FAWC You, Two!

[PennLady]

Some scores have dropped, others have increased. There are a couple of obvious contenders, but it's still too early to tell.

Some definitely went up, as my last check yesterday still saw some stories at x.xx. Can only go up from there. But most stories yesterday seemed to be at 4.00, 4.50 and 5.00 and most have dropped. I realize the drop or increase may not be as dramatic as it looks, since the page I'm looking at probably only updates once a day, maybe twice.

 

[_Lynn_]

I've been fighting a migraine the past few days so reading is a struggle. Hopefully tomorrow is better.

 

[PennLady]

I've been fighting a migraine the past few days so reading is a struggle. Hopefully tomorrow is better.

Feel better. I know migraines, and they are no fun. (My "home remedy" is migraine medicine and some caffeine, like a soda or something.) Hope yours passes soon.

 

[slyc_willie]

Some definitely went up, as my last check yesterday still saw some stories at x.xx. Can only go up from there. But most stories yesterday seemed to be at 4.00, 4.50 and 5.00 and most have dropped. I realize the drop or increase may not be as dramatic as it looks, since the page I'm looking at probably only updates once a day, maybe twice.

I'm tempted to take a screencap now of FAWCker's submission page and post it, because it tells a very interesting story. But if I did that, it would probably invite some trollish behavior.

 

[PennLady]

I'm tempted to take a screencap now of FAWCker's submission page and post it, because it tells a very interesting story. But if I did that, it would probably invite some trollish behavior.

Since just about any action seems to invite trollish behavior, I say go ahead. We'll manage.

 

[slyc_willie]

Since just about any action seems to invite trollish behavior, I say go ahead. We'll manage.

Hmm . . . maybe. It's still pretty early in the voting. Perhaps halfway through would be better (which, I think, would be this Saturday).

 

[sheablue]

I can't wait to read the stories when I get a moment! I've been sick all week, but I'm finally starting to feel better. Good luck everyone!

 

[Saxon_Hart]

Is it just me or is the Fawc a bit lackluster this go around? I have to admit I wasn't as antsy this time and I haven't even looked at the scores yet. Maybe I'm just in a "blah" mood.

 

[FAWCker]

Is it just me or is the Fawc a bit lackluster this go around? I have to admit I wasn't as antsy this time and I haven't even looked at the scores yet. Maybe I'm just in a "blah" mood.

I think some of the initial enthusiasm and novelty factor have worn off, definitely. We didn't know how this was going to work out the first time around. Now that we've managed to more or less settle in, that "virgin" feeling is gone.

 

[damppanties]

Well, there's also a lull until the voting closes and people can discuss stories. I mean, there's only so many times you can say that the stories this time around are really good.

 

[FAWCker]

It's been brought to my attention that some readers have been "outing" the authors in the comments section of the stories. I'm not going to say if any of them are correct, nor should I remove the comments. If I removed the comment, that is basically an admission that the commenter was correct.

I'm not surprised that this has occurred. It was going to at some point. Just have to keep going.

 

[Tx Tall Tales]

Readers

This is my first FAWC competition, I was too busy to consider the first one.

I never realized how anemic the response is to the "Chain Stories" category. Heck, my friggin' How-To got more reads and votes.

These stories basically become invisible after the first couple of days, once they're off the front couple of pages of the New List.

I was trying to figure out a way to generate anonymous traffic, without giving away anything. I had the following idea, and would like to hear what others think of it.

There are 1/2 a dozen ways readers find stories.

1) New List
2) Top Lists
3) Feedback Portal
4) Author List
5) Category List
6) "Similar Stories"

Due to the lack of readers in this particular category, and since the 'author' has no previous works to drive readers, it seems that the only way we're likely to generate any readership is through the Feedback Portal, and we're getting jack for comments.

If all the authors went through each story and provided only GOOD comments on how each story appropriately used its Basket Elements (or Element if not all were used well) as well as some type of reference to what kind of story it is (category - since the readers have no idea), we'd get a lot of traction on the Feedback Portal.

I imagine this could probably drive the readers and votes up 10 fold, without giving anyone an unfair advantage. This would have the added benefit of reducing the impact of any trolling.

