Final Fix For Voting: A Petition

[minsue]

We didn't just discuss the average reader, we discussed trolls and people who were upset with someone because of something they said in forums.

I see now, this idea is itself FUBARed because people seem to desire to be able to punish other authors for whatever reason they have, rather than either ingore them or help them. I, myself, don't see my place as being to punish them.

I wasn't aware that the voting system was put in place to extract punitive repraisal for poor writing. I believe that someone's story languishing with few votes and tiny point totals will pretty much tell them all they need to know. You won't need to be able to slap them with a -10 to show them what's what.

And, believe me, being ignored is more painful punishment than being negatively attacked, when you're trying to say something.

Sorry, I completely misunderstood your point. For myself, I allow voting because I want to know what anybody and everybody thinks. I recognize that is not the same purpose that others may have. I also never saw voting as punishment, but again I recognize that it's simply my point of view.

 

[tolyk]

And that situation happens how often? Right now a guy could have 2000 votes and a 4.99 and a guy with 10 votes and a 5.00 is higher rated. Yes, it will ocasionally yeild numbers that are a little at odds but 10 compared to 50 is a heck of a lot disparity than 10 to 2000. But right now, in every category, there are stories more highly placed that have miniscule vote totals and very minor average advantages over other stories. I doubt there are very many that would be rated 1's that will bypass or stay ahead of a 5 rated story for long.

If a story was to be given only 1 votes, I really doubt it would for long before people stopped reading it altogether. More likely most people wouldn't finish it at all.

And actually the one with 10 votes on the average system will almost certainly have a higher average than the one with 100 votes. I don't propose this as a perfect fix, just a major improvement.

And as I said, it has merit, but it needs a bit of work still.

 

[mack_the_knife]

And as I said, it has merit, but it needs a bit of work still.

Hehe, I've just seen quite a few of 'this is broke' posts, and a whole bunch of 'don't fix it' posts.

People coming into forums and bemoaning how they got slammed by a troll or disgruntled book-thumper of some kind, and others commiserating with them, but nothing being offered as a fix.

If this system is adopted, there will be no more 'vengeance' hits on people's stories. If Joe Schmeckie disliked the fact that your lead character's wife didn't get the right permission prior to fucking around, then they will have to make do with giving you a low vote, or they will have to ignore you, they cannot just take a potshot at you for some odd personal vendetta against cheating wives on a erotica story site.

It really sucks to have a story rocking along, pumping up a big average, then some prick with a itchy clickie finger sinks you in one fell 1. 20 liked it, one didn't like that the heroine didn't have 36DD's. Another guy likes to hand out ones to anyone who misuses even a single semi-colon. Now your average is 4.63? One more guy with a wild hair up his butt, and your tanked right off eligebility for hot, for less than 15% of the voters? Since when is an 85%+ average?
And that's assuming all the guys who liked it gave you whopping 5's for their like. Most businesses would LOVE to appeal to 85+ percent of their target audience. But here, you can do that, and still be average, because of unobombing.

 

[tolyk]

Mack, Hot's aren't supposed to be the average. on a 1 to 5 scale, 3 is average. Anything above 3 you're doing good.

I personally don't care about the H's, hell most of mine don't even get enough votes to get there (poetry, don't submit stories at the moment) and I don't obsess about the little H.. I prefer PCs, be they offensive, informing, or just outright nice. Much more to be learned from a PC than from a vote, no matter what the system.

 

[mack_the_knife]

Mack, Hot's aren't supposed to be the average. on a 1 to 5 scale, 3 is average. Anything above 3 you're doing good.

I personally don't care about the H's, hell most of mine don't even get enough votes to get there (poetry, don't submit stories at the moment) and I don't obsess about the little H.. I prefer PCs, be they offensive, informing, or just outright nice. Much more to be learned from a PC than from a vote, no matter what the system.

That's exactly what I'm saying. 85% of the voters loved your story, yet it will not now be hot because 3 guys had something against it. It is not an average story, it is a story that was torpedoed down to 85% by some guys. 20 liked it, three didn't.

