Getting a little frustrated...

[jtmalone70]

**********

 

[BlackShanglan]

It begins.

Sorry. I shouldn't be flippant. However, we do have this discussion roughly once every two or three months. If you don't see a high number of responses - although I rather think you will - it won't be because no one cares, but because most of us have exhausted our desire to argue about it in the previous wrangles. That said, best of luck to this one and I hope it brings you some joy.

Shanglan

P. S. - Oh, and I might add that money may be part of the motivator here. I haven't seen many online story sites that offer cash prizes for top-ranking stories both in holiday contests and on a monthly basis. That may be what's driving a theoretically higher rate of trolling; there's something to gain by it.

 

[jtmalone70]

**********

 

[yui]

...hehe... Nope, doesn't bring me any joy. None at all. But it is somewhat cathartic.

The rub, though, seems to be that, as you said, it's been discussed a number of times... but what's been done about it other than mere idle chatter?

What can be done? The voting system essentially penalizes you for any vote under a "5", eh? Not everyone is going to think what we write is perfect. That's why I don't vote unless I can vote a "5"; I don't want to sabotage anyone's score. In my experience, Lit does do fairly routine sweeps on my stuff and I haven't sent a single PM requesting that they investigate my scores.

As for the idle chatter, at least once that I know of Laurel has been approached by a collective of authors with suggestions for a change in the voting. If the voting bothers you, disable it. If you are in it for the contests, understand that it's often a dog eat dog situation and encourage your regular readers to read and vote; know though, that the "5" votes are as often swept as the "1" votes.

We all get trolled, particularly if we happen to make the top lists; it's just the nature of the beast. I wish you luck.

Yui

 

[Selena_Kitt]

Oh, and I might add that money may be part of the motivator here. I haven't seen many online story sites that offer cash prizes for top-ranking stories both in holiday contests and on a monthly basis. That may be what's driving a theoretically higher rate of trolling; there's something to gain by it.

That's a really good point... hadn't thought of that...

I agree about the "Editor's Choice"... however, I also kind of view the "E" like I view those shelves in the video store where different employees have chosen their "picks" and put them on display... it seems to be much more personal preference than anything else. The thing about Lit is that it isn't a professional venue... anyone can write a story and submit it... so the quality varies... widely... <shrug>

 

[jtmalone70]

**********

 

[TxRad]

As Shang said..... You are preaching to the chore.... We all know this and well.... nothing has changed so go ahead and joust with all the windmills you want....

Around here it's a thick skin as far as trolls go. they are part and parcel.... the good with the bad

 

[jtmalone70]

**********

 

[sweetnpetite]

...probably not the choir I'm directing this to!

the editors of the site are very busy- there's two of them and they read and approve everything, check for trolls, answer questions, and run the maintanance of everything on this gigantic site, so they don't spend a lot of time on the message boards, if that's what you mean. If you want to make a suggestion to them, the best thing would be to PM laurel. Perhaps she would be willing to explain her reasons for keeping things the way they are. Who knows.

 

[TheEarl]

It's swings and roundabouts. Yes, there are trolls and yes, they do make 1-bombs. However, Laurel and Manu do remove most of the trolling (which includes 5-bombing as well!) and a good/popular story will usually end up near the top of the pile anyway. Look at the people who win the monthly contests on a regular basis and tell me they're not quality authors.

Lit isn't a big prize site. I believe top prize per month is $50, which is £35 in real money. Nice to have, but not exactly life-changing. With that in mind, I see no problem in the court of public opinion, especially when you take into account that everyone is pretty much judged by the same standards.

The Earl

 

[sophia jane]

Don't mind me. I'm just stalking Earl's av.

 

[yui]

Well, I understand what you're saying, but it's not so much about what the readers think and how they score a story. It's more about how the system in place is so easily abused.

I dare say, I think the authors on this site suffer much more from that than whether someone gives a story a rating of anything under a five. And the fact that you even have to mention doing regular sweeps of your stories, ostensibly searching for questionable scoring activities, not to mention that you're not the only one who does this, too, AND those who DO send PM's requesting further investigation - it does tend to say something about the voting system being greatly dysfunctional.

Once in a while, I recieve requests from different literary journals, mostly of an academic nature, to act as a "judge" of sorts for various stories and articles that have been submitted to them over the last year, sometimes longer (depends on how often they publish - monthly, quarterly, etc.).

