Competition vs support: writers' views on other writers

[THBGato]

I came across this essay recently and found it really depressing. It's from 2015 - maybe that was a different time on Literotica - but it posits that authors would deliberately 1 bomb stories by those authors they perceive as their rivals. They would do this out of jealousy at other writers' success, and the (mistaken) belief that doing so would make their own story seem *better* in comparison, score-wise.

Does that happen? Did it ever? It just seems so stupid and petty to me, and also to totally misunderstand how reading works.

Reading is not sport. There doesn't have to be a winner. Choosing a story is not like choosing a restaurant. If a reader reads one story, that doesn't stop them reading another, perhaps that very same evening, unlike restaurants, where most people tend to stick to one per outing!

I've only been posting here since February, I think, but I've noticed nothing but a supportive vibe from those authors who regularly post here. Or am I being naive? Are there actually simmering rivalries going on that I haven't noticed? (Yes, I've heard about LW. But that seems an exception rather than the rule.)

Instead I've seen lovely moments of writers bigging-up other writers on here, from the thread on favourite stories by other writers, to @intim8 using lists to promote other writers (which I've copied), to various authors using their bios to flag up a new story by @AwkwardApple415 to their followers (again which I've copied - go follow Bi_Cathy people: she's got a new story coming soon!)

Because, ultimately, the easier we make it for readers to find other, high-quality stories in the genres they like, the more those readers will return and read more. And that's going to help everyone out, right?

I guess I'm saying I'm glad it's 2024 and you're such a supportive bunch, and it's not 2015, where other writers are apparently the trolls sniping our stories.

 

[SimonDoom]

I'm reminded of what Kareem Abdul-Jabbar once said about the incessant, silly pseudo-debate over who is the basketball "GOAT" (Greatest Of All Time). He said, "It's not Highlander. There can be more than just one."

I don't see this as competition at all. I see the competition as a fun and not-very-serious frosting on the cake, but the cake, which is writing stories to connect with readers and to get better at it, is what matters. It's not a zero-sum game. We all do better if we do this in a spirit of mutual support and appreciation, and with good sportsmanship.

 

[KeithD]

I came across this essay recently and found it really depressing. It's from 2015 - maybe that was a different time on Literotica - but it posits that authors would deliberately 1 bomb stories by those authors they perceive as their rivals. They would do this out of jealousy at other writers' success, and the (mistaken) belief that doing so would make their own story seem *better* in comparison, score-wise.

Does that happen? Did it ever? It just seems so stupid and petty to me, and also to totally misunderstand how reading works.

Sure it happens. It's most evident in the site-sponsored contests. We haven't always had a sweep function here. It was instituted because of the obvious downvoting being done on contest stories that include monetary reward. Logic acknowledges that the one benefiting the most from down voting in a contest is one or more of the other contestants. (When 1 votes--or 5 votes--are lodged right as contest stories post and before there is time to have read the story, there's not much question what is going on and not much more question who is doing it). It's common sense.

 

[THBGato]

Yeah... was never intending to enter a competition, as I don't really believe writing should be competitive. This just confirms that for me.

 

[SimonDoom]

I'll add a few more thoughts about that article, which I read after my last post:

The article obviously exaggerates. It's written for comic effect. It may contain some truth, but it doesn't support its point with any data. So take it with a grain of salt.

If people believe they personally have experienced downvoting by fellow authors, I don't disbelieve them. I'm sure it's happened. I can say that I have no solid evidence that it's happened to me, so I'm agnostic on the issue, and I don't care much because if it's happened it hasn't affected anything I've tried to accomplish here.

I think most deliberate downvoting probably is not by other authors who do so because of competition. Most downvoting I've seen seems to happen because some readers have agendas that are hostile to certain types of stories, and they regularly downvote those types of stories regardless of who the author is or whether there's a competition.

I've never, ever downvoted another author's story for competitive/tactical reasons. In fact, I've never sought out another author's story to downvote it, period. I would feel slimy if I did that, and that feeling would far outweigh any squalid satisfaction I might theoretically get from seeing my "competitor" author's score go down.

