One bombed

[WhenPreNut]

Thanks for all the welcomes
and the discussion's nuances
I'd already picked up the 'not how' bit.

I write what floats my boat. Having just arrived I didn't realise there was a topic to discuss until my 1/1 and 5/4 became 4/5. That was a surprise, then a disappointment and now it's just shit happens maybe because their are damaged people everywhere (and or -&|- we are all damaged at some times in the eyes of others)

I agree all the above that a 1* isn't automatically without integrity. Some of my reading of the forum raise my awareness that all 5* aren't necessarily legit either.

If I read anything I'd rate 3 or less I leave it unvoted. And I'm never going to enter the contests. Jury is out on whether I'll stick around &| leave voting enabled.

Thnx all

 

[ElectricBlue]

From what I’ve read other platforms run automated checks to spot anomalous ratings and filter them out. That kind of process would benefit everyone here.

This site runs regular sweeps to remove anomalous votes, three or four times during Contests. All stories benefit from the process. We all have to wait.

1-bomber fuckwits damage the whole culture. Letting them stand unfiltered is quietly demoralising.

Yes it is, but the site does what it can, using the method it uses. It's not ideal, but significantly better than it was - it was far worse when I joined Lit, believe me.

 

[ElectricBlue]

How is the motivation or intent reliably determined?

Constant repeat behaviour, and a very short time period before the first low votes are probably the best clue. The fuckers hide behind rocks immediately outside the starting gate, I reckon. With a little bit of thought, other indicators become obvious.

 

[IWroteThis]

If I read anything I'd rate 3 or less I leave it unvoted.

People like you are why the ratings are meaningless, which makes it even funnier how much you buy into the con of the falsely inflated ratings.

 

[SmilingLez]

I wish I had the nerve to leave a one bomb. There are many times I thought about it, but chose not to only because of the time and effort the author put into writing the story.

I am not talking about the content of the story, but how it is written. I was halfway into a story, and the author wrote - "As time went on he got boulder." It pissed me off, and I stopped reading the story. I don't know if the author decided not to use the correct word - bolder - in order to avoid being flagged for AI. I don't believe it was an 'English is not my native language' error either.

 

[IWroteThis]

I wish I had the nerve to leave a one bomb. There are many times I thought about it, but chose not to only because of the time and effort the author put into writing the story.

I lot of stories I would have left a 1* rating on were submitted with comments and ratings disabled. Somehow, I don't think it was a coincidence…

 

[MillieDynamite]

Most people do not take spelling, grammar, or, at times, how well the story is written. Often, they vote on how much they like or hate the subject matter.

 

[ElectricBlue]

If I read anything I'd rate 3 or less I leave it unvoted. And I'm never going to enter the contests. Jury is out on whether I'll stick around &| leave voting enabled.

You're saying you only ever score with a 3, no other score ever given?

 

[IWroteThis]

Most people do not take spelling, grammar, or, at times, how well the story is written. Often, they vote on how much they like or hate the subject matter.

Of course ratings are going to reflect reader enjoyment. This is an entertainment web site, not an online English Lit class. I really don't understand why such a simple concept is beyond the grasp of so many people on this site.

You're saying you only ever score with a 3, no other score ever given?

No, their wording indicates they only give out 4* and 5* ratings, never 1*, 2*, or 3*.

 

[ElectricBlue]

No, their wording indicates they only give out 4* and 5* ratings, never 1*, 2*, or 3*.

You're right, I missed that nuance. That's fair enough though, if they do that consistently. That's a reader applying their own criteria to scoring, which is as valid as anyone else's.

 

[WhenPreNut]

People like you are why the ratings are meaningless, which makes it even funnier how much you buy into the con of the falsely inflated ratings.

That's an interesting perspective.

My motivation is that if it isn't to my taste that represent a valid right of two people to have different opinions and preferences. That - I think - represents respecting others.

You've made expressed another perspective - fair enough. Would you care to expand on it? Currently it *feels to me* like a bit of a swipe at the world.

I've not understood "how you buy into falsely inflated". I asked about what looks like, as someone said; "destructive toddler" behaviour. Could you unpack yr comment for me?

 

[WhenPreNut]

You're saying you only ever score with a 3, no other score ever given?

No.
I'm saying if they story line isn't my thing I say to my self "fair enough, move on". If the standard of English is great expressively then I'd go higher than if it's not.

For grammer and spelling they are just conventions, conventions that different by artist style, culture, age and a lot more.

If someone offers their effort for free seems mean to attack their self esteem with a 1 or 2 and a 3 seems rather like a non-expression.

Just my 3¢ worth
Edited (twice !) to repair the autocorrect spell chucker that is really an auto scramble!

 

[SmilingLez]

Of course ratings are going to reflect reader enjoyment. This is an entertainment web site, not an online English Lit class. I really don't understand why such a simple concept is beyond the grasp of so many people on this site.

Some people such as myself enjoy a well-written story too.

 

[IWroteThis]

That's an interesting perspective.

My motivation is that if it isn't to my taste that represent a valid right of two people to have different opinions and preferences. That - I think - represents respecting others.

You've made expressed another perspective - fair enough. Would you care to expand on it? Currently it *feels to me* like a bit of a swipe at the world.