I'm still not certain whether Anonymous comments or signed comments would be better/more fair. I like the idea of signed comments, since the authors would have to stick to the rules, and since you're only allowed one comment 'author' per IP, you couldn't have both signed and anonymous commenters, mucking with stories. The disadvantage is, an astute reader might determine who's in the contest, and adjust their scores. I don't think this is likely, since they're less likely to read the comments until after they've read and voted.

Thoughts? Suggestions? Flames?

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

It's been brought to my attention that some readers have been "outing" the authors in the comments section of the stories. I'm not going to say if any of them are correct, nor should I remove the comments. If I removed the comment, that is basically an admission that the commenter was correct.

I'm not surprised that this has occurred. It was going to at some point. Just have to keep going.

Some of the anonymous comments are so transparent and obvious the poster shoulda used his real name.

 

[sr71plt]

It's been brought to my attention that some readers have been "outing" the authors in the comments section of the stories. I'm not going to say if any of them are correct, nor should I remove the comments. If I removed the comment, that is basically an admission that the commenter was correct.

I'm not surprised that this has occurred. It was going to at some point. Just have to keep going.

Just let them go. The author of one of the pieces telegraphed the authorship every way he could even before they were posted--probably sent out an announcement on how where to find the story and to vote frequently.

Just let this one go. Maybe the next one can keep more to the intent of these exercises.

 

[_Lynn_]

Feel better. I know migraines, and they are no fun. (My "home remedy" is migraine medicine and some caffeine, like a soda or something.) Hope yours passes soon.

Thanks. Today is better. I tried to read but that still irritates the eyes/head.

 

[sr71plt]

This is my first FAWC competition, I was too busy to consider the first one.

I never realized how anemic the response is to the "Chain Stories" category. Heck, my friggin' How-To got more reads and votes.

These stories basically become invisible after the first couple of days, once they're off the front couple of pages of the New List.

Well, you can get around that and get eight times the votes and comments and views of anyone else in the exercise if you maneuver to be first one on the "New" list--by being the last one Laurel processes (the first one on the New list in the first exercise also did better than any of the others), telegraph which one is yours, campaign hard with whatever vote-generating program you have, and get all of your friends to vote and comment for you while everyone else in the exercise remains anonymous. You don't even have to worry about the quality of your story.

A real issue, I think, is those that fall under the "last ten posted" on the category list. The snapshot I'd like to see is the views/vote comparisons of the ones falling below the fold to the ones above it--because this is really the only listing where the stories stay in front of the readers--those looking in that category--for very long. There may not be a casual pattern, though. Those below the fold seemed to do OK in the last exercise, and I think the frontrunner at the moment in this exercise (at least in rating--probably not in views/votes/and comments (but it doesn't take a genius to know why that is happening)--is below that line on the category list.

 

[damppanties]

This is my first FAWC competition, I was too busy to consider the first one.

I never realized how anemic the response is to the "Chain Stories" category. Heck, my friggin' How-To got more reads and votes.

These stories basically become invisible after the first couple of days, once they're off the front couple of pages of the New List.

I was trying to figure out a way to generate anonymous traffic, without giving away anything. I had the following idea, and would like to hear what others think of it.

There are 1/2 a dozen ways readers find stories.

1) New List
2) Top Lists
3) Feedback Portal
4) Author List
5) Category List
6) "Similar Stories"

Due to the lack of readers in this particular category, and since the 'author' has no previous works to drive readers, it seems that the only way we're likely to generate any readership is through the Feedback Portal, and we're getting jack for comments.

If all the authors went through each story and provided only GOOD comments on how each story appropriately used its Basket Elements (or Element if not all were used well) as well as some type of reference to what kind of story it is (category - since the readers have no idea), we'd get a lot of traction on the Feedback Portal.

I imagine this could probably drive the readers and votes up 10 fold, without giving anyone an unfair advantage. This would have the added benefit of reducing the impact of any trolling.

I'm still not certain whether Anonymous comments or signed comments would be better/more fair. I like the idea of signed comments, since the authors would have to stick to the rules, and since you're only allowed one comment 'author' per IP, you couldn't have both signed and anonymous commenters, mucking with stories. The disadvantage is, an astute reader might determine who's in the contest, and adjust their scores. I don't think this is likely, since they're less likely to read the comments until after they've read and voted.

Thoughts? Suggestions? Flames?