 

[onehitwanda]

I'm very sparing with my comments and my ratings, and I never use them as a weapon.

 

[StillStunned]

I'm very sparing with my comments and my ratings, and I never use them as a weapon.

That's what your rapier wit is for.

Personally, I reserve my votes for stories I enjoy or at least want to encourage. No-one's forcing me to rate a story, so I'd rather only do it when it has a positive effect. Any my integrity is worth more to me than whatever satisfaction I might derive from winning a contest.*

* I think. I've never even come close to winning, so I might decide differently if it ever came to that.

 

[Bamagan]

I don't know if it happens, or how often it happens if it does, but it's quite clear from looking at any of the contest support threads that most participants are very confident that it occurs, and they often espouse the belief that it occurs rampantly, and that such voters monitor the threads. I can't help thinking there's a bit of paranoia there, but I can't say for sure that someone isn't out to get them.

 

[Erozetta]

Anything on my favorites list I've rated and probably commented on. If it doesn't make my fave list, I probably didn't vote on it.

 

[TheLobster]

I won't speculate whether anything like the depicted scenario happens, though I wouldn't be too surprised if it did, with some regularity.

However, I do think that this view:

Because, ultimately, the easier we make it for readers to find other, high-quality stories in the genres they like, the more those readers will return and read more. And that's going to help everyone out, right?

is rather naive. There is no compelling reason to believe that the average reader here, one with vanilla/run-of-the-mill tastes and kinks, doesn't have a cornucopia of stories that he can dig into already. When there are hundreds of thousands of stories here, putting even more on the average reader's plate is not going to do much. And prioritizing someone else's stories over your own seems straight-up detrimental given these conditions.

Sure, it's not exactly a zero-sum game but I don't think it's far from it either.

 

[THBGato]

There is no compelling reason to believe that the average reader here, one with vanilla/run-of-the-mill tastes and kinks, doesn't have a cornucopia of stories that he can dig into already. When there are hundreds of thousands of stories here, putting even more on the average reader's plate is not going to do much. And prioritizing someone else's stories over your own seems straight-up detrimental given these conditions.

True. But I know that lots of readers will take other writer's recommendations. For instance, I wrote a review recently of a brilliant story by @WhiteTailDarkTip . I noticed today that they have picked up 12 followers since I started following them. 11 of those also follow me.

Maybe that's coincidental and has nothing to do with my review. But I doubt it.

Thing is - none of those readers have stopped following me. I haven't lost anything by pointing them in the direction of another great writer.

That's how I started on Lit. I read all the Lesbian Sex stories by @onehitwanda Then I checked out her favourites. Read all their Lesbian Sex stories. Then checked their favourites, etc, etc. Their recommendations led me to other writers, but it didn't stop me reading theirs (or following them, or commenting on their stories, or voting for them).

What's my point?

Okay, think of traditional publishing - physical books.

I walk into a bookshop and there's thousands of books. Where to start? Oh, there's an author I recognise and I know I've enjoyed. I'll look around there then. Oh, look, here's another book that has been endorsed by that author. Well, I like her writing, so if she liked this, it's probably good... I'll try the first page...

Authors following other authors on here is essentially the same thing as providing a quote for the cover of another writer's book.

Or you pick one up you've heard about, perhaps through reviews or perhaps through word of mouth, a recommendation from a friend. Well, that's basically the same as name-dropping a writer/story in the forum, one your bio, or even in a story.

The BIG difference is that in a traditional bookstore, the shopper probably has a budget: maybe they can only afford to buy two or three books. On Literotica, money isn't an issue. I can read as many stories as I want at no cost. As long as I keep finding good ones, I'll keep coming back. So, it's in all our interests to make it easier for reader to find the quality stories.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Does that happen? Did it ever? It just seems so stupid and petty to me, and also to totally misunderstand how reading works.

