How do ratings "sweeps" work?

[ChasPHX]

I've seen many references in the forums to so-called sweeps related to low ratings and "1 bombs."

Today I think I saw evidence of a sweep on one of my own stories and I wondered about how it works. I had a story with very low metrics in C&FF category. 1k views, 3 favs. Rating of 3.6ish out of 5 ratings. Then today, I saw it jumped to rating of 4.74! I looked to see how many readers had been added to rate it so highly, but instead of more ratings, it had fewer. It had gone from 5 to 3! I have to assume that two ratings of 1 were removed.

It's hard to tell, because my other stories have higher metrics, but it does not look like any of them have changed.

Who knows how this works? Is it sitewide in one fell swoop, or category by category, or ad hoc?

And not to look a gift horse in the mouth, but it seems like an odd system that the bottom scores are getting tossed but not the top ones. It's like no one is allowed to have the opinion that a story is really bad. Personally, I never rate anything less than a 3, but I have skin in the game - I'm an author too. If I was a reader only, I'd be gone pretty quick if I knew my reviews were being tampered with.

 

[NotWise]

I've seen many references in the forums to so-called sweeps related to low ratings and "1 bombs."

Today I think I saw evidence of a sweep on one of my own stories and I wondered about how it works. I had a story with very low metrics in C&FF category. 1k views, 3 favs. Rating of 3.6ish out of 5 ratings. Then today, I saw it jumped to rating of 4.74! I looked to see how many readers had been added to rate it so highly, but instead of more ratings, it had fewer. It had gone from 5 to 3! I have to assume that two ratings of 1 were removed.

It's hard to tell, because my other stories have higher metrics, but it does not look like any of them have changed.

Who knows how this works? Is it sitewide in one fell swoop, or category by category, or ad hoc?

And not to look a gift horse in the mouth, but it seems like an odd system that the bottom scores are getting tossed but not the top ones. It's like no one is allowed to have the opinion that a story is really bad. Personally, I never rate anything less than a 3, but I have skin in the game - I'm an author too. If I was a reader only, I'd be gone pretty quick if I knew my reviews were being tampered with.

The sweeps are an automated process designed to remove invalid votes. No-one knows how it determines a vote to be invalid, and it's not even a good idea to talk about it, lest we give the trolls ways around it.

My stories have votes swept at odd times, but they're often during themed contests, and or around mid-month when the site is working out the monthly contest winners.

The sweeps do not remove just low votes. They can remove any vote, and I've had more 5* votes removed from some stories than anything else.

 

[LexxRuthless]

The sweeps are an automated process designed to remove invalid votes. No-one knows how it determines a vote to be invalid, and it's not even a good idea to talk about it, lest we give the trolls ways around it.

My stories have votes swept at odd times, but they're often during themed contests, and or around mid-month when the site is working out the monthly contest winners.

The sweeps do not remove just low votes. They can remove any vote, and I've had more 5* votes removed from some stories than anything else.

At least, that was how it used to work. Since July 9th of this year, stories have been getting votes swept away every single day, and nobody seems to know why. Oh, there are theories among the authors, but nobody has heard anything definitive and the site management has said nothing to let us know what's changed.

We aren't really supposed to discuss sweeps at all, but if you do a search through this forum you can find loads of information that authors have posted over the past 12 years plus.

 

[ChasPHX]

Thanks for the responses, I will shut up about it now.

 

[SimonDoom]

At least, that was how it used to work. Since July 9th of this year, stories have been getting votes swept away every single day, and nobody seems to know why. Oh, there are theories among the authors, but nobody has heard anything definitive and the site management has said nothing to let us know what's changed.

We aren't really supposed to discuss sweeps at all, but if you do a search through this forum you can find loads of information that authors have posted over the past 12 years plus.

I hadn't checked this in a little while so I look at the vote totals. My totals show that daily sweeps began diminishing my vote totals modestly beginning in mid-July, but this process stopped on a significant scale in mid-September. My stories have seen vote totals increase significantly since Sept. 28, although two stories have lost votes over that time, and they're fairly old. But I see no systematic sweeping anymore.

 

[AlexBailey]

I notice that there is often a difference between the listed number of votes I have on my author 'works' page and in a story's listing in the hall-of-fame rankings. It typically shows a few more total votes in the hall-of-fame. I wonder if that reflects the total number of votes that have been swept.

 

[Rustyoznail]

I notice that there is often a difference between the listed number of votes I have on my author 'works' page and in a story's listing in the hall-of-fame rankings. It typically shows a few more total votes in the hall-of-fame. I wonder if that reflects the total number of votes that have been swept.

There seems to be a lag in the system. My Summer Lovin' story should be in the all time romance hall of fame, but it's only in the 12 month list. I'm assuming they only get updated once a month or so.

 

[NotWise]

There seems to be a lag in the system. My Summer Lovin' story should be in the all time romance hall of fame, but it's only in the 12 month list. I'm assuming they only get updated once a month or so.

Aside from lags, the all-time list has a minimum vote requirement that varies from category to category.

