Has anyone else drawn the ire of story critic Stacnash? 🤣

[AwkwardMD]

That's nice of you to say. I appreciate it.

I tried to remember the title off the top of my head. I thought it was called The Return Of Molly Starr, but I had the name wrong. Molly Minx. Pretty sure I read it when it was new, which would have been just about 9 years ago at this point.


It was really good. I only remember the broad strokes at this point, and that I really liked it.

 

[Voboy]

Let’s get this straight once and for all: not everyone who holds up an unflattering mirror to you is a troll. Not everyone has to like you or your stories. Free speech isn’t just about being nice or flattering. People are entitled to their opinions, even when those opinions make you uncomfortable. As long as it’s not a direct ad hominem attack, it’s fair game.

But narcissists with fragile egos, who are only here to garner compliments and strut around in their imaginary fancy feathers, will never accept that.

Again, you don't seem to be bothering to read many of our responses. You're setting up a strawman: you're arguing against something a number of us are explicitly NOT SAYING.

We're fine with critique. We don't mind tough feedback. We're okay with that, really, truly, from the bottom of my heart.

You're a troll apart from your "unflattering mirror," not because of it. You're a troll because you're not trying to contribute to the discussion: you're simply lobbing personal bombs.

That's fine, if that's what you want to do. Just, please, don't pretend you're doing anything noble.

 

[lovecraft68]

I tried to remember the title off the top of my head. I thought it was called The Return Of Molly Starr, but I had the name wrong. Molly Minx. Pretty sure I read it when it was new, which would have been just about 9 years ago at this point.


It was really good. I only remember the broad strokes at this point, and that I really liked it.

Kudos for getting through it, I think its 22 pages or something crazy because it was a contest entry so had to be a one off.

 

[lovecraft68]

Again, you don't seem to be bothering to read many of our responses. You're setting up a strawman: you're arguing against something a number of us are explicitly NOT SAYING.

We're fine with critique. We don't mind tough feedback. We're okay with that, really, truly, from the bottom of my heart.

You're a troll apart from your "unflattering mirror," not because of it. You're a troll because you're not trying to contribute to the discussion: you're simply lobbing personal bombs.

That's fine, if that's what you want to do. Just, please, don't pretend you're doing anything noble.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

But is it the ratings or the reviews that are more dubious.

I'd say that depends.
One thing that people who complain about the ratings often miss is that it might not be an indicator of quality or literary value but it is an indicator of how the audience felt about it.

I know it's popular to claim that you don't write for your audience, you write for yourself and all that. But if you aren't writing for an audience why bother posting it? You could save yourself a lot trouble by keeping it on your own computer.

It's a generally accepted principle in marketing that people are more likely to leave a bad review than a good one. If a story averages out to a 4.5 or better that is an indicator that the majority of the audience thinks it's worth reading.
Again, not necessarily Shakespeare, but the intended audience likes it.
You can write a high brow review of how awful the Minecraft movie is. You're certainly entitled to do that, but if you don't recognize that the kids it was made for love it you've missed the point.

As a side note, at least one of the stories Stac trashed has a glowing review from our other in depth reviewer, Commentariat. So, another interesting data point.

 

[Voboy]

I know it's popular to claim that you don't write for your audience, you write for yourself and all that. But if you aren't writing for an audience why bother posting it? You could save yourself a lot trouble by keeping it on your own computer.

I say that sort of thing a lot, so I'll clarify: I don't write for myself in the sense that I somehow need to get it out, like for catharsis. I write for myself in the sense that my intended audience is a reader just like me.

I'm perpetually gobsmacked when commenters post stuff that I could have written. I get a lot of satisfaction knowing that I'm providing something that pleases a reader looking for the same things I look for when I read.

 

[WittyUserName]

"Has anyone else drawn the ire of story critic Stacnash"

Not yet, sadly. Maybe someday!

 

[Actingup]

View attachment 2543279

I really like Graham's Hierachy of Disagreement (see https://themindcollection.com/revisiting-grahams-hierarchy-of-disagreement/)

 

[Comshaw]

The exact same value of the Red H.

I'd say that depends.
One thing that people who complain about the ratings often miss is that it might not be an indicator of quality or literary value but it is an indicator of how the audience felt about it.

I know it's popular to claim that you don't write for your audience, you write for yourself and all that. But if you aren't writing for an audience why bother posting it? You could save yourself a lot trouble by keeping it on your own computer.

It's a generally accepted principle in marketing that people are more likely to leave a bad review than a good one. If a story averages out to a 4.5 or better that is an indicator that the majority of the audience thinks it's worth reading.
Again, not necessarily Shakespeare, but the intended audience likes it.
You can write a high brow review of how awful the Minecraft movie is. You're certainly entitled to do that, but if you don't recognize that the kids it was made for love it you've missed the point.

As a side note, at least one of the stories Stac trashed has a glowing review from our other in depth reviewer, Commentariat. So, another interesting data point.

