I'm so confused

[BillyAndBetty]

..........

 

[Blind_Justice]

Resubmit with a message to Laurel (the one who vets the stories) and let her know that there is no underage content. Use the NOTES field on the submission form.

 

[KeithD]

I was not 18 as a senior in high school or upon graduation or the summer afterward. If you just identified anybody as a high school senior you haven't obviated the age issue.

 

[RejectReality]

Were there any other reasons listed? There's some evidence that this particular rejection is sometimes being appended when something else is marked.

If there were any other issues mentioned, and you know for certain that there's no underage material...

( Noting that the definition of what is sexual is very broad, and doesn't require any physical contact. Hearing sex, or thinking about sex, or admiring someone's body is all in the no-no range for anyone under 18 )

Then deal with the other issue, assume that the under 18 notice was an error, and resubmit.

 

[Rustyoznail]

It can be the smallest thing. I've sent you a PM as I'm happy to have a quick look.

Trees, wood...

 

[BillyAndBetty]

..........

 

[BillyAndBetty]

..........

 

[BillyAndBetty]

..........

 

[BillyAndBetty]

..........

 

[Rustyoznail]

Thank you, we just did.

Well, I’m confused as well. There’s nothing that could be considered as underage.

Its a nice story so far.

Keep us posted.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

Do keep us posted.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Well, I’m confused as well. There’s nothing that could be considered as underage.

Its a nice story so far.

Keep us posted.

Maybe do a quick search for "year old"/"years old". From previous discussions on this topic, looks like that kind of bounce can be triggered by just about any mention of e.g. "a seventeen-year-old port".

Doesn't mean one has to change the content in that case, just need to resubmit with a note confirming that there's no under-age sexual activity. At that point I assume Laurel reads more closely to check the truth of that.

 

[SimonDoom]

Let me just add:

If you send a polite and detailed response to Laurel, she may very well change her mind. I tried this once and it worked (although that concerned a different issue -- the all-important distinction between bestiality and alien sex). She reviews an ungodly number of stories every single day. I have no idea how she does it, and it's no wonder mistakes are made.

 

[Dark_Logan_]

Resubmitting with a note of explanation is as detailed the best way to resolve

I had the very same issue with my first submission - a character that was 18 having a sexual encounter with an older man.

I assumed a cultural cross over in a skim read or word filter - as by admission the 18yr old was attending school at the time (a perfectly normal scenario)

I aged up (at the minor expense of the story)

I clarified this, and detailed there was no underage content in both the notes section and a separate message.

Feel you frustration but the bottom line is the rules are the rules, it’s frustrating as I’ve had to rewrite a large chunk of my upcoming work as a 17yr old was involved in a relationship with a 20yr old. I’m paranoid over the number 17 while I’m re-editing

But the rules are the rules

In short - explain and you should see yourself published in no time ...good luck with the story

 

[Rustyoznail]

Maybe do a quick search for "year old"/"years old". From previous discussions on this topic, looks like that kind of bounce can be triggered by just about any mention of e.g. "a seventeen-year-old port".

Doesn't mean one has to change the content in that case, just need to resubmit with a note confirming that there's no under-age sexual activity. At that point I assume Laurel reads more closely to check the truth of that.

Yeah, nah. Nothing at all. I won't give the plot away but it's very obvious all characters are way past their teens. The only possible thing is an elderly gentleman referring to a younger man as "my boy" - but that's not in a sexual way.

Odd...

 

[KeithD]

"boy" might set the program off, but it's a good word in so many contexts over than underage that it shouldn't be given up without a struggle. I still use it but am prepared to argue if it's flagged.

 

[lovecraft68]

My first thought is the OP is new and Laurel usually looks at new author's stories longer....10 seconds instead of 5.

Odds are a key word jumped out at her and she doesn't bother to read for the context because that uses up more than ten seconds.

Hearken back to Bronzeages(whatever happened to him?) famous rejection for having a 15 year old bottle of scotch in his story.

There are countless stories here with high school and boy not only in the story but in tag lines and some titles.

The screening here is erratic, the rules wink wink and enforced half assed and based on who you are of what the mood of the day is, its nothing personal, you happened to be the 1 story out of 20 rule breaking stories she decided to make a token example of....without breaking any rules.

This post may sound snarky, but its the real answer not the Lit correct toadie response.

Its a great platform with a huge readership, but with no consistency whatsoever with the rules, and too cheap to hire a staff who can actually take a closer look at a submission.

BTW...budding breasts always gets through and I will always be sure to point that out to people claiming under age stories aren't on here.

That's why I get called a troll.

 

[BillyAndBetty]

..........

 

[BillyAndBetty]

..........

 

[NotWise]

Now the third has been rejected, but with a different message. It is more to the point, but slightly less informative. (FWIW "Thursday Story" is not the title, it was submitted on Monday 03/15/21.) The rejection has tomorrow's date too. I mean I've heard of "pre-approval but never "pre-rejection." (Wait 'till the banks hear about this concept.)

"Moderator has rejected your story
Thursday Story - 18 Mar 2021
03/18/2021"

Call Rodney Copperbottom the Robot is kaputt.

That's to the point but not informative at all. Laurel's been doing this every day for 20+ years, it makes me think that you're doing something wrong even though maybe we don't know what it is.

 

[BelleCanzuto]

That's to the point but not informative at all. Laurel's been doing this every day for 20+ years, it makes me think that you're doing something wrong even though maybe we don't know what it is.

Either that or the algorithm that bounces the stories has gone completely haywire.
Or the author is an alt of a different author that has been repeatedly rejected previously.

 

[BillyAndBetty]

..........

 

[ElectricBlue]

Does that mean it's really "not-rejected" and will also be published? It was resubmitted without change with a note stating it did not have any underage activity.

Does it mean: "Moderator has now approved your previously rejected ... story?"

If you're resubmitting stories it's possible a bot is closing out the first version while the second version goes through. Wait a few days and you'll find out. No one here knows, we can only speculate. Patience, grasshopper .

 

[Blind_Justice]

If you're resubmitting stories it's possible a bot is closing out the first version while the second version goes through. Wait a few days and you'll find out. No one here knows, we can only speculate. Patience, grasshopper .

Laurel needs more vetting editors. Why is that so hard for her to do? More eyes mean a faster approval process for everyone and hopefully a more thorough, less arbitrary one.

 

[RejectReality]

Laurel needs more vetting editors. Why is that so hard for her to do? More eyes mean a faster approval process for everyone and hopefully a more thorough, less arbitrary one.

It also means giving other people access to the backend of the site, which is always a risky proposition, and doubly so on an adult site.