nominations

[WriterDom]

How can you have fair and impartial voting when you have 13,000 members and untold guests with each having in their own mind what represents a 2 vote and what represents a 4 vote? There are no standards nor are they any qualifications to ensure a reader even has the skills to comprehend what he or she is reading. Does someone who votes a 1 do so because he feels your story is the lower 20% of all the stories in that particular category, or did he give it a 1 because he feels that incest stories are appalling and immoral? Is someone justified in giving you a 5 just because you made their dick hard, or their pussy wet even though the story may be poorly written?
Maybe you could have a writer's award given by 10 respected writers in each category, but wouldn't personal bias play a role in any judging? Is not all judging subjective?

 

[Whispersecret]

Crazy, maybe it doesn't matter to you, but don't dismiss me as being childish if I care enough to want to solve the problem.

I worked three fucking months on my story. Writing is a hobby now, but perhaps if I work hard enough it could be something more for me. I've already made a small amount of money off Hostile Takeover, so who knows. I do have a dream of having a novel on a bookshelf in my neighborhood store, published by a big house, and so I take my writing seriously.


Besides, this thread isn't really about the nominations anyway. It's about the Top Lists and the voting involved in that.

 

[Madame Pandora]

Dom??? Huh?

Where in ANY of this has someone said there should be a way to limit the SUBJECTIVE aspect of the vote?

If someone wants to give me a one because they didn't like my story, or were offended, or because their panties are in a wad over something I posted on the board - then I say HAVE AT IT. Go for broke. Vote my ass down. Let your one vote count and may the hanging chads of the world salute you.

However, if some people have the ability to vote multiple 5s or multiple 1s...obviously, this can be something that MIGHT be worth discussing.

Let me repeat that for everyone in the cheap seats:

THIS MIGHT BE WORTH DISCUSSING.

Words are NOT actions. On a board that is ripe with sexual taboo and fantasy...WHY is this so difficult to grock?

Explain to me exactly why ANYONE is intimidated by DISCUSSING things? As far as I can tell, the only person who has a reason to be offended by this thread is Dillinger. He's the only one who's been accused. And whether he is guilty or not, HE still posts his opinion. He's not intimidated, as much as he has been pointed at and maligned. (Go ahead, whisper, I defended Dillinger...have at thee ;-P).

I would still like to get away from the accusations and discuss POSSIBILITIES. I brought up a point way back at the beginning of all this, that I think some people are confused by the voting default being set at 3....there have been MANY good points in this thread. THOSE are what I would like to discuss.

Everyone arguing AGAINST this thread seems to have no other idea to voice except that they don't like this thread. HOW EASILY SOLVED IS THIS? Move along home, little doggies. If I have to ignore the other stuff on the board I don't care to read, please enjoy the same pleasure.

Next?

MP

 

[Whispersecret]

MP said, "Now...if there is ANYWAY to move on without "naming names" I would very much like to find out if there's anyway to prevent possible ways of "vote tampering" from happening in the future. I'm from FL and that topic appeals to me ;-)"

I'm all for that. I won't name names anymore. I'm more interested in prevention.

G-Thing-Guy, if you don't like the "whining," move along and don't read it. It's only one thread, so it should be fairly easy to do.

Fred's comments about hobbies made me think. Don't dismiss hobbies as inconsequential in people's lives. Some of us care more about our hobbies than our real life jobs. The job might be a way to pay the bills, whereas a hobby might be something near and dear to our hearts.

I wish I could answer Roger's question about placebo voting, but I think Laurel's the only one who can.

ALso, I think that telling oneself that the voting doesn't really matter might just be a way to protect oneself against the possibility of failure. We're human and no one likes to feel bad. Haven't we all done that in some area of our lives? Something along the lines of, "Oh, well, I didn't really care about that anyway?"

ANY voting will obviously always be subjective, as WriterDom points out. That's a fact of life. We can't regulate the reasons behind why people vote the way they do, nor should we. However, that's NOT the issue. What we're talking about here is safeguarding the process so that underhanded tampering cannot occur.

Why shouldn't the process be fair? Why is it whining to want that? If any voting process anywhere for anything is unfair, it should be mended, no matter if it's for the President of the U.S. or President of the elementary school Student Council.