I have seen differences between the scores on my user CP and my profile page and the score on the top list. I don't have a lot experience in that rarified air, but when "A Valentines Day Mess, Part 3" was floating over 4.9, the toplist always showed the score 0.01 higher than my profile page or my user CP.

If differences are limited to 0.01, then it could just be a matter of how the score is truncated to two decimal places. Rounding to the nearest hundredth would create one result and rounding to the next lowest hundredth will create a different result about half of the time.

 

[AlexBailey]

There seems to be a lag in the system. My Summer Lovin' story should be in the all time romance hall of fame, but it's only in the 12 month list. I'm assuming they only get updated once a month or so.

It seems that it takes a minimum of 100 votes to enter the 'All time' list. Probably a good idea since average scores bounce around so much in early voting... In TG/CD anyway.

@ NotWize: I've seen those same differences in rounding too. It's probably carried to a further place for the rankings to provide more graduation.

 

[Voboy]

There is SO little transparency about almost everything regarding votes, sweeps, lag, ratings, and HoF spots that, to me, it almost seems mentally healthier just to stop worrying about it and go along for the ride. I, too, breathlessly tracked my early stories, and I'll even cop to checking my new postings a couple times a day during that critical first week.

But in general, I try to only worry about things I can control. And I've got NO control over any of this stuff. So? Why worry? The numbers move around and ebb and flow. I have no need to set up a spreadsheet to track them. Sometimes the system benefits me, sometimes not; I'm sure it balances eventually. And if it doesn't, there's nothing I can do about it.

I write and post here. That's enough to concern myself with. I'm gratified that some people like what I come up with. The rest takes care of itself.

 

[SimonDoom]

But in general, I try to only worry about things I can control. And I've got NO control over any of this stuff. So? Why worry? The numbers move around and ebb and flow. I have no need to set up a spreadsheet to track them. Sometimes the system benefits me, sometimes not; I'm sure it balances eventually. And if it doesn't, there's nothing I can do about it.

I write and post here. That's enough to concern myself with. I'm gratified that some people like what I come up with. The rest takes care of itself.

This is a healthy attitude to take about most things.

I never worry about scores and don't get bothered by any of this stuff, but I confess to being curious about it so I follow the stats out of interest. I think it's possible to be interested in something without ever worrying about it.

 

[JaxRhapsody]

I don't think about it. As much as I've said over the years I didn't care about votes or the infamous Red H; I have some, surprised as I am, want them to stay.

 

[Fervid]

I’ll admit up front that while I write for fun, I post for feedback – all kinds, but preferably positive, for the endorphins. So I watch my stories’ ratings. And, they wander around oddly. I can detect real trolling, with math, but sometime ratings change with no change in the number of votes. These are old stories that get maybe one vote a month, and the chance of exactly-offsetting votes and sweeps is negligible. Sometimes there is a sweep of say, a couple of votes, and the score goes down as though more than two 5’s were subtracted. Sometimes a story rating will zoom – 4.69 to 4.82 in one recent case, after months and months of languishing. Maybe that shows a successful sweep. But . . .

I just watched “The Social Dilemma” on Netflix, which I strongly recommend. One theme is how websites’ only real goal is to drive up ad views, and therefore, traffic, even at the expense of things like truth and mental health. (Teenaged girl suicides are up 70% since Facebook.)

The main tool is intermittent reward, as in the Skinner pigeon experiments. It made me wonder whether churning the ratings is a feature, not a bug, to keep authors engaged, and to keep a fresh selection of stories in the HoF. We’ll never know, apparently, but as I’ve complained before, it certainly doesn’t help readers find the best stories, and it provides inaccurate feedback to authors (who, in fairness, are already dealing with a wide range of tastes.)

Watch that show, and see what you think.

 

[davion2308]

There is SO little transparency about almost everything regarding votes, sweeps, lag, ratings, and HoF spots that, to me, it almost seems mentally healthier just to stop worrying about it and go along for the ride. I, too, breathlessly tracked my early stories, and I'll even cop to checking my new postings a couple times a day during that critical first week.

But in general, I try to only worry about things I can control. And I've got NO control over any of this stuff. So? Why worry? The numbers move around and ebb and flow. I have no need to set up a spreadsheet to track them. Sometimes the system benefits me, sometimes not; I'm sure it balances eventually. And if it doesn't, there's nothing I can do about it.

I write and post here. That's enough to concern myself with. I'm gratified that some people like what I come up with. The rest takes care of itself.

I still look at scores while trying not to. I have never set up tracking like an Excel to see what I do but I know the first thing when I log on is to check the scores of the most recent works, especially the first week like you said.

It's healthy to not check 'em. I still can't yet help myself.

 

[ChasPHX]

I think as with most things, it's a matter of finding the middle ground.

