5-bombing

[MediocreAuthor]

So a fellow author, (name withheld, unless they decide to step forward and take credit) was talking to me about ratings and how they rate other's stories.
I mentioned that it was incredibly rare for me to 1 star a story (I don't think I've ever done it, but I'm not positive)... and they said that they never did it. Fair enough.

Then they said something that caught me off guard. This is a quote: "I like going around and five bombing…"

I remarked that that was a kind thing to do, and then I got this response:

"...most people deserve to be happy"

Honestly, while I almost never downvote stories, I try to be honest about my 5 star ratings (I am occasionally extra generous with brand new authors who are just getting started. Everyone needs encouragement at the start).

I plan to continue being honest and fair with my 5 star ratings, but I might consider doing this from time to time.

5-bombing. What a nice thing to do. (Obviously, some authors are going to say that this subtly hurts an author's chances at improvement, but hell... for most of us this is a fun hobby, and if we never get any better, it wouldn't really hurt anything in life).

[EDIT: For the record, in this context, uno-bomb and 5-bomb just refer to rating a story different than your genuine feelings. No one is talking about voting multiple times]

 

[alohadave]

Sweeps catch those as well as 1 bombs. I've have had 5 votes removed from some of my stories during a sweep.

 

[MediocreAuthor]

Sweeps catch those as well as 1 bombs. I've have had 5 votes removed from some of my stories during a sweep.

When I say, 5-bomb, I'm not suggesting that they vote on a story more than once... I'm saying that they find a story that they aren't particularly intrigued by, but they give it 5 stars regardless... just to be nice.

Perhaps I was unclear

 

[Euphony]

I think I've said I do similarly elsewhere.

The system is, to put it kindly, broken. There's a narrow band encompassing good and extraordinary and plenty of times the latter has the lower numerical score.

I roll 5s so long as the story meets the good bar and has at least a few interesting points that dance outside category mainstays/tropes.

Now, if an author shows exceptionalism across multiple stories and/or they take big swings to do things well outside the norm (even if they stumble a bit) I am 5 bombing all over their catalog, sometimes stories I've more skimmed than read analytically.

Maybe I'm just as much a part of the scoring problem but riding a moral high ground updraft b/c I, as a fellow writer, know and respect the work it takes to put forth significant creation, especially when there are headwinds to your themes or content.

But I can't help myself, after accepting I believe the scoring is too noisy to be serious and precious over, to default to the troll opposite.

 

[lustychimera]

For the reasons that I personally enjoy posting stories online, I think false ratings cause more harm than good. I can't improve without feedback, and as odd as it sounds, one of the most frustrating and surprising things about internet writing communities is how difficult it is to find good constructive feedback--or even just negative feedback from someone who legitimately knows what they're actually looking at. Authors have this real tendency toward false positivity.

I guess if someone doesn't care about getting better at their hobby and just enjoys getting views, that a totally different motivation.

But for my perspective, if everybody's perfectly validated, nobody has a reason to improve, or even knows that they need to improve. They just keep middling along.

Idk, I find myself much more personally satisfied knowing that I'm genuinely getting better at something rather than having a bunch of happy campers telling me that I'm awesome.

Also, bombing 5's is going to skew the ratings away from stories that were otherwise well written but now no longer meet the average threshold because they weren't falsely rated.

It's superficial kindness.

 

[Euphony]

how difficult it is to find good constructive feedback--or even just negative feedback from someone who legitimately knows what they're actually looking at. Authors have this real tendency toward false positivity.

Agreed with the caveat that (I believe) the numerical system is beyond repair, at least reasonable effort needed to get it to your functional state.

Story Feedback forum isn't a cure all but a far better solution than the score system. It allows for long form criticism, follow up, context explanations and the like.

But you'll see there, too, its not a panacea. Some of the most earnest, deep criticism is roundly blasted for simply existing let alone some of its open to interpretation content.

Everything has its prickly parts.

 

[lustychimera]

I see this site as structured for readers and not authors. I have different motivations than the site owners. Granted, there are a ton of sites that are geared toward author to author feedback, but you're luck to get a handful of views.

So I can accept that part of this site just fine. I know what it's about. It's a low pressure jumping off point for the commercial market.

A more author geared system would be to weight long form feedback more than a quick rating click is, but that doesn't do much to drive traffic. So, it is what it is.

Some of the most earnest, deep criticism is roundly blasted for simply existing let alone some of its open to interpretation content.

That's certainly an issue with the author. Taking criticism is a skill, and I suppose so is knowing when and what to give.

The best critiques that I've ever gotten in regard to helping me improve were the ones that absolutely tore my story apart---and even went on to attack me as an author. It's like, yeah, it's easy to disregard that stuff as troll feedback, but if they have a point, they have a point.

Also, I see this site as more about gauging the market than improving technical skills. The best way to improve technically is to find a group of writers and do a weekly critique exchange. Posting for solely for readers, as this place is designed for, doesn't really do much for that.

So, I guess I don't see a huge issue with the numerical system because it's doing exactly as it's designed to do: Gauge the market.