Yes it did. When I joined Lit in 2014, it was right at the end of The Clique Wars (or the Writers' Cabins, something like that), where every contest would bring out feral behaviour between two large writer cliques. Every contest would see the same people come out, attacking others in threads, encouraging their fans to bomb other stories down, vote their stories up. It was unbelievable behaviour.

Sweeps were brought in around that time, I think, as well as the AHMod. By 2015, most of the toxics had moved on, they're no longer active in the AH. They might still be active elsewhere behind the scenes, don't know, don't care.

 

[lovecraft68]

Yes it did. When I joined Lit in 2014, it was right at the end of The Clique Wars, where every contest would bring out feral behaviour between two large writer cliques. Every contest would see the same people come out, attacking others in threads, encouraging their fans to bomb other stories down, vote their stories up. It was unbelievable behaviour.

Sweeps were brought in around that time, I think, as well as the AHMod. By 2015, most of the toxics had moved on, they're no longer active in the AH. They might still be active elsewhere behind the scenes, don't know, don't care.

Revisionist history.

Only one clique was gaming contests, the others were calling it out and proving it.

Sweeps existed well before that, back when everything was blamed on two posters/authors Scouries and Bostonfictionwriter.

You're right in the Mod was created due to that.

Also right that as soon as there was a mod the 'clique' all faded away.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I came across this essay recently and found it really depressing. It's from 2015 - maybe that was a different time on Literotica - but it posits that authors would deliberately 1 bomb stories by those authors they perceive as their rivals. They would do this out of jealousy at other writers' success, and the (mistaken) belief that doing so would make their own story seem *better* in comparison, score-wise.

Does that happen? Did it ever? It just seems so stupid and petty to me, and also to totally misunderstand how reading works.

No doubt it happens. People being people, there'll always be some who view life as a zero-sum game. But one needs to take that kind of thing in proportion.

When I get a new follower and I look at who else they're following, there are some names that show up a lot. Mostly those are people who write similar stories to mine, with similar readership, the ones that should be my "rivals" if everything worked that way. But many of those are people who've encouraged me over the years and often assisted me, with editing/beta-reading/shout-outs/etc., and I think I've done the same for many of them.

There certainly are personality conflicts on this board. But I think those are driven far less by competition for readers than by other factors.

 

[Cagivagurl]

I came across this essay recently and found it really depressing. It's from 2015 - maybe that was a different time on Literotica - but it posits that authors would deliberately 1 bomb stories by those authors they perceive as their rivals. They would do this out of jealousy at other writers' success, and the (mistaken) belief that doing so would make their own story seem *better* in comparison, score-wise.

Does that happen? Did it ever? It just seems so stupid and petty to me, and also to totally misunderstand how reading works.

Reading is not sport. There doesn't have to be a winner. Choosing a story is not like choosing a restaurant. If a reader reads one story, that doesn't stop them reading another, perhaps that very same evening, unlike restaurants, where most people tend to stick to one per outing!

I've only been posting here since February, I think, but I've noticed nothing but a supportive vibe from those authors who regularly post here. Or am I being naive? Are there actually simmering rivalries going on that I haven't noticed? (Yes, I've heard about LW. But that seems an exception rather than the rule.)

Instead I've seen lovely moments of writers bigging-up other writers on here, from the thread on favourite stories by other writers, to @intim8 using lists to promote other writers (which I've copied), to various authors using their bios to flag up a new story by @AwkwardApple415 to their followers (again which I've copied - go follow Bi_Cathy people: she's got a new story coming soon!)

Because, ultimately, the easier we make it for readers to find other, high-quality stories in the genres they like, the more those readers will return and read more. And that's going to help everyone out, right?

I guess I'm saying I'm glad it's 2024 and you're such a supportive bunch, and it's not 2015, where other writers are apparently the trolls sniping our stories.

This is nothing more than my opinion and my take on what goes on here, in Literotica.
This is a microcosm of society. The separating factor being... It is a society of creators... People who step out from the crowd to create something.
Creators appear in many forms, Artists, sculptors, Musicians and of course writers.

To step out of the crowd, and bare your soul to the public takes one thing. EGO..,.