I think that Laurel has a vested interest in making sure that the voting is as tamper-free as she can make it. If the authors feel that their work is going to be maligned by being shoved down or even off the Top Lists, then they might not be as eager to post them. Plus, she cares about the site, as do I and many others, and monkeying around with the Top Lists brings down the integrity of her site, which is a reflection on her as its webmistress. If I were her, I'd be getting to the bottom of this problem pronto.

Hey, MP, not gonna tease ya. Now, get up off the floor, you clumsy pizza burner. LOL.


[Edited by whispersecret on 01-19-2001 at 11:31 AM]

 

[WriterDom]

How can this be true, MP

If someone wants to give me a one because they didn't like my story, or were offended, or because their panties are in a wad over something I posted on the board - then I say HAVE AT IT. Go for broke. Vote my ass down. Let your one vote count and may the hanging chads of the world salute you.

However, if some people have the ability to vote multiple 5s or multiple 1s...obviously, this can be something that MIGHT be worth discussing.

`````````````````````````````````````

and just this morning you go on a rant about getting one (1) ?
`````````````````````````````````````````````````

Last night at before I went to bed my latest story had 12 votes and a 4.92 average. The only possible combination was eleven 5s and one 4. Then...this morning, it appeared on the "Top Lists." As I write this I have gotten only ONE other vote. And, my 13th vote is....a 1 (possibly a 2, but I think Larel ALWAYS rounds up). Dropping my average to 4.7.

