Are there any legitimate one votes?

[lovecraft68]

Just curious about that seeing as with a contest underway there will be massive sweeps coming soon.

From what I gather the sweeps erase "suspicious" votes. Some of these I know are % votes that come within very short periods of time (4 0r 5 chapters voted at once) or of course from the same IP address.

Mostly what is erased is the one bombs because they are always seen as trolling.

Well, does the system leave one bombs alone ever? There has to be a point where a one is given legitimately. I read part of an incest story yesterday that was the most horrendous thing I have seen here. Little to no grammar, terrible misspellings(my personal pet peeve) and the story itself completely ludicrous.

I gave it a one, as did many others seeing the score was below a three. Will the sweep eliminate all those votes?

Common sense tells me they must leave some alone or everyone would have 5's or very high 4.8's across the board, but I am wondering how they differentiate.

 

[TheeGoatPig]

I made what I considered to be a legitimate One vote once. Worst writing I ever read.

 

[lovecraft68]

I made what I considered to be a legitimate One vote once. Worst writing I ever read.

I try not to vote 1's. I tell myself that whether I liked a story or not, I know writing is a lot of work and people are proud of what they put up there.

This one the other day though was different. There was no work put into this, if there was they would have at least used spell check. Never mind the dialogue read like a bad Beavis and Butthead conversation.

So I pulled the trigger. Now I'm wondering if I'll do it more often.

 

[Dual_Triode]

Like everyone else, I've been one-bombed. As far as I can tell, most of them get swept away. I can't claim this with absolute certainty, however.

I've never cast a one vote. If the story is that bad, I can't finish reading and voting. The lowest vote I have cast is a three with private feedback outlining my reasons.

I suppose you could reward true wretchedness with a two. It will affect the average score nearly as much and may be more permanent, if that is your goal. In doing so, however, I would feel obligated to give private feedback to the author. Sometimes getting a "D" on a test is more eye opening than getting an "F".

 

[PennLady]

I have voted two's a couple of times, not sure about one's. But it was, as lc said, the story was just so poorly-written. Mostly, though, if it's that bad, I just don't finish reading. Life's too short.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Are there any legitimate 5 votes? Same problems.

All of us seem to have a love-hate relationship with our critics until we trust the critic as a fair and impartial judge of our stuff, and respect the critic's fund of knowledge.

Maxwell Perkins, for example, couldnt write squat yet he was a master editor and critic, and many of his proteges earned Pulitzer or Nobel prizes.

 

[Dual_Triode]

Are there any legitimate 5 votes? Same problems.

All of us seem to have a love-hate relationship with our critics until we trust the critic as a fair and impartial judge of our stuff, and respect the critic's fund of knowledge.

Maxwell Perkins, for example, couldnt write squat yet he was a master editor and critic, and many of his proteges earned Pulitzer or Nobel prizes.

A perfectly logical question. For me, this reinforces the notion that the body of readers on Literotica are neither fair nor impartial. I seem to be my own worst critic; more ruthless than any reader feedback.

As a fledgling author, I feel ecstatic when I get a five and crushed when I get a one. But, as you point out, neither score is a true reflection of the real quality of the writing. I don't have a trusted critic to review my writing, just my own impressions and goals. And the feedback from other Lit authors.

That's why I hang out here.

 

[Neonurotic]

1 bombs will stick if the story has already received a majority of low votes and that's the same with the 5 bombs.
Suspicious votes are votes that falls out of the norm then swept. Maybe even suspect ip numbers are auto-swept.

 

[PayDay]

I'm mostly with DT on this one. I never vote below a three on a bad story, unless I couldn't finish it, at which point, I won't vote. The exception being I always vote one on a pretencious writer who is pushing across the "better than you" vibe in their writing, or one who makes it overly complicated to feel important. You know(,) the ones.

Otherwise, the voting system on here is chaotic, which to me is perfect unless someone is voting for themselves or agrressively in SPAM votes. If Lit was(is?) clearing SPAMmed ones, they would be clearing SPAMmed fives just the same.

Votes do not matter to me unless they are all awesome, it's the feedback explaining that trips the trigger for most (I'm assuming).

I'm sure as great as Lit is in the first place, that Lit has found a way to make the system "fair" in the second place.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

A perfectly logical question. For me, this reinforces the notion that the body of readers on Literotica are neither fair nor impartial. I seem to be my own worst critic; more ruthless than any reader feedback.

As a fledgling author, I feel ecstatic when I get a five and crushed when I get a one. But, as you point out, neither score is a true reflection of the real quality of the writing. I don't have a trusted critic to review my writing, just my own impressions and goals. And the feedback from other Lit authors.

That's why I hang out here.

Here's an example of how author's oughta write. Bill Cosby plays this lady like a guitar, and the results are wonderful. All ofus should strive to make ordinary human action stunning.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1NsC98xVN0

 

[estragon]

"For me, this reinforces the notion that the body of readers on Literotica are neither fair nor impartial."--DualTriode.

Dual, precisely. The readers have no obligation to be either fair or impartial. They need not be (although I am sure many are) unprejudiced, and they need not be (although again I am sure many are) much more than functional illiterates looking for a quick wank. And shooting off their little potty mouths and making poo when they don't get what they want.