I don't think this is advisable in its entirety. Right now, the stories are on a fair plain (well, as fair a plain can be with the title and description coming into play) and they sink or swim as they will. I feel providing a category in the comments, or anywhere else, gives some stories an unfair advantage over others.

Secondly, I really wouldn't want to provide only good comments on all stories. I try not to comment when something goes really wrong in a story or I dislike something, but overall I comment the way the story makes me comment rather than with a motive to attract more readers to it.

That said, I agree that more commenting in a way that people want to comment would be a good way to get things going in the feedback portal. I have been commenting -- anonymously -- for that very reason.

 

[_Lynn_]

This is my first FAWC competition, I was too busy to consider the first one.

I never realized how anemic the response is to the "Chain Stories" category. Heck, my friggin' How-To got more reads and votes.

These stories basically become invisible after the first couple of days, once they're off the front couple of pages of the New List.

I was trying to figure out a way to generate anonymous traffic, without giving away anything. I had the following idea, and would like to hear what others think of it.

There are 1/2 a dozen ways readers find stories.

1) New List
2) Top Lists
3) Feedback Portal
4) Author List
5) Category List
6) "Similar Stories"

Due to the lack of readers in this particular category, and since the 'author' has no previous works to drive readers, it seems that the only way we're likely to generate any readership is through the Feedback Portal, and we're getting jack for comments.

If all the authors went through each story and provided only GOOD comments on how each story appropriately used its Basket Elements (or Element if not all were used well) as well as some type of reference to what kind of story it is (category - since the readers have no idea), we'd get a lot of traction on the Feedback Portal.

I imagine this could probably drive the readers and votes up 10 fold, without giving anyone an unfair advantage. This would have the added benefit of reducing the impact of any trolling.

I'm still not certain whether Anonymous comments or signed comments would be better/more fair. I like the idea of signed comments, since the authors would have to stick to the rules, and since you're only allowed one comment 'author' per IP, you couldn't have both signed and anonymous commenters, mucking with stories. The disadvantage is, an astute reader might determine who's in the contest, and adjust their scores. I don't think this is likely, since they're less likely to read the comments until after they've read and voted.

Thoughts? Suggestions? Flames?

While comments, votes, and feedback are all nice, I did FAWC 2 for the challenge of writing to fit the basket. So thinking up ways to generate more traffic to the stories didn't cross my mind.

 

[PennLady]

While comments, votes, and feedback are all nice, I did FAWC 2 for the challenge of writing to fit the basket. So thinking up ways to generate more traffic to the stories didn't cross my mind.

I will admit I posted a link to the FAWCker page on my blog, but just to the page. I explained the contest but gave no hints. I did offer a free PDF of one of my stories, but, sadly, that does not seem to have been a good carrot. I am humbled; le sigh. I was hoping that might generate some views, but I'm guessing if it did, not many.

But I also think it's not worth a whole lot more effort, since these will be transferred to our own individual pages in a couple of weeks.

I also did it for the challenge -- not just of working in the ingredients, but in doing it in a short period of time. Comments and views will come later, I hope.

ETA: I posted on my blog without really thinking about it, and because I didn't think it would hurt. If you want to check what I wrote: http://evemcfadden.wordpress.com/2013/08/07/challenge-stories-posted/

 

[FAWCker]

The Chain Stories category was chosen (as well as assigned by Laurel) because it was the only venue that allowed for anonymous posting, while maintaining a level playing field. It was well known from the beginning that readership would be low. The point of FAWC is not to increase views, but to provide a writing challenge.

Once the challenge is over, all the stories will be reassigned to their true authors. You may then delete it from your submissions page and re-submit however you wish.

 

[patientlee]

The Chain Stories category was chosen (as well as assigned by Laurel) because it was the only venue that allowed for anonymous posting, while maintaining a level playing field. It was well known from the beginning that readership would be low. The point of FAWC is not to increase views, but to provide a writing challenge.

Once the challenge is over, all the stories will be reassigned to their true authors. You may then delete it from your submissions page and re-submit however you wish.

Personally, I'm happy with how this is going. I have no fans, so it helps me to have people stumbling upon my story, hoping to find their old favorites.

I loved the basket idea. That was the one and only reason I participated.

This has been fun, and I hope the next challenge has a different fun twist.