We all like to think we are unaffected by it, but I disagree. We all have a larger than average ego, otherwise we couldn't post our stories thinking they are at least readable...
We are all human beings, and carry the traits of all humans, including one of our worst...

Jealousy... Couple ego and jealousy and well you have bad behaviour.
I had this vision of writers being this wonderfully collaborative loving group of people. The truth is far different.

Within our little world, I have witnessed some awful behaviour, and I don't have to look outside the AH to see it.
Does that flow into the world of commenting and voting....Probably...

Personally, I only vote or comment on stories that have affected me in one way or the other. I don't use my votes for malicious purpose. If I vote it is because you have stunned me with beautiful writing, or made me think... "God no."

What am I saying? We are no different to the rest of humanity. Evil does reside in here.

Cagivagurl

 

[WhiteTailDarkTip]

I'm very sparing with my comments and my ratings, and I never use them as a weapon.

Likewise. THBGato has been kind enough to not only upvote my work but write a hugely favourable review of one of my series. Until then I had been wondering whether my output was cutting the mustard, what with all the other great writers on the site.
It also opened my eyes to the social aspect of Literotica. (I’m not a very social animal and I found the Forums rather intimidating.) Following, being followed, commenting and sharing are all new to me as I don’t participate in any other social media.
The idea that someone might deliberately one bomb a story is abhorrent but wearily believable. It’s just my naïveté to think otherwise.
I offer occasional praise when someone has written something amazing (eg MsAppropriately’s “The Now Former Lady Deveroux Ch. 09”) but I would never one star without explanation.

 

[KeithD]

Yes it did. When I joined Lit in 2014, it was right at the end of The Clique Wars, where every contest would bring out feral behaviour between two large writer cliques. Every contest would see the same people come out, attacking others in threads, encouraging their fans to bomb other stories down, vote their stories up. It was unbelievable behaviour.

Sweeps were brought in around that time, I think, as well as the AHMod. By 2015, most of the toxics had moved on, they're no longer active in the AH. They might still be active elsewhere behind the scenes, don't know, don't care.

I was here in 2014. Cliques existed then (one main one that was obvious) and there was a lot of "scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" talk on the contest threads, but I don't remember there being any open encouragement to vote particular stories/writers down. I would quite believe in that time frame that this was done in backchannels. It was the period in which it was quite clear that organized contest manipulation was going on.

I agree that sweeps came in during the Scouries/Freddie (Bostonfictionwriter. Still submitting stories but now claiming to be female, although in his first iteration he made the mistake of showing a book cover that led to the real guy) era, which was rougher than 2014. Premier writers here were being openly harassed here in that era ("the dead baby attack," at the height), threatening to leave if the Web site didn't rein in the harassers--and then leaving because not only weren't the harassers reined in, but the main harasser was claiming to be on staff here and Laurel/Manu didn't even bother to post to deny that.

The current era is quite civil here compared to some earlier times.

 

[intim8]

Instead I've seen lovely moments of writers bigging-up other writers on here, from the thread on favourite stories by other writers, to @intim8 using lists to promote other writers (which I've copied), to various authors using their bios to flag up a new story by @AwkwardApple415 to their followers (again which I've copied - go follow Bi_Cathy people: she's got a new story coming soon!)

I do feel a little competitive here, but it's a friendly kind of competitiveness. I'm a big believer that things like this are not a zero-sum game, that in a competition, both can come out ahead.

As mentioned in another thread, 50 Shades opened up the market for that kind of material. I think it probably also opened up the market more generally, expanded the total market for books. Harry Potter did the same, and a lot of those kids who devoured those are probably still reading, still buying books. We all benefit from it, at least potentially if we ever try to start selling.

Here, the competition is for views, votes, followers, etc. Your success does not come at the expense of mine. At least not fully. I couldn't argue for any specific mechanics of it, but I do think that one way or another, y'all's success makes mine a little more attainable. And the mutual support on the forum definitely helps.