Again we get back to the punishment issue. I'm not submitting my stories to see if people will punish me for their content or execution. If I want to be punished, I'll hand my wife the whip.

I agree that PC's are better than votes, but they're also a whole hell of a lot rarer. And most are pretty vague "i liked it" or "i didn't like it" type things, making the ones that actually say something that much more precious.

Under the current system 3's stink, they trash your average, if you're hoping for something good to be seen in your story, like toplisting or 'H's or contest winning. They are not seen as average by anyone, they are half as bad as a 1. The current system, as it stands, it's pretty much 5 or punishment. If you give anyone you like anything less, you just bashed their average.

 

[Weird Harold]

I've not been around the 'industry' since this is only the second erotica site I've worked with. But if the whole industry is using crap for a system, why do it? I think the averaging system is misleading as all get out, ....

I did NOT say the "erotic story industry" I said any site that has a rating or voting system.

That includes sites like Amazon, E-bay, ESPN, and all of the news outlets, as well as sites like "ratemytits" or "ratemyass."

The few sites that don't use "averages" use "percentages" which are computed in much the same way.

The one change I'd like to see at Lit is the individual votes available to the authors. It's possible to compute what each vote is if youfollow your scores closely enough -- and I have dealt with other sites that show the last ten votes to everyone -- so I know that votes of 2,3, are almost non-existant and votes of 4 are rare; everything is either a Five or a One and the same is true for other sites -- whether they use a five point scale like Lits or a ten point scale votes or ratings are either I love it or I hate it and very few people bother to vote on mediocrity.

Lit's -- or any other site's -- rating system could obviously be improved and it's vaguely possible that it might even be made bullet-proof, but since there is no way to force people to rate a story you'll still have the extremes of "Loved it" and "hated it" dominating the scoring system and anything less than a perfect score will arouse the ire of authors.

An averaged value is a standard statistical tool for comparing disparate quantities:

The price per unit value on a grocery store shelf sticker is an "average" because the same product in different size packages often has a different PPU number because of a "base value" for packaging or other things besides the actual product.

Crime rates and similar information are always presented as "per unit of population" -- which is an "average" -- so that cities of different size can be compared.

Your proposed system would give less weight -- and therefore less exposure -- to new stories and allow the oldest stories to dominate the top stories lists. I have three stories posted here that have been posted for several years. Last I checked, one was still prominant on the top stories list and the other two have dropped out of sight if not off the lists completely. Under your system, the two bad stories -- which are where they belong -- would be just as prominent as the good story.

Stories here get votes when they're exposed to the readers. When they're on the New Stories list, they get about 80% of the votes and views they will ever get unless the author advertises their stories with a link in their signature.

After a story slips off the New List, it only keeps getting more votes and views if it is in the top stories list, the author advertises it, or it is good enough to word-of-mouth recommendations.

Your system would change the dynamics of how a story gains votes when it is no longer on the New list and, eventually, an excreble story could gain the top spot just because so many people hated it enough to vote ones.

Under the averaging system, a story that gains a few good scores stay on the top list long enough to collect a lot of good scores and consolidate it's position. The top story list eventually accurately reflect the most popular stories in a category -- no matter how long they've been on the site -- with a smattering of "flash in the pan" stories that hit the top story lists for a few hours or a few days.

I can't see how your system would provide that long-term exposure for the stories that people like or provide a way for the readers to story to move an unpopular story off the top lists once it gained the longevity and vote numbers to overcome a preponderance of low votes.

In short, while I can see how your system might help suport an author's ego, I can't see how it will help the readers choose a story they might like from the thousands available here.

A voting system implies that a vote can have an effect -- whether a high vote or a low vote. Under your system, a non-vote is the only effective way to "hurt" a story and there is no way to distinguish between disgust or apathy in that choice -- in fact expressing utter disgust by voting low is beneficial while apathy is hurtful under your system. A reader who votes one because, "I can't believe this is one of the best on the site," under your sytem just pushes the story a notch higher on the top stories list instead of the intended result of moving it down the list. The only way that reader can affect the bad story's place in the ratings is to vote for every story below it on the list.