 

[MediocreAuthor]

Idk, I find myself much more personally satisfied knowing that I'm genuinely getting better at something rather than having a bunch of happy campers telling me that I'm awesome.

Also, bombing 5's is going to skew the ratings away from stories that were otherwise well written but now no longer meet the average threshold because they weren't falsely rated.

It's superficial kindness.

I agree... Hence my viewpoint that I always rate stories fairly.

But going out of your way to be nice to a stranger has its own merits. It's a mixed bag.

I would argue that the majority of stories on this site are "fine... whatever" from my point of view. I don't love them or hate them. But if I went around 3-staring all those stories, it wouldn't really help those authors improve.

Take my story Eltrich Pact for example. It didn't score quite as well as I'd hoped. But, the comments were almost all positive. Anyone who gave me 3 stars, but no constructive criticism did me no good improving my skill. Do you see my point?

Scores are a judge of popularity, not quality. (There's some overlap, but in general one ≠ the other)
And telling someone "great job" when in reality they did an "okay job" will encourage them to keep it up... And most people who keep at a hobby will slowly get better, right?

 

[lustychimera]

Anyone who gave me 3 stars, but no constructive criticism did me no good improving my skill. Do you see my point?

Yeah, I definitely think the bigger kindness is to give a well thought out feedback in the comments over a quick rating.

And telling someone "great job" when in reality they did an "okay job" will encourage them to keep it up... And most people who keep at a hobby will slowly get better, right?

I tend to think of critiques in two categories: You have the beginner authors who need motivation first and foremost, so you heap on the compliments until they get to the point where they are passionate enough about the hobby that they're not just going to drop it due to a negative remark.

Then, that's when I start with the honest critiques so they know where to improve.

But like I said in the other post, this site isn't really designed for author to author feedback. It's for writers to get their feet wet with the reader's reactions.

 

[XerXesXu]

After wrestling with the site's dysfunctional rating system, though I've only ever given 4 0r 5 stars, I now only give 5 stars. If the rating is below 4.5 I give it 5, if it's above, I don't give it a rating.

 

[SimonDoom]

But if I went around 3-staring all those stories, it wouldn't really help those authors improve.

No, but it would help convey information to other potential readers, and that's the primary purpose of a rating system. Ratings are for readers first, authors second.

 

[MediocreAuthor]

After wrestling with the site's dysfunctional rating system, though I've only ever given 4 0r 5 stars, I now only give 5 stars. If the rating is below 4.5 I give it 5, if it's above, I don't give it a rating.

Honestly, I do very similarly. If a story is a 4 to me, but it's rated 4.1 I leave it alone. If it's a 3, but it's rated 2.9, I do rate it, etc, etc...

 

[ronde]

I don't believe it's really possible to construct a rating system that's any better than the one on Lit. Although in theory, it's a sliding scale based upon reader's opinion, what I've found is it's basically binary.

It's been my experience that most readers either like a story or dislike it. Those who like the story will usually give it a 5. Readers who rate based upon both content and writing style will sometimes give a story a 4 and leave a comment as to why. At the other end of the scale, readers aren't quite so forgiving. If they don't like the story, they give it a 1 sometimes without even reading it through. It's rare that they give a comment, and if they do, it's always "anonymous". We can't see the individual scores, but I would bet that ratings of 2 and 3 are rare.

There are the exceptions, such as readers who have a particular dislike of some genre or author and will always give a story in that genre a 1, and there are also readers who will rate a story as a 5 just because they like the author or they like anything in that particular genre. It's been that way on Lit since I started writing.

 

[lustychimera]

It is truly tragic to witness authors, who should be passionately immersed in the eloquence of words, gradually becoming consumed by numbers. What an unfortunate waste of precious time.

Dude, if you were searching for a place to be immersed in the passion of words, you would have a little circle jerk critique group curated to your tastes. No more than a dozen people. Book clubs are on Sunday.

If you are using this place to "discover the eloquence of words" rather than as a stepping stone to commercial success or personal validation, you are quite dumb.

 

[MediocreAuthor]

It is truly tragic to witness authors, who should be passionately immersed in the eloquence of words, gradually becoming consumed by numbers. What an unfortunate waste of precious time.

I don't disagree with you, but... and be honest... doesn't part of you like seeing higher numbers in lieu of lower ones?

It's like when a stranger holds the door open for you... You didn't need it, but it's nice sometimes.

 

[djrip]

It is truly tragic to witness authors, who should be passionately immersed in the eloquence of words, gradually becoming consumed by numbers. What an unfortunate waste of precious time.

 

[Djmac1031]

I've said it before and with no shame: I'm very generous with my 5's.

If I read your story all the way through, it means I enjoyed it.

If I didn't like it, I probably realized less than halfway through and just stopped. And didn't rate at all.

That said, I'd never go around 5 star rating stories I hadn't read just to help boost a rating or feed someone's ego, new writer or not.

Is the 1 Bomb crowd unfair? Absolutely. We know far to many 1 ratings come from people who either never bothered to read it or simply get a kick out of trashing someone's hard work.

Readers shouldn't choose a story to read based on star ratings. And not all do so.

But we can't say ratings don't affect readership at all.

If I go to an authors catalog and see lots of Red H ratings, am I more inclined to read their works? Probably.