Dillinger, unless I am much mistaken, lives on the West Coast and wouldn't even be awake at 7:30am EST. So....either an early bird just doesn't like me....or there's more than one person who likes to tinker with top lists. You can blame Dillinger for a little of it, but you can't blame him for every story that falls.

````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Seems that ones are unacceptable to you for any reason, or am I missing the point here?

 

[Laurel]

craZy, sure it is a hobby, but why shouldn't the writers care about their work? A hobby being one of the most intense studies. Some of them have spent many hours working on their stories. You might have a small point, but on the other hand look at some of the other threads on in this forum. Is this matter any less important? I don't think anyone would argue with you that world hunger is more important, but remember this is a web site for erotic writing. By keeping the goal of 'erotic writing' in mind: I think it helps the site quality by keeping feedback to the writers as fair and honest as possible.

If you want to have a discussion about the accuracy of the voting, fine. I've already stated that the voting is a work in progress, that we are aware of the security issues, blah blah blah, but if you all want to keep on saying "the voting's not secure!", well...no shit. Discussing it isn't going to get it done any faster. My programmer has one speed - very fast - but even at that speed he can only do one thing at a time.

If we all want to have a witch hunt and make accusations about something we know nothing about, fine...just don't try to claim your single interest is "making the voting fair". Unlike you all, I know how the voting works (well, I have a vague idea, anyway). I know it is logistically impossible for Dillinger to give himself hundreds of votes within a 24-hour period, or even with a week - unless he's some kind of genius hacker, which I doubt. He may be asking his friends to vote for him, and you may find that distasteful. Fine, that's your right to express that. However, that is not a voting security issue. I can't stop that from happening. As WriterDom said, and as was made evident by the Florida debacle, discerning the voter's intent is next to impossible.

I feel like I've answered all of your legitimate questions to the best of my ability. No matter how secure the voting is, there will always be those conspiracy-minded individuals who will have wild & crazy stories to explain why their favorite story didn't make the Top 20, while these other "poorer" (in their opinion) stories did. On every site that features voting, these type of discussions take place. I do think we should care about our stories and the feedback they receive. I also think that putting this much importance on something as inaccurate and unhelpful as voting numbers is a mistake. I think we'd be better served worrying about ways to increase detailed written feedback from readers than worry this intensely about voting. What does a "3" mean, really? How does it help you as a writer to know Voter 234 gave you a "3"?

Voting numbers are a guide. They are to be taken with a grain of salt.

I don't like the turn this thread has taken. I detest witch hunts, especially ones based on no knowledge whatsoever. First Dillinger, then the next author who's story has the misfortune of getting a bunch of votes in a short amount of time...ah, it must be Fraud! If you have a legitimate concern, email me and I'll have our programmer run the numbers and look for foul play. If you just want to stir shit, then go ahead and post unsubstantiated accusations on the BB. But then don't turn around and try to act as though that's a noble gesture in the interest of Fairness, because it's anything but.

I'm going to the dentist. Can we all try to keep from hanging each other for the next few hours? Thanks.

 

[HSWriter]

Holy Shit Laurel!

*stands there with lower jaw on the floor* that was certainly powerful

 

[Fred H.]

Madam;
you quoted me, so I will respond, and I'm a little surprised at your response. A witch-hunt is no where close to the subject. Maybe we hit a nerve… in a tooth possibly? Some of the best writers on the site posting to this topic and it does pertain directly to the web page so I though it would interest the management. This is not a criticism of the site merely a discussion on the nomination and voting process. Why so sensitive, or should a man, never ask a woman than question?
Would you be happier if no one cared?

 

[Guest]

Laurel, it must be a nightmare for you coming back to all this kind of stuff after your holiday and I know that the barrage of what seems like constant criticism gets you pissed off sometimes but don't get disheartened. None of it's intended as an attack on you or Literotica it's just people arguing about something that's important to them.

Originally posted by Laurel
I think we'd be better served worrying about ways to increase detailed written feedback from readers than worry this intensely about voting. What does a "3" mean, really? How does it help you as a writer to know Voter 234 gave you a "3"?

I agree with you there. It's completely subjective. I don't treat the votes as any form of real feedback about whether I've written a good or bad story. Emails from readers, the Story Feedback board, the Volunteer Editors, other writers and your E (editor) classification give a much more accurate indication of where a story has worked and where it hasn't.

I also think that putting this much importance on something as inaccurate and unhelpful as voting numbers is a mistake.

But the votes are important to writers. Somebody mentioned earlier (I think it was DCL) that the majority of new visitors to the site visit the Top Stories lists first, and perhaps even continue to base their reading habits here on those figures. I know that was the first point of entry for me (along with the 1999 writers' awards) and that for quite a while those were the only stories I read. So, it doesn't matter how accurate the voting is, being somewhere high up on those lists is all important. At the end of the day, if your story isn't fairly high up on a toplist it's probably not going to be read once it moves off the New Stories page by anyone other than friends. If you've spent days, weeks, maybe months working on a story you want as many people as possible to read it - not getting onto a toplist is like a single not getting into the Billboard Charts. It's going to flop.