 

[KeithD]

Users don't have a finite number of views, votes, or comments to give, so I think the competition here, such as it is, is for attention (time/effort dedication) and respect/regard. I don't feel any views/votes/comments competition with anyone else posting to the board, perhaps because so few are writing in the genre of the account I use to post to the board. I could see this affecting regular posters who share primary genre writing with other regular posters, maybe, but I think the competition they will feel, although maybe exhibited in relative views/votes/comments/ratings received, is one of respect/regard for their posting footprint.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

To step out of the crowd, and bare your soul to the public takes one thing. EGO..,.

Not necessarily. Honest confidence/courage can get the job done. Also conviction.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I don't really see it as competitive because competition requires some sort of metric for winning and losing. If you get more views and a higher score you aren't "winning" or "beating me", you are just getting more views and a higher score.
The only reason I really look at view counts for other author's stories is because I'm curious about what's possible. What is the upper limit for viewers for a given story in a given category?
Heck Tolkien and C.S. Lewis were contemporaries and good friends, Tolkien outsold Lewis, does that mean he "won"? I think both men would have laughed at that idea.
Some people do get too wrapped up in this stuff, but it just isn't worth the effort. You want to spend your time 1 bombing all my stories? Okay, I guess. You'd probably be better off honing your own craft, but you do you...

 

[lovecraft68]

I don't really see it as competitive because competition requires some sort of metric for winning and losing. If you get more views and a higher score you aren't "winning" or "beating me", you are just getting more views and a higher score.
The only reason I really look at view counts for other author's stories is because I'm curious about what's possible. What is the upper limit for viewers for a given story in a given category?
Heck Tolkien and C.S. Lewis were contemporaries and good friends, Tolkien outsold Lewis, does that mean he "won"? I think both men would have laughed at that idea.
Some people do get too wrapped up in this stuff, but it just isn't worth the effort. You want to spend your time 1 bombing all my stories? Okay, I guess. You'd probably be better off honing your own craft, but you do you...

There's no real competition on a free site. If the site charged a fee and for that fee you were only allowed to read X stories a month? Now there would be competition, but people can read unlimited stories, seem to be able to fav as many authors and stories as they want etc...

 

[lovecraft68]

I was here in 2014. Cliques existed then (one main one that was obvious) and there was a lot of "scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" talk on the contest threads, but I don't remember there being any open encouragement to vote particular stories/writers down. I would quite believe in that time frame that this was done in backchannels. It was the period in which it was quite clear that organized contest manipulation was going on.

I agree that sweeps came in during the Scouries/Freddie (Bostonfictionwriter. Still submitting stories but now claiming to be female, although in his first iteration he made the mistake of showing a book cover that led to the real guy) era, which was rougher than 2014. Premier writers here were being openly harassed here in that era ("the dead baby attack," at the height), threatening to leave if the Web site didn't rein in the harassers--and then leaving because not only weren't the harassers reined in, but the main harasser was claiming to be on staff here and Laurel/Manu didn't even bother to post to deny that.

The current era is quite civil here compared to some earlier times.

I think when Manu put Scouries on his fav list it told everyone all they needed to know about who was going to win out in the feuds with the top authors vs him. Remember, the victim of the dead baby thread was talking lit authors into publishing for money, and even though she never told them they had to stop posting here, some did, and I don't think the site appreciated it.

 

[KeithD]

I think when Manu put Scouries on his fav list it told everyone all they needed to know about who was going to win out in the feuds with the top authors vs him. Remember, the victim of the dead baby thread was talking lit authors into publishing for money, and even though she never told them they had to stop posting here, some did, and I don't think the site appreciated it.

The site certainly did nothing to keep the victim, at the head of the top list at the time, so a draw of readers, at the time--or two other top performers before her who were being harassed.

 

[KeithD]

There's no real competition on a free site. If the site charged a fee and for that fee you were only allowed to read X stories a month? Now there would be competition, but people can read unlimited stories, seem to be able to fav as many authors and stories as they want etc...

The site-sponsored contests involve money. That invites scheming competition.