Well said. I've argued before that the ONLY critics worth a damn are the readers. A story may have technical flaws, missed punctuation, a few words used inappropriately, some misspelled, and it may not be what any self-annointed critic wants to see, but if the readers like it, it reached its intended audience and did what it was written to do. If it has a high score and/or a red H, it means the readers that voted liked it, a lot. You can damn well bet if a story rubs the readers wrong, it's going to get bombed. Loving Wives is a prime example of that.

This ain't a site to be publishing literary master pieces. It's an EROTIC site for primarily sex stories. And if a story is halfway decent in form and format and titillates a reader's libido, even if it contains what some would consider major flaws, it will be rewarded by the readers.

PSG tends to believe that the scores mean nothing, hence their opinion that the H means nothing. To me that always sounded like sour grapes.

But then what do I know? I'm a self-taught, sausage-fingered dyslexic writer. You can't get much farther from a writing expert and still claim to be one, a writer not an expert. I'd share my definition of an expert but it would offend many so I will desist.

Comshaw

 

[Comshaw]

I really like Graham's Hierachy of Disagreement (see https://themindcollection.com/revisiting-grahams-hierarchy-of-disagreement/)
View attachment 2543283

Hang on just a damn minute! You mean to tell me the use of "Fuck you, you stupid asshole and the horse you rode in on!" Isn't appropriate debate form? Damn! I guess that eliminates me!


Comshaw

 

[SkyBubble]

It sounds like being on his bad list is a badge of honor.

 

[AwkwardMD]

This ain't a site to be publishing literary master pieces.

Not with that attitude.

 

[Comshaw]

Not with that attitude.

Please elucidate.


Comshaw

 

[WittyUserName]

I really like Graham's Hierachy of Disagreement (see https://themindcollection.com/revisiting-grahams-hierarchy-of-disagreement/)
View attachment 2543283

This is cool, I wish I had seen it before! In my experience it's usually "Your an asshat!"(Wow, just writing that made me cringe).

 

[AwkwardMD]

Please elucidate.


Comshaw

There's two ways to respond to this, because there's really two functioning definitions of the term masterpiece.

The first is the original definition, a piece of work that proves one has reached master status, or that one has attained mastery of their craft. It doesn't need to be perfect, but it gets enough things right that the skill behind the creation is evident. I can point to any number of stories submitted to our review thread that fit this criteria, but for brevity's sake I'll highlight AI Era: Fusion Tug by @Cacatua_Galerita. It's excellent. More people should read it.

The second is the more commonly used definition, that a masterpiece is not just a demonstration of skill but is, by many accounts, among the best of its kind. A work that is more or less perfect. AI Era: Loss Function by @Bramblethorn is one I see mentioned a lot, as an all-time favorite (and a personal favorite). Omen raves about The Gold Dollar Girls by @MelissaBaby.

 

[SinclairGroupLLP]

None of us, posting here in this very thread, is "spiralling" into "emptiness, loneliness, depression, and self-loathing." Rather, we're chuckling together over the overwrought statements of one commenter and, now, another troll poster. We're bonding. It's a nice thing.

Clearly, the reason why I'm not on the leaderboards with 10,000 followers is because I'm not spiraling into emptiness, loneliness, depression and self-loathing.

I'm fucking awesome, I love my life, and I wish I had time to be lonely. I've got too many hobbies, lol. Maybe someday I'll be angsty enough to be a truly great writer. In the meantime, I'll tell my jack off stories and hope you guys enjoy them, lol.

 

[Comshaw]

There's two ways to respond to this, because there's really two functioning definitions of the term masterpiece.

The first is the original definition, a piece of work that proves one has reached master status, or that one has attained mastery of their craft. It doesn't need to be perfect, but it gets enough things right that the skill behind the creation is evident. I can point to any number of stories submitted to our review thread that fit this criteria, but for brevity's sake I'll highlight AI Era: Fusion Tug by @Cacatua_Galerita . It's excellent. More people should read it.

The second is the more commonly used definition, that a masterpiece is not just a demonstration of skill but is, by many accounts, among the best of its kind. A work that is more or less perfect. AI Era: Loss Function by @Bramblethorn is one I see mentioned a lot, as an all-time favorite (and a personal favorite). Omen raves about The Gold Dollar Girls by @MelissaBaby .

A very well put explanation of "masterpiece". And FYI I agree with you. Perhaps I shouldn't have put it quite that way.

However, that still leaves unanswered the question of this: "Not with that attitude." Precisely what "attitude" are you referring to?

Comshaw

 

[Actingup]

This is cool, I wish I had seen it before! In my experience it's usually "Your an asshat!"(Wow, just writing that made me cringe).

If I'm wanting to really get up somebody's nostrils, sometimes I send it to them and give them a suggested rating on the scale with some encouragement to Do Better. But I only reserve that for the very worst offenders. I've found it tends to shut people up though.