Well, some of these journals offer rather substantial prizes, in some instances thousands of dollars, publishing contracts, etc. - nothing to scoff at. They don't rely on reader's scoring their favorite stories. Instead, a panel of editors is assembled and asked to do the judging. The authors have no idea who we are and, likewise, those doing the judging have no idea who the authors are. We simply read the stories and rate them as we see fit. No scores. Just first, second, third, etc.

I think Literotica, if they're going to be handing out cash prizes to what they believe are the best quality stories, per the requirements of a particular contest, should really do something along these same lines. Otherwise, what you end up with is what they have now: a skewed system of voting that doesn't accurately reflect what it purports. Just assemble, say, ten members of the site, based on a set of requirements for choosing them, and let them be the final judge.

Additionally, you could revamp the current voting system such that in order to cast a vote, you'd need to be a member of the site AND your name would be attached to the vote you cast, which would them be made available to the author. No more anonymous voting. It really serves no useful purpose, anyway. It's merely a means by which abuse of the system can more readily take place.

Throughout all of this, who really suffers the most? The authors? To some extent, yes. But, in the end, it's the readers who carry the brunt of it; the customers, so to speak. They expect the scores to accurately reflect the quality of a story, but, unfortunately, this isn't exactly the case.

Personally, I think "editor's choice" is allowed to be whoever that editor feels is worthy. Shang's Es are by far some of the best stuff on Lit. I don't think it's always about technical ability (though Shang's, and a number of others, is above reproach), but about ideas and raw talent. Technical writing is a skill, not a gift. Some people are writers and some people are storytellers. Personally, I envy the storytellers.

Also, the contest are "reader choice", eh? If I'm a reader, I want my vote to count, not be filtered through some electoral college of voters that were not of my choosing.

The idea of requiring voters to log in and dis-allowing anon feedback has been broached many, many times, that isn't new ground; we've all thought of that already. The downside is, that is opens a person up to retaliation by disgruntled authors who don't think their story rated a "3" or a "2" or, god forbid, a "1".

The readers are savvy; if they like your stuff, they come back to you. Casual surfers might be sucked into the top lists, but they will back-click soon enough and look elsewhere if they find only drivel. I view it much like "bestseller lists"; there are loads of books on that list that simply don't appeal to me, but by some seemingly arbitrary measure, they are "bestsellers". Authors that I love are overlooked and authors that are way, way overrated make the list. That's life, eh? I'm intelligent enough to make my own choices. Personally, I trust my readers and accept that trolling is part and parcel of a quasi-democratic system on a free porn stories site.

Luck,

Yui

 

[Liar]

Lit isn't a big prize site. I believe top prize per month is $50, which is £35 in real money.

Hehe. You're now officially a cool cat in my book.

Don't mind me. I'm just stalking Earl's av.

No, that's perfectly understandable. However, I think I'll stalk yours for a while.

 

[rick_oh]

The scoring system is easily abused. As far as trolls go, there is one who persisted in sending vile and hateful emails through the ananymous feedback system, until I turned off ananymous feedback totally. I do not agree that systematic abuse is part and parcel of being an author. I do agree that all voting should be tracked and not anonymous. As for PM'ing Laurel, the one I sent her several weeks ago (not on this subject) has not even been read by her, nor have the emails I've sent gotten replies, so I have no confidence that PM'ing or emailing her will have any effect.

 

[mack_the_knife]

I believe top prize per month is $50, ****jingoism deleted*****

It's $100, at least it was a while back. Still not life changing, but is still nice.

 

[jtmalone70]

**********

 

[rick_oh]

Well, I'll say this here, since I shared it with someone else privately.
[snip]
Why on earth the voting problem isn't rectified really makes me scratch my head.

So, I think your lack of confidence extends not only to other authors, but readers, as well.

I agree, but I just wanted to clarify that my PMs and emails were about other issues than the voting, and I've never asked for a vote to be changed.

 

[cantdog]

Well, I understand what you're saying, but it's not so much about what the readers think and how they score a story. It's more about how the system in place is so easily abused.

I dare say, I think the authors on this site suffer much more from that than whether someone gives a story a rating of anything under a five. And the fact that you even have to mention doing regular sweeps of your stories, ostensibly searching for questionable scoring activities, not to mention that you're not the only one who does this, too, AND those who DO send PM's requesting further investigation - it does tend to say something about the voting system being greatly dysfunctional.