The voting system at Lit -- and at most other story sites on the internet, erotic or otherwise -- is a tool for the readers more than it is a judgement of the author's ability. It's a popularity contest rather than a critical assessment and it's only real value to an author is to boost readership.

 

[Weird Harold]

Under the current system 3's stink, they trash your average, if you're hoping for something good to be seen in your story, like toplisting or 'H's or contest winning. They are not seen as average by anyone, they are half as bad as a 1. The current system, as it stands, it's pretty much 5 or punishment. If you give anyone you like anything less, you just bashed their average.

Under your system, threes stink just as much -- and are just as likelyto be seen, which is not very.

Under your sytem, only OLD matters to place where readers are likely to find your story after it leaves the new story list and even then a story that gets less than fives is going to be far below it's contemporaries that get all fives.

The only thing your system does that I can see is punish newer stories by keeping them at the bottom of every list except the new stories list.

 

[rgraham666]

As long as the mods are good about cleaning up fraudulent or malicious votes, I see no reason to change the system.

Personally, I prefer the comments I receive. A stranger or friend writing to say they liked or disliked a story tells and gives me more, than a vote.

 

[wishfulthinking]

Good for Mack to put his opinion forward. Just because something has been in place for a while or it it the way things are always done, doesn't mean it can't be looked at, evaulated, changed or left the same.

That being said, I'm a bit confused. Wouldn't the system you are proposing be a "yes I liked this story" vote [and nothing else] rather than a 1 to 5 or 1 to 10 or bar table showing the % of 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1 votes [again, see previous posts on this ]. So one vote -> one positive vote - and no scaling. If that makes sense. Now you all know the meaning of confusion

This way, there is no trolling, unless it is reverse trolling where all your friends vote.

Having made some logical and unlogical jumps to arrive at this conclusion, I don't know how this would be received by authors because they do place a lot of emphasis on 4.50 and above.

I think what is clear from this [and the dozens of similar threads about voting] is that perhaps Lit should be less opaque about its methods to cull trolls. Eg. Votes will be removed in the following instances:
1. More than 1 vote registered from the same IP address. The lowest vote will be removed.
2. ..
3. ...
4. ...

The other thing I would like to mention is that older stories get trolled just as much as the new stories, possibly even more so if they are sitting on the top of the top lists. They might not seem to fluctuate as much as the newer ones until they find their feet, BUT the older ones have already gone through the same trolling to arrive at the spot they achieved. Which story should hold that number 1 spot is subjective

 

[elsol]

Deleted...

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[wishfulthinking]

1 more thing:

There is a real psychology behind different methods of voting. In order to effectively petition lit in my mind, several methods need to be put to the masses, including the current system, and allow readers and authors alike to decide between what they like.

Also, if you want to go ahead with this, perhaps even get support from readers and authors to trial a pilot system for eg 3 months running along side the usual system perhaps in a 1 catefory. However, the objectives and goals would need to be clear.

But all the different variables would need to be considered (positives and negatives) before arriving at a system the majority are happy with eg:

Live voting
Not revealing votes, but simply listing them in order of highest vote
Only allowing members to vote
Bar graphs
1-5
1-10


This article confused me:
http://www.codeproject.com/useritems/CodeProject_s_Voting.asp

 

[elsol]