I don't really think there's a big 1-man conspiracy to rig the votes - not even the mysterious G-Man is capable of that - but I do find it really depressing that one random voter can (whether through malice or because they genuinely thought your story wasn't very good) completely demolish a fairly good vote-score, and a placing at the top of a list, just with 1 vote.

I know how demoralising it was for me yesterday when a single voter knocked me down from a score of 4.56 to 4.27 - the difference between being near the top and being nowhere. I don't mind if 11 people vote for me and they all give me a low score. But if 10 people give me a high score and 1 person completely demolishes it by giving me the lowest score possible then I feel cheated.

My suggestion above (which probably isn't at all practicable) was to try and take the edge off the most extreme votes by removing the "1". I really do think that if somebody dislikes a story they should just not vote on it. When you vote for your President you don't vote for who you don't want in power, you vote for who you do want.

Anyway, Laurel, we're all just letting off steam. Don't worry about it. It's like Scotland. People moan about the rain here all the time but they'd poke the eye of anyone who asked them to leave.

You've made some incredible changes to Literotica over the months and I can't believe how far it's come from the "Golden Days" of 500 errors and Slut_Boy's 'A Brief Description Of Who You Are' (oh, yeah, forgot - that's still looming over us). The work you and Manu have put into the site is really amazing.

Now, there's a big bowl of Sticky Toffee Pudding on its way but you're not allowed to eat it till you get the all-clear from the dentist (hope he doesn't look anything like Laurence Olivier in 'Marathon Man').

 

[Guest]

If we get rid of the one vote wouldn't the two vote become one's by default? Unless we keep the fake one a secret.
We could just make any of the votes a random number generator between one and five.

 

[Madame Pandora]

Seems that ones are unacceptable to you for any reason, or am I missing the point here?

Dom, yes you are. But since Laurel and several others apparently are as well and it's obviously unacceptable to talk about certain things, screw it. Life's too short.

Tell you what, I was new here and I've met a great deal of interesting people, but I've never seen such a ridiculous amount of over-sensitivity in my life. I'm done with this topic, too. I have absolutely no idea how long it will be until I’m done with them all.

*I* have never participated in a witch hunt for what it's worth, and I don't appreciate the conjecture. I simply saw an opportunity for manipulation and I thought it was worth discussing. If there is going to be this need for over-protection of the board...whatever. Like I said, I always operate under the impression that DISCUSSION hurts nothing, but now that there's going to be a Republican back in the White House, I suppose times are changing faster than I thought.

I will tell you straight that the reason I am so interested in this topic is because one of my friends ASKED me if I wanted her to cheat on my behalf and I told her no. She explained how she COULD do it, and told me HOW and I was amazed. It just hadn’t occurred to me before. But, since this is a PORN site, I guess the rules of proper and improper are not necessarily apparent to everyone else. This is ANOTHER topic I would have liked to discuss in this thread, which seems unable to get past all this other rhetoric. Then, I thought, wait…I had said no….and probably a few others have said no, too. But what about those who didn’t say “no.” Was there a way to at least thwart the methods I was aware of. And I have SUGGESTED that it could be a fan or a friend with their own intentions behind this, and NOT necessarily the author. But, fuck it. Just fuck it. I could defend my stance for days, but you don’t win against a brick wall.

I will refrain from mentioning/discussing/suggesting anything that might possibly be wrong or need improvement.

But, for what it's worth, I believe there is a difference between MENTIONING and DISCUSSING something and WHINING about it. If I am standing in a room and I remark "It is hot." I don't consider that whining. If I say "Hmmm...I wonder if the thermostat is broken?" I don't consider that whining. If I even go so far to say "Hmmm...maybe I should check with a repairman…" THAT I do not consider whining. If someone else says “Yeah, it IS hot…what do you think it is?” and we start to talk about it, I don’t consider that whining. I consider that DISCUSSION. And yeah, sometimes discussion heats up and sometimes people get snippy and sometimes people MISTAKE the tone of words. As I say…life’s a tough game, wear a cup so that when you take one in the nuts you can still walk home after.

What I consider whining is to stand in the room and bemoan the fact that it's hot and take NO EFFORT to see the cause. But, that's just me.

If you look back through this thread, I have considered MANY possibilities. I still think the “King of the Hill” theory is very right. The minute someone is #1, someone will want to knock them off. THAT is why I think I got a 1 this morning. Could I be wrong – HELL YES. But that’s the point of OPINION and DISCUSSION. Yes, you very well MIGHT be wrong. If you think it’s whining to consider a possibility, well…that’s your opinion. I wouldn’t try to change it. Enjoy it.

I never said this was a priority that needed to be addressed this minute. I never said "Laurel, everyone's cheating and we need to get on this today." I never asked for someone to hop to it and get us answers. All I've ever said is that I thought it was worthy of discussion. For the simple fact that it was commented that the voting process was a work in progress, I thought perhaps suggestion and example and brainstorming would be worth a toss.

Screw it. It's not worth this crap.

MP

 

[Fred H.]

Originally posted by Roger Simian

I know how demoralising it was for me yesterday when a single voter knocked me down from a score of 4.56 to 4.27 - the difference between being near the top and being nowhere. I don't mind if 11 people vote for me and they all give me a low score. But if 10 people give me a high score and 1 person completely demolishes it by giving me the lowest score possible then I feel cheated.

