether or not your story will be swept is not certain because of the vast amount of stories on this site. It’s a case of putting up with it. What’s also annoying is you need several 5’s to counteract a single 1-bomb.

I did go to read your stories and saw they are bdsm. I like, and write in, that category but I’m on the Domme/submissive male so I’m sorry to say I didn’t read any of them. But if you enjoy writing, and are happy with your stories, and you know some readers enjoy them, keep writing.

 

[gunhilltrain]

New(ish) writer here.

Added a new episode to my Kathryn series of stories and it got to hot - was pleased all going well - had done all the research - including get the assistance of a willing research assistant or two.

Then somebody gives it a one star (hated it) rating and the story drops its - but whoever did it didn't give any feedback at all - does this sort of thing bug other writers?

You may have realized this: comments are the rarest thing to get, fewer than votes to say nothing of "views." There is a thread here (actually in the Author's Hangout I think) in which somebody estimated the ratios among the three.

Just by randomly looking I see I have a story with 38 votes but two comments. That's pretty typical.

 

[ElectricBlue]

All you can hope for is that it will disappear in a random sweep but whether or not your story will be swept is not certain because of the vast amount of stories on this site. It’s a case of putting up with it. What’s also annoying is you need several 5’s to counteract a single 1-bomb.

When a sweep goes through (usually in the context of a contest or an anthology) it goes through the whole story file. You don't have to be in the contest or the anthology, you will still benefit from the sweep.

I've not yet worked out how far back a sweep goes - a far way, I reckon - some of my very earliest stories still get score adjustments occasionally, and I joined in 2014.

 

[ElectricBlue]

You may have realized this: comments are the rarest thing to get, fewer than votes to say nothing of "views." There is a thread here (actually in the Author's Hangout I think) in which somebody estimated the ratios among the three.

Just by randomly looking I see I have a story with 38 votes but two comments. That's pretty typical.

Typically, one vote per hundred views, one comment per thousand views. Some categories better/worse.

If you write extremely well or really badly, you'll get comments. If you''re in the middle of the giant Lit bell curve, you can expect mostly silence.

 

[EddieTheBastard]

Thanks all for you feedback - yes the voices in our heads definitely do sometimes create a story and use us to tell it!

Glad it doesn't just happen to me and yes, comments are rarer and those I've received have been very useful (ideas, constructive criticism etc.)

 

[Emirus]

When a sweep goes through (usually in the context of a contest or an anthology) it goes through the whole story file. You don't have to be in the contest or the anthology, you will still benefit from the sweep.

Annabelle was on 4.55 after 31 votes and I really liked seeing that little red H after all the effort I and my friend, adviser, proof reader and editor put in. The last two votes, accompanied by nasty but comprehensive insults, have been 1-bombs and she’s fallen to 4.33. She now needs 16@5 to get back to 4.55.

I had a couple of stories swept recently. One of them had one 1 star removed and five 5 stars. What? My friend, a much better writer than me and who started a few months before myself, has 24 stories every one with a red H. So I think I’ve got a good editor. But strangely enough they’ve had the same experience of having blocks of 5’s removed. Fortunately they are a much better writer than myself so get a lot more 5’s.

I don’t have as much faith in sweeps as yourself EB. But I’ll eat my words if Annabelle suddenly jumps back up the ratings.

 

[EddieTheBastard]

Thanks again for the feedback Emirus - looked at your story - definitely not a 1 - its very clear what the character of the story is early on and its well written - so if a person doesn't like that sort of thing then simply don't finish it - or skip it based on the description and tags.

Dunces hiding behind the web to toss out mindless insults seems to be an issue pretty much everywhere sadly.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I don’t have as much faith in sweeps as yourself EB. But I’ll eat my words if Annabelle suddenly jumps back up the ratings.

It's what I've observed over five years. In that time I've entered only two contests and one anthology, but my new stories get swept and the scores move around whenever a sweep goes through, just like everyone else. The occasional old story moves around too, but after a time, they all mostly all settle down as the number of views drops off with age - although I always can see when interest in my back catalogue rises.

After the low bombs get removed, it's down to the quality of the writing to keep the scores high. I don't seem to get the "unhelpful fives" that others report - so presumably my fives satisfy the algorithm in terms of all pages read with realistic times on page (ie: the story has actually been read, and the system can figure that out from the time between page turns).

 

[SimonDoom]

It's what I've observed over five years. In that time I've entered only two contests and one anthology, but my new stories get swept and the scores move around whenever a sweep goes through, just like everyone else. The occasional old story moves around too, but after a time, they all mostly all settle down as the number of views drops off with age - although I always can see when interest in my back catalogue rises.

After the low bombs get removed, it's down to the quality of the writing to keep the scores high. I don't seem to get the "unhelpful fives" that others report - so presumably my fives satisfy the algorithm in terms of all pages read with realistic times on page (ie: the story has actually been read, and the system can figure that out from the time between page turns).

You probably shouldn't describe how it works (assuming this is how it works), because if people know how it works it won't work as well.

 

[ElectricBlue]

You probably shouldn't describe how it works (assuming this is how it works), because if people know how it works it won't work as well.

Pure speculation. Common sense says a time on page clock has to be involved, otherwise how would you know the validity of any score (especially the "not so helpful fives")? Besides, my speculation could just as easily be disinformation, and how would anyone know?

 

[LupusDei]

Pure speculation. Common sense says a time on page clock has to be involved, otherwise how would you know the validity of any score (especially the "not so helpful fives")? Besides, my speculation could just as easily be disinformation, and how would anyone know?

Further, that's the one thing hardest to mimic by a troll or script, these want things done fast and easy. There's tons of other signs how to identify scripts or multi-trolling. Also, secrecy is bad security, and if someone is really interested, may try to read about battling muti-accounting and macro scripting in online games; that's the real battle field, with even real money involved, sometimes even on both sides. Sweeping Lit votes is just a civil use of military technology in comparison.

 

[EddieTheBastard]

excellent point

Further, that's the one thing hardest to mimic by a troll or script, these want things done fast and easy. There's tons of other signs how to identify scripts or multi-trolling. Also, secrecy is bad security, and if someone is really interested, may try to read about battling muti-accounting and macro scripting in online games; that's the real battle field, with even real money involved, sometimes even on both sides. Sweeping Lit votes is just a civil use of military technology in comparison.

Well put, I suppose they could do as some dance, gymnastics and ice-skating contests do and trim top and bottom comments - but in reality, the site is great and most people clearly aren't utter dicks.

 

[GroverLang]

The odd 5 a writer might put on their own story is heavily outweighed by the damage done by a moron with a 1. Sweeps should be at the bottom not the top.

 

[ElectricBlue]

The odd 5 a writer might put on their own story is heavily outweighed by the damage done by a moron with a 1. Sweeps should be at the bottom not the top.

What happens, I think, is that fans who think they are being helpful load on fives without reading the story to legitimise their vote; or they read the story, forget to vote, and come back later to the last page and drop down the five in two seconds. Depending on their log-on practices, their IP address may or may not be known, and the vote may appear false. An "unhelpful five" and a one-bomb results in a 3.