The Total Point System On A Present 75 Number Top List

Rank	Rating	Votes	Date	        Name	TP
44	4.88	213	6/30/2004	Name44	1039.44
45	4.88	202	4/3/2004	Name45	985.76
61	4.87	167	5/31/2004	Name61	813.29
62	4.87	167	6/1/2004	Name62	813.29
63	4.87	156	6/2/2004	Name63	759.72
64	4.87	148	6/27/2004	Name64	720.76
46	4.88	146	8/18/2004	Name46	712.48
65	4.87	146	5/7/2005	Name65	711.02
22	4.9	141	3/15/2005	Name22	690.9
32	4.89	141	3/16/2005	Name32	689.49
47	4.88	139	6/10/2004	Name47	678.32
3	4.94	130	3/30/2005	Name3	642.2
48	4.88	126	5/28/2005	Name48	614.88
33	4.89	123	8/8/2004	Name33	601.47
66	4.87	123	7/6/2004	Name66	599.01
5	4.93	114	4/28/2005	Name5	562.02
67	4.87	108	10/12/2004	Name67	525.96
68	4.87	106	11/15/2004	Name68	516.22
23	4.9	105	8/19/2004	Name23	514.5
69	4.87	104	8/25/2004	Name69	506.48
9	4.92	99	6/10/2004	Name9	487.08
1	4.97	98	5/13/2005	Name1	487.06
49	4.88	99	7/27/2003	Name49	483.12
6	4.93	92	4/18/2005	Name6	453.56
70	4.87	89	9/21/2004	Name70	433.43
50	4.88	83	1/4/2005	Name50	405.04
71	4.87	83	11/7/2004	Name71	404.21
13	4.91	79	5/6/2005	Name13	387.89
72	4.87	76	2/23/2005	Name72	370.12
34	4.89	70	11/4/2004	Name34	342.3
7	4.93	68	1/20/2005	Name7	335.24
51	4.88	67	1/7/2005	Name51	326.96
35	4.89	64	7/5/2004	Name35	312.96
73	4.87	63	12/29/2004	Name73	306.81
52	4.88	60	3/9/2005	Name52	292.8
14	4.91	57	1/14/2005	Name14	279.87
36	4.89	53	7/1/2004	Name36	259.17
74	4.87	52	11/8/2003	Name74	253.24
24	4.9	49	3/8/2005	Name24	240.1
53	4.88	48	3/9/2005	Name53	234.24
15	4.91	47	7/3/2004	Name15	230.77
75	4.87	46	3/23/2005	Name75	224.02
54	4.88	40	3/9/2005	Name54	195.2
55	4.88	40	10/9/2003	Name55	195.2
37	4.89	35	8/10/2004	Name37	171.15
16	4.91	33	3/28/2005	Name16	162.03
17	4.91	33	4/22/2005	Name17	162.03
56	4.88	33	4/12/2005	Name56	161.04
57	4.88	32	1/3/2005	Name57	156.16
25	4.9	31	4/26/2005	Name25	151.9
8	4.93	28	8/18/2004	Name8	138.04
38	4.89	28	3/27/2005	Name38	136.92
39	4.89	28	5/27/2005	Name39	136.92
40	4.89	28	12/8/2004	Name40	136.92
2	4.96	27	4/3/2005	Name2	133.92
41	4.89	27	4/2/2005	Name41	132.03
42	4.89	27	4/12/2002	Name42	132.03
58	4.88	26	11/18/2004	Name58	126.88
59	4.88	25	11/15/2003	Name59	122
10	4.92	24	5/5/2005	Name10	118.08
18	4.91	22	3/27/2004	Name18	108.02
19	4.91	22	4/10/2005	Name19	108.02
26	4.9	21	6/14/2005	Name26	102.9
27	4.9	20	5/21/2004	Name27	98
43	4.89	18	12/14/2004	Name43	88.02
60	4.88	17	6/19/2005	Name60	82.96
4	4.94	16	7/22/2004	Name4	79.04
11	4.92	13	11/1/2004	Name11	63.96
12	4.92	12	4/4/2005	Name12	59.04
20	4.91	11	9/12/2001	Name20	54.01
21	4.91	11	10/25/2000	Name21	54.01
28	4.9	10	5/31/2005	Name28	49
29	4.9	10	12/6/2004	Name29	49
30	4.9	10	6/16/2005	Name30	49
31	4.9	10	5/6/2005	Name31	49

The Lollipop goes to whoever can tell me if I sorted this table by Total Points or Total Votes.

-- Hint (99 98 99)

Now, can anyone with a Usability background tell us why the table positions become self-sustaining for a site this large?

I'll try...

Once a story comes off the New page how does it garner attention?

Either it wins the best 'story' for that month/category or the writer is popular enough to have a following that reads everything they put up.