 

[Tx Tall Tales]

The Chain Stories category was chosen (as well as assigned by Laurel) because it was the only venue that allowed for anonymous posting, while maintaining a level playing field. It was well known from the beginning that readership would be low. The point of FAWC is not to increase views, but to provide a writing challenge.

Once the challenge is over, all the stories will be reassigned to their true authors. You may then delete it from your submissions page and re-submit however you wish.

I understand. I'm not questioning the category or the process. I enjoyed the challenge of incorporating the basket elements into the story.

Although the purpose is to provide a writing challenge, it seems counter-intuitive to NOT want to increase readership. I've avoided commenting or voting on the stories, because of the conflict of interest, although I believe comments would drive more visibility to individual stories and the contest in general.

I'm not worried about the reads, once it's over, I'll get mine. It just seems a shame so many stories have less than 700 reads and less than 20 votes.

The good news it looks like they've been swept, and the scores are more reflective of what they should be.

 

[TE999]

I, for one, am not unduly surprised by the lackluster scores on most of the FAWC stories; the first FAWC contest yielded the same results. Chain Stories routinely score low for some reason even when written by 'popular' authors. I can only assume it's not a widely read cat and/or most readers don't have the patience to follow an extended story line.

I had fun writing my story and that's what counts.

 

[FAWCker]

I understand. I'm not questioning the category or the process. I enjoyed the challenge of incorporating the basket elements into the story.

Although the purpose is to provide a writing challenge, it seems counter-intuitive to NOT want to increase readership. I've avoided commenting or voting on the stories, because of the conflict of interest, although I believe comments would drive more visibility to individual stories and the contest in general.

I'm not worried about the reads, once it's over, I'll get mine. It just seems a shame so many stories have less than 700 reads and less than 20 votes.

The good news it looks like they've been swept, and the scores are more reflective of what they should be.

I think what FAWC has become is something of a peer-review writing exercise backed up by Lit readership. With that in mind, it's more about the challenge of writing a story to meet the requirements of the challenge than it is to build any particular author's fan base. It would seem true that any sort of "contest" (and I never wanted FAWC to actually be a contest, though it seems to have rather naturally drifted toward that) would want to increase readership through exposure. But FAWC is a little different. It was designed by, hosted by, and perpetuated by, a small group of AH Literotica members. That, combined with the placement of the stories in the Chain Stories category, necessarily means all the stories in the challenge will receive small readership.

Given that, I think the challenge meets its purpose. From what we have seen from the first FAWC, voting was much more honest and much less patronizing in nature. I think there was a distinct lack of "Oh! I love this author! 5 stars!" voting and more of a considerate nature of voting, in that each story was judged by its merits, without bias to the author.

FAWC, I think, exists as a counter to the "popular vote" that seems to be pervasive during official Lit contests. I will not, for a moment, denounce Literotica, but I don't think that voting based on fan-based approval can be discounted. With FAWC, at least, perhaps some of that is minimized.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I think what FAWC has become is something of a peer-review writing exercise backed up by Lit readership. With that in mind, it's more about the challenge of writing a story to meet the requirements of the challenge than it is to build any particular author's fan base. It would seem true that any sort of "contest" (and I never wanted FAWC to actually be a contest, though it seems to have rather naturally drifted toward that) would want to increase readership through exposure. But FAWC is a little different. It was designed by, hosted by, and perpetuated by, a small group of AH Literotica members. That, combined with the placement of the stories in the Chain Stories category, necessarily means all the stories in the challenge will receive small readership.

Given that, I think the challenge meets its purpose. From what we have seen from the first FAWC, voting was much more honest and much less patronizing in nature. I think there was a distinct lack of "Oh! I love this author! 5 stars!" voting and more of a considerate nature of voting, in that each story was judged by its merits, without bias to the author.

FAWC, I think, exists as a counter to the "popular vote" that seems to be pervasive during official Lit contests. I will not, for a moment, denounce Literotica, but I don't think that voting based on fan-based approval can be discounted. With FAWC, at least, perhaps some of that is minimized.

The stories are significantly improved this time, even if a few of the scores are puzzling. So to my way of thinking no one should feel ashamed of their effort. Every contest has its East German judges who score their people HIGH, and everyone else low. I mean, Reuben vanished from Earth after he beat Clay Aiken at American Idol. You cant beat real talent. You can fool your friends, but you cant cheat God.