But it doesn't mean I'll automatically enjoy them.

And I've read plenty of fantastic stories with mid tier ratings.

And let's be honest: most (not all) stories rated under a 3 probably deserve them.

I think encouraging comments for new writers with good efforts but weak execution is far more constructive than just handing out a 5 though.

 

[AlinaX]

If a story keeps me interested the whole way through, I'll give it five stars, because ultimately that's what I'm looking for as a reader - and, as an author, I know anything less than five stars can actively hurt.

If I *love* a story, or find it interesting for some or other reason, then I may favourite it. Sometimes I'll even leave a short comment, but I do find the non-interactive nature of comments a little discouraging.

 

[ElectricBlue]

It's been my experience that most readers either like a story or dislike it. Those who like the story will usually give it a 5. Readers who rate based upon both content and writing style will sometimes give a story a 4 and leave a comment as to why... We can't see the individual scores, but I would bet that ratings of 2 and 3 are rare.

Such a theory of scoring doesn't explain why writers get a wide range of scores - if as you say all positives are fives, then scores will skew high. But they don't. I've got 120 or so chapters/stories, and my scores are spread fairly evenly between about 4.30 and 4.90, with about ten percent between 4.00 and 4.25. That implies readers do score against a range, most likely 3s to 5s (1s and 2s less likely because if they think the story is that bad, they've moved on and don't bother leaving scores at all).

Similarly, you can find writers with a spread of scores between 3.50 and 4.50, with only an occasional Red H, thus their stories are being ranked lower overall.

I think readers do score using their own range criteria - many writers don't, but I reckon most readers do.

 

[stickygirl]

There's only six ratings on offer and you may be seeing the effect of cup half-full/half-empty people. A certain reader group will think a story was okay and give it a 3 = bang in the middle, numerically, but as we authors perceive it, 3 is a negative reaction. Another excitable group used to shouting 'Amazing, Brilliant' or 'I fuckin hate that' are more likely to post 1s and 5s.

Maybe scores are a measure of the readers resulting orgasm, with everything from 'hit the headboard - 5' to 'did the chores instead - 1' ?

I'm no fan of red H's because they steer readers toward headboard splatters, and so very good stories become overlooked.

ETA to the OP - mate, change your name. It's hardly inspiring!

 

[onehitwanda]

The problem I have (and I realise the irony of how black a pot I am, here) is that the H is subjective. The most useful I've found it being is as a filter for authors I may want to try reading. But as @stickygirl says, we're probably measuring metrics which aren't actually the ones that indicate whether a story is compelling or not.

I want Cormac McCarthy or Roald Dahl or Phillip K Dick when I read; but there's a ton of writing here, more than a lifetime's worth, and I have no way of finding that - the only measurable metric I have a priori is the score and the small set of flags. Once I've read one story by an author, I know whether that is someone I want to read more from, but before then there's nothing.

I don't think it's a solvable problem. Not here, at least.

 

[MediocreAuthor]

There's only six ratings on offer and you may be seeing the effect of cup half-full/half-empty people. A certain reader group will think a story was okay and give it a 3 = bang in the middle, numerically, but as we authors perceive it, 3 is a negative reaction. Another excitable group used to shouting 'Amazing, Brilliant' or 'I fuckin hate that' are more likely to post 1s and 5s

And I think that is the reason that my friend chooses to 5-bomb on occasion. They aren't going to take a terrible story and stroke the authors ego, they are just being nice to a fellow author.

If I give a story 5 stars, I will often comment as well. If you earned a 5star, you've earned a comment, because comments are better than scores anyway

ETA to the OP - mate, change your name. It's hardly inspiring!

Hey, if @NoTalentHack can revel in a bit of self-deprecation, so can I. His name is by far the harsher (and less accurate) name.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Ah, back to our favorite topic...

For me personally, the worst thing about the current rating system is that it ranks all types of stories indiscriminately. A few days ago, I was going through Hall of Fame stories in one category, and I found a high-rated standalone story of about 50k words with many comments and favorites, and then just above it, the 30th chapter of some series that had a bit above 1k words and contained practically one sex scene. Why would anyone think it a good idea to rank those two by the same criteria is beyond me.
Readers' competence, the problematic red H, and bombs aside, we are rating apples, oranges, bananas, and walnuts all by the same silly criteria, and what we get is a huge sack of bullshit. Through vast Lit reading experience, many of us have found certain ways of sifting through that bullshit, but that doesn't change the fact that the current system is incredibly inadequate.

 

[Bazzle]

I will give a story 5 stars, then maybe if there is something glaring or wrong leave a comment.
I need all the 5*'s I can get...im not going to give out anything less...well maybe not leave any stars if its awful

 

[BobbyandtheCabin]

I think it's a lovely idea.
Genuinely I'm SO happy if I see my rating's gone up, and even more so when I see I've got a positive comment.

I 100% get the need for critique, and I've had some useful critical comments. But a few times I've had a rating plummet with no comment, no explanation. What are you supposed to do with that? Then there's some who fancy themselves as critics and will pick for the sake of picking on things that ultimately can just come down to [writing] preference