-- Counterargument is 'Last 30 Days List'

The problem: It's already been admitted that some categories get more votes...

Therefore in a SINGLE Last 30 Days List system -- Anal stories are favored because an anal story will get about 5 times the votes of other categories.

An anal story can get 100 4's --- and have 400 points
Another category can get 50 5 -- and have 250 points

Which is CLEARLY the better story though... the one that because someone got assfucked got more votes? Or the one that got 50 perfect votes?

I like assfucking... but let's get real.

-- Counterargument 2 -- A 30 day's List For Each Category...

Which equals "Let's throw MORE information at a reader" when we ALREADY don't trust them to correllate

Story 1 --- 100 Votes 4.92 5/15/2005
Story 2 --- 11 Votes 4.91 3/15/2004

I don't know what other writers experience but when I've managed to get on and hold on to a Top List spot... it's gotten me more reads, more votes, more emails, more PCs.

Get it?

The LIST influences who gets 'more' votes.

Withing a certain 'quality range' whoever has the most votes is the one at the top... I've already at least quasi-proved that.

Counter-argument -- Well, people will be able to vote fairer.

True... but that holds for EVERY story; therefore it does not break what has been proven; TP Rank = Most Votes within a specific quality range.


You know what, there's no point in continuing in my eyes. There's other arguments that can be brought forward to say that the Total Point system is actually a popularity contest but either you see what I consider to be a flaw AS a flaw or you don't.

(Here's a clue about the popularity thing... has anyone read an AH'er that says 'If you want to garner attention write for contests... they get a lot of votes and lots of readers because the LIST is kept up for longer.' There's also freaking postings in the AH -- 'Here's a list of stories that need votes to qualify for the contest!' and what does MORE votes mean in the TP system?)

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[Guest]

Nobody likes the show-off!

 

[elsol]

Anal Top 75 Sorted By TP

Rank	Rating	Votes	Date	TP
60	4.65	1716	5/17/2002	7979.4
1	4.8	1657	7/3/2003	7953.6
72	4.64	1534	9/13/2002	7117.76
20	4.72	1133	12/3/2003	5347.76
12	4.73	846	8/20/2004	4001.58
2	4.77	826	2/3/2004	3940.02
21	4.72	626	12/7/2002	2954.72
13	4.73	579	7/4/2004	2738.67
50	4.66	519	3/17/2003	2418.54
73	4.64	492	7/26/2002	2282.88
4	4.75	416	12/25/2004	1976
5	4.75	393	4/19/2004	1866.75
44	4.68	360	10/21/2002	1684.8
39	4.69	347	4/5/2004	1627.43
51	4.66	342	5/14/2003	1593.72
6	4.75	332	4/5/2005	1577
74	4.64	330	9/7/2003	1531.2
28	4.71	309	3/24/2004	1455.39
40	4.69	296	8/1/2003	1388.24
41	4.69	295	2/2/2004	1383.55
14	4.73	291	4/16/2005	1376.43
45	4.68	291	10/20/2004	1361.88
29	4.71	284	2/22/2005	1337.64
47	4.67	269	10/26/2003	1256.23
75	4.64	268	10/12/2003	1243.52
52	4.66	262	7/14/2004	1220.92
8	4.74	251	12/8/2004	1189.74
9	4.74	244	1/8/2005	1156.56
22	4.72	225	7/9/2004	1062
7	4.75	221	12/29/2003	1049.75
61	4.65	219	2/11/2005	1018.35
23	4.72	214	3/26/2005	1010.08
62	4.65	212	7/27/2003	985.8
63	4.65	207	1/13/2005	962.55
24	4.72	201	2/18/2004	948.72
15	4.73	188	1/13/2005	889.24
16	4.73	185	8/11/2004	875.05
3	4.76	156	6/7/2005	742.56
53	4.66	157	4/28/2005	731.62
54	4.66	156	10/3/2004	726.96
64	4.65	156	6/5/2003	725.4
25	4.72	152	5/25/2005	717.44
34	4.7	141	1/17/2005	662.7
30	4.71	140	8/29/2004	659.4
35	4.7	139	5/13/2005	653.3
55	4.66	137	3/6/2005	638.42
48	4.67	135	4/7/2004	630.45
17	4.73	132	11/3/2004	624.36
18	4.73	126	5/19/2005	595.98
56	4.66	125	6/5/2004	582.5
65	4.65	124	2/26/2004	576.6
66	4.65	123	8/15/2003	571.95
31	4.71	121	5/1/2005	569.91
36	4.7	117	2/20/2005	549.9
57	4.66	118	8/25/2004	549.88
10	4.74	107	12/16/2004	507.18
37	4.7	99	1/13/2004	465.3
26	4.72	88	3/31/2005	415.36
58	4.66	87	3/10/2005	405.42
46	4.68	78	9/5/2003	365.04
32	4.71	76	4/5/2005	357.96
59	4.66	68	2/24/2005	316.88
27	4.72	65	12/3/2004	306.8
42	4.69	61	2/23/2005	286.09
49	4.67	61	6/9/2005	284.87
33	4.71	58	1/22/2005	273.18
67	4.65	51	4/4/2004	237.15
68	4.65	46	1/7/2004	213.9
19	4.73	45	6/21/2004	212.85
69	4.65	40	6/17/2004	186
70	4.65	37	9/22/2004	172.05
11	4.74	35	9/11/2004	165.9
71	4.65	23	4/5/2005	106.95
38	4.7	20	2/27/2004	94
43	4.69	13	1/9/2005	60.97