Of course, there are readers of impeccable taste, whose refined politeness of expression, educated criticisms and well-reasoned corrections are pure gold to the writer. I only wish there were more of them.

 

[Dual_Triode]

Here's an example of how author's oughta write. Bill Cosby plays this lady like a guitar, and the results are wonderful. All ofus should strive to make ordinary human action stunning.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1NsC98xVN0

Marcia Brody is precious! "Who's on first?"

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

"For me, this reinforces the notion that the body of readers on Literotica are neither fair nor impartial."--DualTriode.

Dual, precisely. The readers have no obligation to be either fair or impartial. They need not be (although I am sure many are) unprejudiced, and they need not be (although again I am sure many are) much more than functional illiterates looking for a quick wank. And shooting off their little potty mouths and making poo when they don't get what they want.

Of course, there are readers of impeccable taste, whose refined politeness of expression, educated criticisms and well-reasoned corrections are pure gold to the writer. I only wish there were more of them.

I cant imagine you handling any criticism with grace.

 

[estragon]

I cant imagine you handling any criticism with grace.

Oh, I can, and have done before now. But have you ever read anything I've written?

 

[PayDay]

Oh, I can, and have done before now. But have you ever read anything I've written?

Sick burn. This feels like my Thanksgiving all over again. Now if only I had some turkey or pie.

 

[lovecraft68]

Oh, I can, and have done before now. But have you ever read anything I've written?

No Estragon, the real question here is has anyone here ever read anything that JBJ claims to have written?

 

[RedHairedandFriendly]

If I can't finish a story, I don't vote. My votes will range usually between a 4 & 5 because if it's good enough to capture my interest to the end, then it deserves that high of a number.

Earlier when I first starting writing and reading, I would read through everything, so I could get an idea on my own style, and for those early reads I did vote low if I felt it was an awful piece of work, but now I just click back and find something else and don't bother voting unless I finish - no pun intended.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Oh, I can, and have done before now. But have you ever read anything I've written?

I read enough to conclude you need an editor.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

No Estragon, the real question here is has anyone here ever read anything that JBJ claims to have written?

You read my scribbles all the time.

You confuse pissing in the snow with mastery of urology.

 

[estragon]

Sick burn. This feels like my Thanksgiving all over again. Now if only I had some turkey or pie.

Pay, Johnson is the turkey. As for pie, I cannot help you there.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Pay, Johnson is the turkey. As for pie, I cannot help you there.

You confirm my assertion.

 

[lovecraft68]

You read my scribbles all the time.

You confuse pissing in the snow with mastery of urology.

You live in Florida where there is no snow, so apparently you don't even write there either.

 

[Darkniciad]

1 bombs will stick if the story has already received a majority of low votes and that's the same with the 5 bombs.
Suspicious votes are votes that falls out of the norm then swept. Maybe even suspect ip numbers are auto-swept.

^ This

1s get removed more often by this sweep because the majority of people who don't like it simply don't reach the end to vote.

If the story is offensive enough ( see LW ) to the reader, or so unbearably horrible as to make them wonder how it ever got past the moderators, or dashes their expectations of the author, etc. then enough low votes will remain to make the lower votes not trigger the "out of the norm" criteria.

I still suspect that most of the 1s go away, even in this situation. People who vote 1 tend to do so frequently, and probably get themselves flagged as problem voters, making all the clicking meaningless when all of their votes end up in the dustbin. A 1 from someone who doesn't vote low all the time on a story that is receiving overall bad ratings might very well stick.

Most of what brings the score down are the 2s, 3s, and 4s, though. In this case, more 5s are probably removed because they're what's outside the norm.

That's the best I've been able to reverse engineer this type of sweep.

As to the general question, I've seen some that I might have voted 1 on, if I'd finished them -- entirely based upon readability. Every one I can think of was a bare minimum 1 page story that only had four or five immense paragraphs, and was almost incomprehensible due to the grammar and spelling errors.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

You live in Florida where there is no snow, so apparently you don't even write there either.

We have snow in Florida.

http://www.searchamelia.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/let-it-snow.jpg

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

^ This

1s get removed more often by this sweep because the majority of people who don't like it simply don't reach the end to vote.

If the story is offensive enough ( see LW ) to the reader, or so unbearably horrible as to make them wonder how it ever got past the moderators, or dashes their expectations of the author, etc. then enough low votes will remain to make the lower votes not trigger the "out of the norm" criteria.

I still suspect that most of the 1s go away, even in this situation. People who vote 1 tend to do so frequently, and probably get themselves flagged as problem voters, making all the clicking meaningless when all of their votes end up in the dustbin. A 1 from someone who doesn't vote low all the time on a story that is receiving overall bad ratings might very well stick.

Most of what brings the score down are the 2s, 3s, and 4s, though. In this case, more 5s are probably removed because they're what's outside the norm.

That's the best I've been able to reverse engineer this type of sweep.

As to the general question, I've seen some that I might have voted 1 on, if I'd finished them -- entirely based upon readability. Every one I can think of was a bare minimum 1 page story that only had four or five immense paragraphs, and was almost incomprehensible due to the grammar and spelling errors.

Does Mizzz Laurel cull 5's too? I'm skeptical she does. Say what you want but LIT is a vanity press.