i'm not writer, but this hit home!
You have showed something that would anger anyone. Just curious as to how many hours you spent on your story? I will make a point of reading your best work this weekend.
One person should not be able to do this to a gifted writer!

 

[Fred H.]

Screw it. It's not worth this crap.

MP

mP please don't get mad. As a writer that has submitted to this site, you're more than entitled to your views and to post those views. I don't think Laurel is mad, just a little defensive and that I can understand that occurring. You have contributed much to the discussion and have a logical opinion and view about the problems. Again, I will try and read your work also this weekend.

 

[Whispersecret]

Roger, MP, Fred, thanks for your thoughtful replies. They quite a way toward calming me down. I'm still pretty pissed off right now, so I'm not going to give a real reply until I can be rational and not emotional.

 

[Lil-Brandi]

I want to be nominated....

If not for my pen"woman"ship, then maybe for "Lit's Most Curious" or "Most Likely to utilize witchcraft in her threads (wink Madame Pandora), or maybe for "Most Likely To Create a Monster"...I don't need a trophy or anything...just a nomination! LOL Ok, now that I added my two cents worth I feel better!!!

 

[KillerMuffin]

I know that the voting results Stalking Tango received disappointed me. The original flurry of email was "WOW!!! What a GREAT story!!!! I loved the way you wrote it!!!" It lingered on page 1 of the top lists for a few days, then suddenly bottomed out. I suspect two reasons are best explained by two emails I received regarding it. Something along the lines of "I can't believe anyone thought this story was good. You are sick, no one, not even a rapist should be raped. Rape is BAD!" The other one went along the lines of: "I liked the story, but damn, the sex just wasn't hot."

So, while the writing might have been good, it just didn't qualify in some peoples minds as a good story due to content.

As far as voting goes, Laurel is doing the best she can with what she can. I imagine she has a life somewhere around there, I don't expect her to chain herself to her chair and solve all possible voter fraud problems right off the bat. No one does.

We may seem to be whining and complaining alot, but there is one very important thing that's happened here on this thread. Those of us authors with concerns that a very legitimate have been able to voice those concerns. Nothing may have been accomplished to solve those concerns, most likely because nothing CAN be done about it, but we feel like we've been heard. The powers that be have acknowledged that we have a greivance. Sometimes, that's enough. Laurel knows, Laurel cares, if she could do something, she would. It's enough for me, most likely it's enough for all of us. The bitching may irritate those of us who think the voting is trivial or who haven't written anything, but it makes us feel validated.

As long as there is voting, there will be voter fraud. The votes here may seem trivial in the scheme of things, but to some of us it's the only barometer of how well we write other than one or two emails. Faulty as it is, it is important to us. Writers put in a great deal of work on every story they write, they put a piece of themselves in it. Some stuff gets no email, so all we know is that 11 people voted for it and they gave it a collective total of 4.67, therefore it's not too bad. Like my poem Burning.

Thank you Laurel, I appreciate all the work you've done.

 

[Laurel]

You all are completely missing the point. Please reread my post.

I have no problem with suggestions and discussions regarding improving any part of the site. Anyone who's been around here long enough knows this. I don't even mind criticisms of Literotica. I didn't take your remarks - or any of the remarks - as criticisms of the site. What I do mind are the insinuations of cheating on the part of other authors. That's what 'tripped my trigger'.

Earlier in this thread, I tried to diffuse the accusations against Dillinger and others, to no avail. When I check back on this thread after a long absence, I read more accusations. These accusations, as I've already stated, are unproductive and unfounded. They don't help to improve the site a whit. They DO slander people without proof. They DID cause people to "vote down" an author as "payback" for something they were accused of without any proof whatsoever. That's unfair, unproductive, and uncool.

I didn't say that the voting is unimportant. I did say that it is not worth getting your panties in a wad over the current system. I said - and I've said it more than once on this very thread - that we are working to improve the voting, and that these improvements won't go into effect until later on. Once those improvements are in place, I would love to hear your comments/criticisms/moanings/etc. In the meantime, I don't think publicly accusing people of voting fraud solves anything, do you?

 

[Lil-Brandi]

Sorry ya'll...

I made light of this thread to try to ease some of the tension. My serious thoughts about this topic are as such. There is never going to be a complete resolution to how a story is going to be voted! Someone may love it, some might hate it. Its simply called different minds, different perceptions, etc. When there are so many differences involved, there can never be a resolvement...ever. I have had numerous stories posted on here...and my total satisfaction for each of them has been the feedback I recieve in email. They have been overwhelming...and all good. That to me shows that my stories are doing what they should be doing...being enjoyed by "those" readers! The second thing I strive for, is not a high vote by 100, or 200, or 300 totally different personalities, but to recieve an "H" or an "E" by someone's opinion I respect more than anyones, and that is Laurel's and Manu's. I just recieved my first "H" on a story and that is much greater an accomplishment than any 5.00 could be!!!

 

[Laurel]

Dom, yes you are. But since Laurel and several others apparently are as well and it's obviously unacceptable to talk about certain things, screw it. Life's too short.