 

[Actingup]

There's two ways to respond to this, because there's really two functioning definitions of the term masterpiece.

The first is the original definition, a piece of work that proves one has reached master status, or that one has attained mastery of their craft. It doesn't need to be perfect, but it gets enough things right that the skill behind the creation is evident. I can point to any number of stories submitted to our review thread that fit this criteria, but for brevity's sake I'll highlight AI Era: Fusion Tug by @Cacatua_Galerita . It's excellent. More people should read it.

The second is the more commonly used definition, that a masterpiece is not just a demonstration of skill but is, by many accounts, among the best of its kind. A work that is more or less perfect. AI Era: Loss Function by @Bramblethorn is one I see mentioned a lot, as an all-time favorite (and a personal favorite). Omen raves about The Gold Dollar Girls by @MelissaBaby .

Just by the by, @Bramblethorn's 'The Floggings Will Continue' is my default bookmarked Literotica page. Some stories hit differently, and I think that one is a perfect example of the first definition even if it doesn't quite fit the second.

 

[AwkwardMD]

A very well put explanation of "masterpiece". And FYI I agree with you. Perhaps I shouldn't have put it quite that way.

However, that still leaves unanswered the question of this: "Not with that attitude." Precisely what "attitude" are you referring to?

Comshaw

It sounds like you're ruling yourself out of creating something that good by accepting that Lit isn't the right venue for it, so why try?

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I say that sort of thing a lot, so I'll clarify: I don't write for myself in the sense that I somehow need to get it out, like for catharsis. I write for myself in the sense that my intended audience is a reader just like me.

I'm perpetually gobsmacked when commenters post stuff that I could have written. I get a lot of satisfaction knowing that I'm providing something that pleases a reader looking for the same things I look for when I read.

Fair consideration. I write because I enjoy it and I hope other people do as well.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Well said. I've argued before that the ONLY critics worth a damn are the readers. A story may have technical flaws, missed punctuation, a few words used inappropriately, some misspelled, and it may not be what any self-annointed critic wants to see, but if the readers like it, it reached its intended audience and did what it was written to do. If it has a high score and/or a red H, it means the readers that voted liked it, a lot. You can damn well bet if a story rubs the readers wrong, it's going to get bombed. Loving Wives is a prime example of that.

This ain't a site to be publishing literary master pieces. It's an EROTIC site for primarily sex stories. And if a story is halfway decent in form and format and titillates a reader's libido, even if it contains what some would consider major flaws, it will be rewarded by the readers.

PSG tends to believe that the scores mean nothing, hence their opinion that the H means nothing. To me that always sounded like sour grapes.

But then what do I know? I'm a self-taught, sausage-fingered dyslexic writer. You can't get much farther from a writing expert and still claim to be one, a writer not an expert. I'd share my definition of an expert but it would offend many so I will desist.

Comshaw

And don't take that to mean you shouldn't put your best foot forward and write the best story you can, simply that you should understand your audience.
Ever take a public speaking course? First thing they mention, "consider the audience".

As others have mentioned there are some amazing stories on this site. Ones that are better than a great deal of the stuff you find from "professionals" and "real publishing" and all that.

 

[Comshaw]

It sounds like you're ruling yourself out of creating something that good by accepting that Lit isn't the right venue for it, so why try?

Me thinks perhaps you are reading into what I said something that isn't there. When you think something is, the best thing to do is question, not assume. Assumptions are dangerous in that they can lead a person far astray from the truth.

Ruling myself out? how? Because of the last passage in my previous post? If you took that as self-deprecation, don't. Every last word is true. I am mostly self-taught and am still learning. Because of injuries, health issues and dyslexia it takes me 3-4 times as long to type a story as most of ya'll. But I get it done. And according to the votes and comments, I've done pretty good. And the readers who vote and leave comments are the only critics that I really care to listen to.

Can I do better? Oh hell yes! Can't we all? And I will. I get a little bit better every time I type a story. But I ALWAYS keep in mind where we are posting and what we are writing. It ain't something I'm going to share with my grandmother.

Comshaw

 

[Djmac1031]

After reading through 10 pages of this thread, im afraid im going to have to rate it 3 Stars, average at best.

While the humor is strong and often on point, I found the conflicts rather forced and contrived.

The plot started out interesting but quickly became repetitive. And for an "Erotica" site, this whole thing sure has been a boner killer so far.

Still, plenty of interesting characters, some very ... opinionated.

 

[Comshaw]

After reading through 10 pages of this thread, im afraid im going to have to rate it 3 Stars, average at best.

While the humor is strong and often on point, I found the conflicts rather forced and contrived.

The plot started out interesting but quickly became repetitive. And for an "Erotica" site, this whole thing sure has been a boner killer so far.

Still, plenty of interesting characters, some very ... opinionated.

NO! Say it ain't so Joe!

Comshaw