Website rules - where are the limits?

[maxpotter]

So this is the rule:

9. No HTML links or web addresses are allowed within stories.​

I understand this rule. I am going over a rejected story where the usernames inside the story also seem to cause a rejection. I was a bit confused as I thought I was in the bounds of the published rule.

I didn't put in the Top Level Domain (e.g. .com) for the site I reference.

What I wonder, is what are the actual enforced parameters? I have a story where the protagonist has a Twitter account and post pictures. I'm holding off until I have a "model". What is permitted and not here? Can I say Twitter? Use a hashtag? I know I can't put a link in (although that would be great).

With the prevalence of online communication, and how it can be used in events for stories, I want to know what I have to do to comply.

 

[jaF0]

I am going over a rejected story where the usernames inside the story also seem to cause a rejection.

Example?

 

[RejectReality]

You can say things like "Twitter" and "Facebook" but don't put in .com, .net etc. anywhere.

Never tried hashtags or @UserName but I expect that could be a rejection reason on a speed scan, mistaking the latter for an email address. You may need to put a note in the notes section pointing out the hashtags and @s so Laurel is aware of them and doesn't knee-jerk reject it for them.

 

[maxpotter]

Well, according to the volunteer editor, it might have been parts like this:

BrainyAndHung: So you got close to meeting that guy and he bugged out?

BetaNick: Yeah, was a while back. Not had a lot of luck since then.

But I'm not sure, as the message did not get into specifics, and did not show the difference with the published rule.

Beyond this, what are you looking for in an example?

 

[jaF0]

Beyond this, what are you looking for in an example?

where the usernames inside the story also seem to cause a rejection

Neither of the names you included here would violate policy. Lack of quote around the spoken bits would however.

BrainyAndHung asked "So you got close to meeting that guy and he bugged out?"

BetaNick replied "Yeah, was a while back. Not had a lot of luck since then."

Do it as conversation rather than a script for actors to read.

 

[maxpotter]

Neither of the names you included here would violate policy. Lack of quote around the spoken bits would however.

BrainyAndHung asked "So you got close to meeting that guy and he bugged out?"

BetaNick replied "Yeah, was a while back. Not had a lot of luck since then."

Do it as conversation rather than a script for actors to read.

Those are chat conversations, on a website, not a spoken conversation.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Those are chat conversations, on a website, not a spoken conversation.

This topic came up a while back with no real conclusion, but dialogue without punctuation could be enough to knock the story back, even if it is chat.

But if the rejection note only references links, emails, whatever, scrub through the text to eliminate anything like that, and resubmit. Dialogue without punctuation might be your next problem, but deal with the rejection note issues first.

 

[Blind_Justice]

In my "Ghost in the Machine" story I have several instances of chat messaging. I made sure to let Laurel know in the submission's Notes field they are ficticious and not an attempt at doxxing someone. Maybe try to resubmit with a similar notice. If all else fails, send Laurel a PM and explain your case.

 

[SimonDoom]

Neither of the names you included here would violate policy. Lack of quote around the spoken bits would however.

BrainyAndHung asked "So you got close to meeting that guy and he bugged out?"

BetaNick replied "Yeah, was a while back. Not had a lot of luck since then."

Do it as conversation rather than a script for actors to read.

No, that wouldn't violate the Site's policy. There is no particular policy on how to format a chat or a text message discussion or other online communications. For that matter the various authoritative sources like the Chicago Manual of Style don't dictate any particular format for these communications. You can adopt whatever format you want so long as it's clear.

I can't see how this snippet of dialogue would violate any policy on this Site and get rejected. I assume there's something else that resulted in the rejection.

 

[Enchantment_of_Nyx]

Well, according to the volunteer editor, it might have been parts like this:

BrainyAndHung: So you got close to meeting that guy and he bugged out?

BetaNick: Yeah, was a while back. Not had a lot of luck since then.

If that's not the correct way to do it, I can't imagine what is. This is also something you could point out in the comments section on the submission form. I suppose it wouldn't hurt to point out in the comments that those aren't actual usernames.
Another thing you could try is putting the chat excerpt in italics.

I'm doubtful the format is the reason it got rejected, though.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Well, according to the volunteer editor, it might have been parts like this:

BrainyAndHung: So you got close to meeting that guy and he bugged out?

BetaNick: Yeah, was a while back. Not had a lot of luck since then.

I very much doubt this would be grounds for rejection. I've used exactly the same style for text conversations without any problems.

 

[maxpotter]

I can't see anything else, I have asked in my Authors notes if they would point out specifically what the difficulty is. It's been a few notes now, but I'm sure I said I used a site and chatting in the story.

 

[jaF0]

The 'rules' have been getting muddled recently and what did or didn't get through in the past is no indicator of what will or won't now.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I can't see anything else, I have asked in my Authors notes if they would point out specifically what the difficulty is. It's been a few notes now, but I'm sure I said I used a site and chatting in the story.

I doubt you'll get anything back that is specific to your story. The rejection reasons are generic, so you just have to keep trying to interpret them as best you can, and keep resubmitting. When you do, pop in a Note to the Editor saying what you've done. Eventually you'll get it through, and you'll know for the future.

 

[maxpotter]

I have been pointing out.

I do workflows for a living. I know there is a huge amount of work for this website, and everyone is a volunteer - I run parts of volunteer organizations as well, so I know how difficult it is. But the work for not answering questions when poised seems to be more work.

As mentioned above, muddled rules make it difficult to comply with. I understand _why_ they have that rule, even if I don't see the need for enforcement with the change to a lot of how the internet works today. I do get to the point of thinking it's just being rejected because it was rejected in the past.

 

[SimonDoom]

I have been pointing out.

I do workflows for a living. I know there is a huge amount of work for this website, and everyone is a volunteer - I run parts of volunteer organizations as well, so I know how difficult it is. But the work for not answering questions when poised seems to be more work.

As mentioned above, muddled rules make it difficult to comply with. I understand _why_ they have that rule, even if I don't see the need for enforcement with the change to a lot of how the internet works today. I do get to the point of thinking it's just being rejected because it was rejected in the past.

The confusion is understandable and frustrating. It would be very helpful if Literotica would update, expand, and clarify its story content rules, and put all of them in one easily accessible place.

 

[KeithD]

I have been pointing out.

I do workflows for a living. I know there is a huge amount of work for this website, and everyone is a volunteer - I run parts of volunteer organizations as well, so I know how difficult it is. But the work for not answering questions when poised seems to be more work.

I think there are practically no volunteers working this Web site beyond the nonsanctioned users who answer questions on the board to help (and occasionally get bitten for trying to help). The discussion board mods--but how many of those are there? I think the entire story side is run by the owners who aren't volunteering but are making whatever profit there is to make.