I don't think it's right to publicly accuse an author of 'cheating' without proof, especially when said public accusation results 'payback' 1-votes to the author in question. How would you feel if this happened to you?

I am concerned about voting and voter fraud. I'm putting more time, money, and effort into a solution than anyone here. However, public witch hunts don't solve the problem. They exacerbate it. If you have a legitimate concern regarding a specific author's votes, the right way to handle it would be to email me and I'll have it checked out. What did publicly accusing Dillinger solve? Now he'll never have accurate votes. And why - because he promoted his stories to his friends? And what happens the next time we see a 'bad' story in the Top 20 - do we all run off to give it a 1 on general principle?

I'm not picking on anyone in particular. I bit my tongue for a long time, hoping that someone else would come forward and say, "Hey, maybe it isn't fraud. Maybe we shouldn't accuse someone without proof." WriterDom tried to do that, and he got shunted aside.

Take my opinion for what you will. I'm not God of the Board. If you want to call me an asshole, do it. I won't kick you off, and I won't remove your stories. I'm not like that. But if you all have the right to express your opinion, so do I...and my opinion happens to be that Dillinger got fucked. I would hate to see that happen to any other 'unworthy' author. That's my 2 cents. Now, back to our regularly scheduled program....

 

[Guest]

Thanks Fred.

If we get rid of the one vote wouldn't the two vote become one's by default?

Yeah, I suggested a way to combat that on the last page.

"What would happen if the 1 vote was blocked off so that only 4 types of vote were available (but the computer would still calculate scores as though there were still 5 options). The 4 votes would be equivalent to a 2, 3, 4 and 5."

Oh, shit - I don't even know if that makes any sense. I'm not the brightest bulb on the DChristmas tree as far as numbers go. I thought Pie Squared was just a posh way of cutting your pastries.

Unless we keep the fake one a secret.
We could just make any of the votes a random number generator between one and five.

Hahaha. You mean like the national lottery? I NEVER have the winning ticket. Couldn't we base it on a game of darts, or who's the fastest to the top of the hill?

 

[Laurel]

Thank you Laurel, I appreciate all the work you've done.

I know you do...and I appreciate VERY MUCH all of your contributions to the site - stories, poems, posts, emails...which is why it concerns me when accusations are made that affect an author negatively. This morning, I checked the voting logs from a while back and found a rash of 1's, all for the Jessica series by Dillinger. On a hunch, I checked this thread and found that the rash of 1's corresponded to the posting of the fraud accusations. Reading the thread, I was shocked to find that everyone pretty much accepted the fact that Dillinger was a cheater. NOT ONE PERSON emailed me and said, "Hey, could you check Dillinger's voting IP's or something? This looks fishy." That's what bugged me.

 

[CRaZy]

Written Feedback

Let's put our energy into getting written feedback from the everyday readers. I have started another thread on that. I have also mentioned in the story feedback section that I chat in a "regular Joe" chat room. Very few of the people in there are readers but they read some of the stories here because I nag them to. The stories they like most are often not the ones that the authors prefer. Some of their choices are very surprising to me. Their feedback is very interesting and valuable and I edit my stories till they find them enjoyable (or until the money shot is working as one of them puts it). We need to hear more from the average reader who doesn't email or post on the story feedback discussion boards. This might help us broaden our opinions about what makes a "good" story.

 

[jcgirl]

Not snobby, but the number of posts over a span of time do indicate that the "screen identity" is a valid person. Forgive me -- but I see several ID's with only 1 to 3 posts under their name, for the same story in several categories that look to be one person re-nominating their own work.

Also why is there so little interest from the more active posters on the forums for the stories? With a larger participation the error or corruption in voting would not make a difference.

How did this entire thing turn so ugly? The nominations are here to recognize the writers who took the time, effort and courage to express themselves and put thier name to that expression.

I for one never read the stories here. Ive been here a long time. I came here for the chat room. A friend reccommended it to me. I was here almost a year before I even ventured out of the chatroom. When I did, I found the BB and some very interesting individuals as well. I have just reached over 1000 posts. I would really hate it if someone questioned the validity of my vote because I wasnt here 24 hrs a day racking up my tally. Thats ridiculous. I only peeked at this thread a few days ago because of the fact it had to do with the nominations and since I dont read the stories here there was no reason for me too. I read it and went and read one of Dill's stories. Just had to see what all the hoopla was about, and you know what? I liked it. It was well written and it flowed nicely. Before I was knew it, I was done. Now I didnt vote for it, for the simple reason I have yet to read any others.

This is a PORN site people. We are here to vent. To express our wants, needs and desires. To let our creativity flow thru this tremendously enjoyable outlet. RELAX

 

[WriterDom]

I understand that the reason all the old votes were lost was because of the new system, but that might a good practice to follow every year. Have a Hall of Fame for all categories from 2001, and limit the top list to pieces written only in 2002. An author could continue to hold old stories in the index. Hell, that might even bring Havocman out of retirement

 

[Fred H.]

laurel I would like to point out that never once did I mention names. Never, was I intending to. Your reasons for going off were not expressed or explained well.

to clarify my point about the number of posts and the validity of the name; sure there may not be any connection, but when you see a rash of names that have registered the same day they voted, all in a row, I find that odd.