Once in a while, I recieve requests from different literary journals, mostly of an academic nature, to act as a "judge" of sorts for various stories and articles that have been submitted to them over the last year, sometimes longer (depends on how often they publish - monthly, quarterly, etc.).

Well, some of these journals offer rather substantial prizes, in some instances thousands of dollars, publishing contracts, etc. - nothing to scoff at. They don't rely on reader's scoring their favorite stories. Instead, a panel of editors is assembled and asked to do the judging. The authors have no idea who we are and, likewise, those doing the judging have no idea who the authors are. We simply read the stories and rate them as we see fit. No scores. Just first, second, third, etc.

I think Literotica, if they're going to be handing out cash prizes to what they believe are the best quality stories, per the requirements of a particular contest, should really do something along these same lines. Otherwise, what you end up with is what they have now: a skewed system of voting that doesn't accurately reflect what it purports. Just assemble, say, ten members of the site, based on a set of requirements for choosing them, and let them be the final judge.

Additionally, you could revamp the current voting system such that in order to cast a vote, you'd need to be a member of the site AND your name would be attached to the vote you cast, which would them be made available to the author. No more anonymous voting. It really serves no useful purpose, anyway. It's merely a means by which abuse of the system can more readily take place.

Throughout all of this, who really suffers the most? The authors? To some extent, yes. But, in the end, it's the readers who carry the brunt of it; the customers, so to speak. They expect the scores to accurately reflect the quality of a story, but, unfortunately, this isn't exactly the case.

I hate anonymous complaints of all kinds. But just what sort of difference can be made about it? This is the internet. My name isn't really cantdog. And I could quite easily join the site under any number of other names. You are chasing rainbows with your 'no anonymous votes' idea.

Your panel of judges notion for prize-bearing contests is, however, spot on.

 

[R. Richard]

This is why I've never asked anyone to look at my scores and "fix" them. I know for a fact, I've had stories 1-bombed incessantly. And I think it doesn't take a great leap of logic to know they were very likely malicious. BUT... since I don't know that for certain, I don't request a "fix".

Why on earth the voting problem isn't rectified really makes me scratch my head.

Welcome to trollville! Each night [more or less] Laurel and/or Manu sweep the contest entries and remove troll votes. Each day many of us get the troll votes back. It is not just a matter of a troll exressing a personal opion, it is a maliciious and destructive attack upon an author(s).

 

[jtmalone70]

**********

 

[rick_oh]

Oh, I know.......... *sigh*


[snip]
But, since it's not a sure thing that what they recieve is honest feedback, well, they're left kinda wondering if there's any point in continuing down that path.

[snip]

I can understand that the proprietors of this site probably have their hands fairly full. Still... I think if they did away with anonymous voting, that might serve to curtail some of the otherwise superfluous work they encounter on a daily basis.
[snip]

I'm not a new writer, but the troll I've encountered who is abusing the literotica anonymous feedback system has resulted in my feeling that way occasionally. I will keep posting, however, since the troll obviously wants me to stop posting. Probably because he/it writes the same kinds of stories and thinks of mine as competing.

I agree that eliminating anonymous voting is the best avenue to take. I think it would do wonders.

 

[elsol]

Actually, I've found that readers do differ greatly from site to site.

They differ in

a) Reading tastes
b) Voting patterns (whether or not they'll vote, how they vote).
c) Feedback numbers
d) Type of feedback

Focus a majority of your energy on one site... and use the others as feelers.

It's not that I don't take Lit readers seriously... but the noise ration is too high for me to make them my primary audience.

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[rikaaim]

*Claps hands*

It's so much fun to complain, let's see:

Okay, not really going to complain. I'm going to stand up for the little defenseless voting system. *Stands up* There ya go little fella.

Seriously, I think it's just fine. I fully get your point on tricking the public sorta speak with the top lists scores, but as Yui pointed out, the reader will simply back click mindless drivel. I recall when I visited this site not as a writer but as a reader. I too went for the "H" stories. Albeit having to back click a story or two did set me back in my endeavors, I always managed to acomplish my goal. *coughs*

I am an amatuer writer. I am depressed. I still write. I've taken many critical hits and my ego has been bruised at some point or another. I don't care anymore. I write for me. I have a few friends around here who seem to think that I'm good. I write for them.