After you hit a certain quality level... the Points are meaningless... it's the number of Votes that really decides your position.

Why bother with points then...

Two Voting Categories

1 --- OK
2 --- Sucked

Whoever has the most OK's is the Top Dog...

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[elsol]

Anal Top 75 Sorted By TP

Rank	Rating	Votes	Date	TP
60	4.65	1716	5/17/2002	7979.4
1	4.8	1657	7/3/2003	7953.6
72	4.64	1534	9/13/2002	7117.76
20	4.72	1133	12/3/2003	5347.76
12	4.73	846	8/20/2004	4001.58
2	4.77	826	2/3/2004	3940.02
21	4.72	626	12/7/2002	2954.72
13	4.73	579	7/4/2004	2738.67
50	4.66	519	3/17/2003	2418.54
73	4.64	492	7/26/2002	2282.88
4	4.75	416	12/25/2004	1976
5	4.75	393	4/19/2004	1866.75
44	4.68	360	10/21/2002	1684.8
39	4.69	347	4/5/2004	1627.43
51	4.66	342	5/14/2003	1593.72
6	4.75	332	4/5/2005	1577
74	4.64	330	9/7/2003	1531.2
28	4.71	309	3/24/2004	1455.39
40	4.69	296	8/1/2003	1388.24
41	4.69	295	2/2/2004	1383.55
14	4.73	291	4/16/2005	1376.43
45	4.68	291	10/20/2004	1361.88
29	4.71	284	2/22/2005	1337.64
47	4.67	269	10/26/2003	1256.23
75	4.64	268	10/12/2003	1243.52
52	4.66	262	7/14/2004	1220.92
8	4.74	251	12/8/2004	1189.74
9	4.74	244	1/8/2005	1156.56
22	4.72	225	7/9/2004	1062
7	4.75	221	12/29/2003	1049.75
61	4.65	219	2/11/2005	1018.35
23	4.72	214	3/26/2005	1010.08
62	4.65	212	7/27/2003	985.8
63	4.65	207	1/13/2005	962.55
24	4.72	201	2/18/2004	948.72
15	4.73	188	1/13/2005	889.24
16	4.73	185	8/11/2004	875.05
3	4.76	156	6/7/2005	742.56
53	4.66	157	4/28/2005	731.62
54	4.66	156	10/3/2004	726.96
64	4.65	156	6/5/2003	725.4
25	4.72	152	5/25/2005	717.44
34	4.7	141	1/17/2005	662.7
30	4.71	140	8/29/2004	659.4
35	4.7	139	5/13/2005	653.3
55	4.66	137	3/6/2005	638.42
48	4.67	135	4/7/2004	630.45
17	4.73	132	11/3/2004	624.36
18	4.73	126	5/19/2005	595.98
56	4.66	125	6/5/2004	582.5
65	4.65	124	2/26/2004	576.6
66	4.65	123	8/15/2003	571.95
31	4.71	121	5/1/2005	569.91
36	4.7	117	2/20/2005	549.9
57	4.66	118	8/25/2004	549.88
10	4.74	107	12/16/2004	507.18
37	4.7	99	1/13/2004	465.3
26	4.72	88	3/31/2005	415.36
58	4.66	87	3/10/2005	405.42
46	4.68	78	9/5/2003	365.04
32	4.71	76	4/5/2005	357.96
59	4.66	68	2/24/2005	316.88
27	4.72	65	12/3/2004	306.8
42	4.69	61	2/23/2005	286.09
49	4.67	61	6/9/2005	284.87
33	4.71	58	1/22/2005	273.18
67	4.65	51	4/4/2004	237.15
68	4.65	46	1/7/2004	213.9
19	4.73	45	6/21/2004	212.85
69	4.65	40	6/17/2004	186
70	4.65	37	9/22/2004	172.05
11	4.74	35	9/11/2004	165.9
71	4.65	23	4/5/2005	106.95
38	4.7	20	2/27/2004	94
43	4.69	13	1/9/2005	60.97