Interest in ratings and even the willingness to conform your story to certain standards in order to achieve higher ones doesn't detract from your artistic intent. Self publishers, marketers - some people eat and breathe this stuff and look for every possibility to optimize the work to increase visibility and boost sales. When there's money at stake, people's perspective tends to be pretty fluid... ; )

We're exceptionally lucky here with this platform, because it allows us to put work out to the world with very few boundaries, and we don't need to give a rat's ass about how it's received. We can just keep pumping out whatever we want! And even the lowest viewed stories on the site are still getting more views than the stories collecting dust on my hard drive, never to be seen by anyone.

Some might argue it's the readers who are the lucky ones, with this seemingly infinite supply of content, but I think it's the other way around. The best way to monetize this site (beyond ad revenue)? Charge writers a monthly membership fee of $2.00! In exchange, our requests for site improvements suddenly get the attention they've "earned."

Don't tell the admins I suggested that.

 

[Voboy]

This is a healthy attitude to take about most things.

I never worry about scores and don't get bothered by any of this stuff, but I confess to being curious about it so I follow the stats out of interest. I think it's possible to be interested in something without ever worrying about it.

I'll hasten to add that I agree with that last bit. An academic interest in stats and such is a good thing. I was replying more to what I thought I detected in the OP and, by extension, in a lot of other posters on this topic over the years: anxiety.

 

[SimonDoom]

I was replying more to what I thought I detected in the OP and, by extension, in a lot of other posters on this topic over the years: anxiety.

And I completely agree with you!

I don't understand being anxious about this site. It's free and it's fun. Readers are entitled to whatever opinions they have about our stories. We aren't entitled to expect they will like what we write.

 

[Rustyoznail]

It seems that it takes a minimum of 100 votes to enter the 'All time' list. Probably a good idea since average scores bounce around so much in early voting... In TG/CD anyway.

That makes sense. Thanks.

 

[NotWise]

That makes sense. Thanks.

That varies from category to category. It looks like 200 in I/T and LW, and 100 elsewhere, but I haven't checked everything.

 

[RejectReality]

That varies from category to category. It looks like 200 in I/T and LW, and 100 elsewhere, but I haven't checked everything.

Some such as Chain Stories are also lower. Not many, though. The bulk of categories have the 100 minimum.

 

[Emirus]

I've seen many references in the forums to sweeps..........Today I think I saw evidence of a sweep on one of my own stories..........Who knows how this works?...........

I like my little red H’s because to me it means the majority of readers really liked the story. But I had a weird one this morning. It stood out because, although I don’t have many stories, all but two were red. Now it’s all but three.

After having a little cry, and drying my eyes with the a piece of kitchen roll, I decided to get my finger out and tell the tale because it fits in with recent comments and I think it’s funny.

As has been said, no point in fretting about it because there’s nothing you can do. It’s like trolls. You’d like to serve them up with fava beans and a nice chianti but only the wine would taste nice so there’s no point in thinking about them.

The story was on 251/55/4.56 about a week ago, the last time I looked, but today it’s on 247/55/4.49. That’s weird. It could be that a sweep took away two 4’s and then put one back. Or a sweep took away two 4’s and, by sheer coincidence it received a 4 from a reader. Although the rating for that story hasn’t moved for over a month.

I’m not complaining because there’s lots of good stories with 3.49. Going by the comments lately about ratings moving about it doesn’t seem uncommon although I haven’t noticed anything with mine before.

Perhaps the system has been infiltrated by an evil alter-ego of Manu, like a drunken black Spiderman, and is meandering around the web.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

Emirus, the only way for a story to lose votes is for the site to take them away, which generally translates into 'sweep'. There's been an ongoing discussion here about a sudden uptick in this sort of thing, but Laurel, the owner, has not commented or explained why. As to the 'how' of it, as already noted, Laurel has strongly suggested in past that we not discuss it as close guesses might clue the clueless trolls.

 

[NotWise]

The story was on 251/55/4.56 about a week ago, the last time I looked, but today it’s on 247/55/4.49. That’s weird. It could be that a sweep took away two 4’s and then put one back. Or a sweep took away two 4’s and, by sheer coincidence it received a 4 from a reader. Although the rating for that story hasn’t moved for over a month.

A simple combination would be that the site swept a 5* vote and someone voted 1*.

I've seen some odd changes recently. I have a story that went up in spring, 2018 that got a flurry of activity last November, then no activity at all for almost a year. Last night the site swept a 5* vote without changing the score.

There have been many sweeps since the last time there was a vote cast on that story. If that vote was a problem, then why didn't the earlier sweeps catch it? Why sweep it now?

A more recent story had one vote removed, and lost six stars.

I think there's "stuff" going on, but I have no clue what it is. I've taken to just waiting to see if things will wash out.

 

[AlexBailey]

I have a story that went up in spring, 2018 that got a flurry of activity last November, then no activity at all for almost a year.

I wonder if there was a 'similar story', one with near identical tags, that was popular last November. A close match may still show up that was posted around that time.

 

[NotWise]

I wonder if there was a 'similar story', one with near identical tags, that was popular last November. A close match may still show up that was posted around that time.

I checked. The initial activity was from a troll who bombed one of my other stories, then went on through most of my catalogue. The rest of the activity came after I reported the trolling and asked for a sweep.