Consequently I'll sometimes get good feedback.

A random reader will e-mail me or leave a comment that lets me know that I've accomplished what particular goal I've set out to do. In my one and only posted story here, which is needs a good edit, I've gotten the exact kinds of comments I was hoping for. The kind of comments that let me know that that one particular feeling, that one transition, that one memory we've all forgotten, is clear. That feeling, mood, transition in time and place is real, if only for a fraction of a second in someone's mind. That's why I write. If for one full second I can transport a person from this world into my world and make it "real", then I've done my job. I am happy. Yes, I slave over words. I try to pick just the right ones. I try hard to watch my grammer and mechanics. I don't always succeed. Yet when some stranger who's only read one thing of mine says they get it, I'm at peace and have the encouragement I need to keep writing. That's my voting system.

Do I want the "H"? Of course. Do I want the "E"? You bettcha. Do I deserve it? Maybe. Maybe not. I haven't been to other sites. I don't know what their voting systems are. At first I was upset that my story wasn't getting a good score vote average wise. Now it's decent and I look at it and want to take it down, shred it to pieces, and throw it away. I can hardly read the drivel anymore. That let's you know what I think of my own work. I am my own worst critic. I would one bomb everything of mine except for one of my poems. I trust in the cosmic law of averages. What one person one bombs another may five bomb. It all works out in the end in my book.

As for me when I vote, if I don't think it's a five, I don't vote. I'm like Yui in that regard. I always do my very best to leave comments though. What I might not vote on I'll leave an honest critique. I'll leave the good highlight points in the PC section of the story so I don't scare away a would be reader. As soon as I click on a story to read it, before reading a single word of the story, I read the public comments. It may be wrong, but that's what I do. Since I do that I leave only good in the PCs. If I personally see a long string of negative remarks I might not read the story, which would be a shame and shows my shallowness in that regard. I'll also send a detailed PM about what I liked, again, and what I thought could use a little bit of work. All of course being just my thoughts and opinions someone could print out and use as toilet paper one day if need be.

Well, now that I've said nothing, I'll stop. I haven't spit out a good mindless rant in a while. That was nice. I feel...less constipated?...mentally?...yeah. We'll just go with that.

 

[BlackShanglan]

If the goal is feedback and encouragement, we have several systems in place for that. The votes are largely useless for feedback; they don't give any indication of what qualities in the story the reader liked or didn't like. All one has is a very vague general idea of whether the readers liked it better or worse than one's previous efforts, and even that is heavily skewed by the great differences in expectations and voting levels in different categories.

The SDC and the Story Feedback Forum are excellent places to receive advice and encouragement. The votes just tell you (in an inapplicably vague fashion) what random readers thought of the story. They might serve some purpose for readers; they can serve no real purpose for those attempting to learn to write better, although I suppose that encouragement is always nice. I'd rather have it from people whose opinions I respect, however. I like feedback from readers and comments and PC's, but votes really don't tell me anything; hence my apathy on voting reform. I don't think it's worth the trouble.

Shanglan

 

[cantdog]

I don't know, Shang, you have to work up a sustained desire for critics to do that sort of thing. I found SDC very traumatic.

I think the Irish girl's right, really. The money prizes make people screw with the voting. Just looking at the voting, all by itself, we find it's not very predictive. Stories with high votes can be nearly anything, short of fifth-grade drivel.

Malone, like so many people starting in at the site, instinctively wants to limit the hoi polloi. Her gut tells her that the regulars, the members, will be better equipped to judge. But it is almost certainly people who are writing, or tightly-bound fans of particular writers, who are fudging the scores. Who else has a stake? Casual readers don't have a reason to prefer one writer to win over any other.

Limiting the voting to a core of Lit participants will only make the proportion of finagling votes greater, since the enemy is us. What the vote system needs is a de-coupling from the prizes. I really think that a panel of judges instead of an open vote pool will remove the main temptation to bomb or boost stories artificially. Let votes count, even on contest entries, yes. But let the contests themselves be decided by some other, independent, mechanism. Once the contest is done, the vote totals can determine the future standing of the story, just like any other story. But for prizes, pull the scoring out of reach of the trolls.