After you hit a certain quality level... the Points are meaningless... it's the number of Votes that really decides your position.

Why bother with points then...

Two Voting Categories

1 --- OK
2 --- Sucked

Whoever has the most OK's is the Top Dog...

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[elsol]

Anal Top 75 Sorted By TP

Rank	Rating	Votes	Date	TP
60	4.65	1716	5/17/2002	7979.4
1	4.8	1657	7/3/2003	7953.6
72	4.64	1534	9/13/2002	7117.76
20	4.72	1133	12/3/2003	5347.76
12	4.73	846	8/20/2004	4001.58
2	4.77	826	2/3/2004	3940.02
21	4.72	626	12/7/2002	2954.72
13	4.73	579	7/4/2004	2738.67
50	4.66	519	3/17/2003	2418.54
73	4.64	492	7/26/2002	2282.88
4	4.75	416	12/25/2004	1976
5	4.75	393	4/19/2004	1866.75
44	4.68	360	10/21/2002	1684.8
39	4.69	347	4/5/2004	1627.43
51	4.66	342	5/14/2003	1593.72
6	4.75	332	4/5/2005	1577
74	4.64	330	9/7/2003	1531.2
28	4.71	309	3/24/2004	1455.39
40	4.69	296	8/1/2003	1388.24
41	4.69	295	2/2/2004	1383.55
14	4.73	291	4/16/2005	1376.43
45	4.68	291	10/20/2004	1361.88
29	4.71	284	2/22/2005	1337.64
47	4.67	269	10/26/2003	1256.23
75	4.64	268	10/12/2003	1243.52
52	4.66	262	7/14/2004	1220.92
8	4.74	251	12/8/2004	1189.74
9	4.74	244	1/8/2005	1156.56
22	4.72	225	7/9/2004	1062
7	4.75	221	12/29/2003	1049.75
61	4.65	219	2/11/2005	1018.35
23	4.72	214	3/26/2005	1010.08
62	4.65	212	7/27/2003	985.8
63	4.65	207	1/13/2005	962.55
24	4.72	201	2/18/2004	948.72
15	4.73	188	1/13/2005	889.24
16	4.73	185	8/11/2004	875.05
3	4.76	156	6/7/2005	742.56
53	4.66	157	4/28/2005	731.62
54	4.66	156	10/3/2004	726.96
64	4.65	156	6/5/2003	725.4
25	4.72	152	5/25/2005	717.44
34	4.7	141	1/17/2005	662.7
30	4.71	140	8/29/2004	659.4
35	4.7	139	5/13/2005	653.3
55	4.66	137	3/6/2005	638.42
48	4.67	135	4/7/2004	630.45
17	4.73	132	11/3/2004	624.36
18	4.73	126	5/19/2005	595.98
56	4.66	125	6/5/2004	582.5
65	4.65	124	2/26/2004	576.6
66	4.65	123	8/15/2003	571.95
31	4.71	121	5/1/2005	569.91
36	4.7	117	2/20/2005	549.9
57	4.66	118	8/25/2004	549.88
10	4.74	107	12/16/2004	507.18
37	4.7	99	1/13/2004	465.3
26	4.72	88	3/31/2005	415.36
58	4.66	87	3/10/2005	405.42
46	4.68	78	9/5/2003	365.04
32	4.71	76	4/5/2005	357.96
59	4.66	68	2/24/2005	316.88
27	4.72	65	12/3/2004	306.8
42	4.69	61	2/23/2005	286.09
49	4.67	61	6/9/2005	284.87
33	4.71	58	1/22/2005	273.18
67	4.65	51	4/4/2004	237.15
68	4.65	46	1/7/2004	213.9
19	4.73	45	6/21/2004	212.85
69	4.65	40	6/17/2004	186
70	4.65	37	9/22/2004	172.05
11	4.74	35	9/11/2004	165.9
71	4.65	23	4/5/2005	106.95
38	4.7	20	2/27/2004	94
43	4.69	13	1/9/2005	60.97

