Backend misclassification event bug

[lovecraft68]

This thread is going the way of all the others. Something is wrong but it devolves into arguing while the people responsible sit and laugh because they never have to answer to anything, their bootlicks just jack the thread and that's that.

3...2...1 before we get the first meme or boob joke

 

[Underscore_2]

No, you weren't even close. That was when it was first released, not when the version Literotica is currently running was released.


Then you should STFU and stop being that person.

Your response was anticipated, cos its par for the course .... booooooring

 

[IWroteThis]

Your response was anticipated, cos its par for the course .... booooooring

So, you knew you were spouting bullshit before I called you out on it?

Good to know…

 

[nudeblaqgirl]

So, you knew you were spouting bullshit before I called you out on it?

Good to know…

Who cares, dude.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

As you can see there is no checklist and no reason why the stories that were in pending purgatory and posted live for months were sent back

Yes, there is: it says "This is better suited to our forum: http://forum.literotica.com/"

In between "However, we've found that we cannot post your submission in its current form. The checklist below may help you in re-examining your manuscript." and "Please feel free to re-submit the story after a Volunteer Editor has examined it, or after you've made revisions. You can find a list of Volunteer Editors here." is where you find the list of reasons!

Why on earth a chapter of a previously-published story should be 'better suited to our forum' is beyond me, assuming it's not a corrupted file that looks like less than 750 words, but that is a checklist with one 'reason', even if it's complete bollocks.

Has anyone else ever had that 'reason' for a story being rejected?

 

[IWroteThis]

Who cares, dude.

Well, since you asked, I do.

Willful ignorance and deliberately spreading false information needs to be called out as a warning to those who don't already know truth and might believe the lies.

 

[nudeblaqgirl]

Well, since you asked, I do.

Willful ignorance and deliberately spreading false information needs to be called out as a warning to those who don't already know truth and might believe the lies.

Or you're just a pedantic pissant

 

[IWroteThis]

Or you're just a pedantic pissant

Ah, shooting (at) the messenger. How pathetic, but predictable.

 

[nudeblaqgirl]

Ah, shooting (at) the messenger. How pathetic, but predictable.

 

[millamomud]

Jeez, just get a room already

 

[TheRedChamber]

Yes, there is: it says "This is better suited to our forum: http://forum.literotica.com/"

In between "However, we've found that we cannot post your submission in its current form. The checklist below may help you in re-examining your manuscript." and "Please feel free to re-submit the story after a Volunteer Editor has examined it, or after you've made revisions. You can find a list of Volunteer Editors here." is where you find the list of reasons!

Why on earth a chapter of a previously-published story should be 'better suited to our forum' is beyond me, assuming it's not a corrupted file that looks like less than 750 words, but that is a checklist with one 'reason', even if it's complete bollocks.

Has anyone else ever had that 'reason' for a story being rejected?

That caught my eye as well. It's never happened to me, but I'm pretty sure I've seen it discussed here before. Basically, if someone posts a short, maybe rambling muse on some fetish or other in the How To or Essay sections, it might get kicked for being better suited to a forum post.
Given the titles of SmilingLez's works, I'm guessing this doesn't really apply here and is a mistake.

(Yes I had seen it. Here - https://forum.literotica.com/threads/sigh-my-first-year-on-literotica.1623491/#post-100026923)

 

[cadeauxxx]

So many theories. Let's just face reality.

The only reality here is that the site owners never address these problems, so people are left to speculate and try to guess why it is happening to them.

There are so many threads with so many authors talking about how their stories are stuck in pending hell and yet not a single time has one of the owners came out and addressed it. The silence speaks volumes.

 

[Britva415]

If you think they're still running the same version of MySQL on the same version of Linux on the same physical server that they stood up in the beginning, you should stick to "reading" picture books.

It's the same application, though.

Of course the underlying tech stack is going to receive appropriate upgrades over time, but that doesn't make the custom application any more stable.

If anything, they would make it less stable. Every upgrade of any single tech stack element is likely to introduce bugs into a custom app that runs on that stack.

 

[Britva415]

Has anyone else ever had that 'reason' for a story being rejected?

An already-published one?

I mean, not me, no, but nor have I seen anyone in AH or TS saying it happened to them.

A publishing rejection? Yes, I have seen people saying they tried publishing something which wasn't quite a "story," or wasn't even close to a story, and got this rejection message for that reason.

 

[IWroteThis]

It's the same application, though.

Of course the underlying tech stack is going to receive appropriate upgrades over time, but that doesn't make the custom application any more stable.

If anything, they would make it less stable. Every upgrade of any single tech stack element is likely to introduce bugs into a custom app that runs on that stack.

If you had quoted a different portion of my comment with this reply, I would agree with you. There was even a nice section where I explained that the issue is the custom code base, which you could have quoted instead…

To be clear, my original comment was simply debunking repeated claims that Literotica is still running the same bits it was when they stood it up back in 1998; the most repeated being about needing to upgrade to a modern database.

 

[Britva415]

To be clear, my original comment was simply debunking repeated claims that Literotica is still running the same bits it was when they stood it up back in 1998; the most repeated being about needing to upgrade to a modern database.

I guess it depends what you mean by "bits." Lit IS still running the same application. Upgrades? Some. Bug fixes? Some. A new front end? Okay. I think that's what people are saying. It's certainly what I'm saying. It doesn't seem like it's aligned with what you're saying. Having an upgrade to a modern database under the hood doesn't eliminate bit-rot from a 28 year old application running on it, and it doesn't debunk that it's the same app, patched, re-patched, and un-patched.

It's like the Ship of Theseus - maybe it's a whole new ship and maybe it's not, but the skipper at the helm and the charts he's steering by are the same, and haven't been keeping updated with the shifting shoals and changing currents, and she runs aground in places she didn't used to.

 

[IWroteThis]

I guess it depends what you mean by "bits." Lit IS still running the same application. Upgrades? Some. Bug fixes? Some. A new front end? Okay. I think that's what people are saying. It's certainly what I'm saying. It doesn't seem like it's aligned with what you're saying. Having an upgrade to a modern database under the hood doesn't eliminate bit-rot from a 28 year old application running on it, and it doesn't debunk that it's the same app, patched, re-patched, and un-patched.

It's like the Ship of Theseus - maybe it's a whole new ship and maybe it's not, but the skipper at the helm and the charts he's steering by are the same, and haven't been keeping updated with the shifting shoals and changing currents, and she runs aground in places she didn't used to.

Once again, you're just talking circles around both the original comment and my response.

Sorry, but Lit is not the same application it was back then. Sure, it still has a lot of the same concepts and window dressings, and a lot of the new code was based on the old code, but you can't just change the file extension from .pl to .php and have it magically run in the new environment. Likewise, going from .php to .js doesn't work like that either. The code has to be rewritten in the new language.

In regards to your reference to the Ship of Theseus, you're right about it being the same skipper, but wrong about it being the same charts. In fact, you appear to agree with me, at times, that the problem is the reliability of the updates to those charts.

So, again, yes, the code is the problem. However, the problem isn't that the site is still running the 1998 code, because it's not. It's not even that the new code was based off of the old code rather than redesigning the site from scratch each time. No, again, the problem is that the site has grown beyond the capabilities of the people behind it and that deficit is, in part, manifesting as bugs in the code.