After you hit a certain quality level... the Points are meaningless... it's the number of Votes that really decides your position.

Why bother with points then...

Two Voting Categories

1 --- OK
2 --- Sucked

Whoever has the most OK's is the Top Dog...

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[mack_the_knife]

Wonder if they could set the list to be sortable by clicking the header of a line, click total points, it sorts that way, click rating, it sorts that way, click votes, it sorts that way, click story name, it sorts that way?
Might make for a workable thing. I'd like mine sorted one way, another reader might like it another. Let the readers choose how they wish to quantify their results?
Most listings I find on the internet are multiply sortable by the headers of each line of data. I even, when I first came here, tried to click up there on the toplists to reorganize them by most votes, period...till I got it through my head that it wouldn't do anything. You could then click the top of the heading for author name and see everything they've got in the toplisting, or you could click the dates of release to see all the new stories, that are toplisted.

 

[elsol]

I would like to see them add downloads... to the list.

If anyone is wondering; for the most part the above bears out if you expand it to a full Top 500 list.

Nearly half of the cases are where a story switches positions with its neighbor depending on whether you sort by Most Votes or Total Points... i.e. story 64 in TotalPoints system becomes story 65 in a MostVotes system and vice versa.

The 'most' movement occurs in the middle of the pack; with stories that have between 53 and 100 votes.

A majority of the flips occur here because 'packs' of stories with the same number of votes do a dance i.e stories 167-183 play musical chairs depending which sort you use... the SUM total vote differences in these are *drumroll* 4.

In other words 1 story has 76 votes, 8 have 77, 6 have 78, 1 has 79.

But this is on the 3rd page and I never go that far... the first 75 scores are stable with only two-story flips occurring.

-- Okay, I really have to do something about this insomnia.

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[BlackShanglan]

Actually, I have nothing to gain by this proposal.

Actually, this new system will do nothing but hurt my ratings. Despite them being the 'least important aspect of literature' (i.e. the praise of your fellow authors and readers is not important). Yeah, good literature isn't to be enjoyed, it's to be there...I suppose.

The phrase, if you would care to read again, was "the least important aspect of writing." Writing. As in the act of improving one's writing and learning to become more proficient and more skilled at the task rather than focusing on the voting tendencies of persons with whom one may or may not have any shared goals in common.

Naturally, I quite value the feedback of my fellow authors and readers. That's why I leave the public comment feature turned on, value and immediately respond to feedback sent to me, exchange drafts with other authors and engage in critiques, and post and respond to the story discussion circle board. It's remarkable just how much you can learn from a good round on the SDC - and how little one learns from an anonymous 3 or 5 in the voting process.

Shanglan