I've not understood "how you buy into falsely inflated". I asked about what looks like, as someone said; "destructive toddler" behaviour. Could you unpack yr comment for me?

There are primarily two ways that ratings can be useful. One, they can provide feedback to the writer to let them know how well the audience they chose liked their story. If only those who liked it give feedback, the writer gets a falsely inflated impression of their success. Perhaps you've heard the phrase "Don't fix what ain't broke." Well, inaccurate feedback stops you from fixing what is broken, because you don't know that it's broken.

The second use is to inform other readers. Used properly, ratings reflect how well the combination of title, description, and category matches up with what the people clicking on that particular combination were looking for. Thus, the next person who is tempted by the combination can look at the rating and anticipate how likely it is they'll actually like the story. A falsely high rating can trick more people into clicking and being disappointed. I know some writers think views is the ultimate goal, but I disagree.

Now, of course, different people have different opinions. But, the average of honest ratings over time accounts for that. The average of dishonest ratings does not. Ratings will never be an objective measure, but we can strive to make them a useful subjective measure.

Finally, as you don't seem to understand how ratings are inflated, let me give you a simple example. Let's say that you and one other person read a story. They loved it. You hated it. In an honest world, they'd give it a 5, you'd give it a 1, so it would end up with a 3* average. Now, in this world where you abstain from voting below 4*, they give it 5, you give it nothing, and it ends up with a 5* average.

 

[MillieDynamite]

In what way does what I said mean I don't understand it? Of course, I understand it. It was a general observation about that site and those who vote, nothing more, nothing less. So why the condescending hate post? It is not beyond me, and I don't like you insinuating it is.

Of course ratings are going to reflect reader enjoyment. This is an entertainment web site, not an online English Lit class. I really don't understand why such a simple concept is beyond the grasp of so many people on this site.



No, their wording indicates they only give out 4* and 5* ratings, never 1*, 2*, or 3*.

 

[IWroteThis]

Some people such as myself enjoy a well-written story too.

So do I, but I can tolerate bad writing of a good story much more than good writing of a bad story.

In what way does what I said mean I don't understand it? Of course, I understand it. It was a general observation about that site and those who vote, nothing more, nothing less. So why the condescending hate post? It is not beyond me, and I don't like you insinuating it is.

Perhaps I misunderstood the extent of your statement, but I read it as you criticizing those who rate based on content rather than strictly technical merits. If so, my apologies.

 

[MillieDynamite]

@IWroteThis, I'm also not saying people don't have a right to vote for whatever they want to for whatever reason they want to. I'm saying that if you write anything outside some people's narrow view, you'll get downvotes.

 

[SmilingLez]

So do I, but I can tolerate bad writing of a good story much more than good writing of a bad story.

That's where you and I differ. I cannot tolerate a good story riddled with errors. To me that shows purposeful callousness. An author who doesn't give a damn about their readers.

Edit - I cannot tolerate a "bad story" (subjective) either, regardless of how well it is written

 

[metropolinational]

I just wish they would give us all the data rather than a single number.

A score of 3.4 with 100 votes can mean two entirely different things:
Great story: 60 5s and 40 1s.
Crap story: 10 5s, 30 4s, 50 3s, 10 2s.

 

[ElectricBlue]

No.
I'm saying if they story line isn't my thing I say to my self "fair enough, move on". If the standard of English is great expressively then I'd go higher than if it's not.

For grammer and spelling they are just conventions, conventions that different by artist style, culture, age and a lot more.

If someone offers their effort for free seems mean to attack their self esteem with a 1 or 2 and a 3 seems rather like a non-expression.

Just my 3¢ worth
Edited (twice !) to repair the autocorrect spell chucker that is really an auto scramble!

Got it, thanks. I'd mis-read your comment.

 

[ElectricBlue]

That's where you and I differ. I cannot tolerate a good story riddled with errors. To me that shows purposeful callousness. An author who doesn't give a damn about their readers.

That's a bit unfair. A story riddled with errors might mean a writer doesn't have the skills to do their otherwise promising story justice, but it doesn't necessarily correlate to them not giving a fuck.

I attempted to edit a story by a one-off writer, the story having something powerful about it, despite multiple technical issues. It proved impossible to edit without turning it into something it wasn't, but it still put its hooks in.

 

[designatedvictim]

Sounds like you have a devoted hater!

That definitely sucks, but their one bad vote will get carried away in the breeze like a fart at the beach

Yeah, everyone has different experiences, here.

So far as I know, I have no dedicated Trolls.

Having said that, my most recent went up three weeks ago and its first vote was a 1* within roughly 90 minutes of appearing.

I had three 1* in the the first 25 votes. If my story sucked that badly, it would never have clawed its way out of the vote-gutter, but it has.

If 12% of the readers - and I use that term loosely, here - consistently disliked my stuff that much, the rating would still be in the gutter.

(There were 5 1* 'Hate It' and one 2* 'Dislike It' votes in the first 100 votes, so the ratio dropped significantly over time. To add insult to injury, I lost a vote to a sweep somewhere along the line - it had to be a 5*, as the overall score dropped.)

Having griped about that, I can't believe this was anything directed at me, personally, but indicates more likely a category-specific, general '1*-vote the new story and let God sort it out.'

 

[SmilingLez]

That's a bit unfair. A story riddled with errors might mean a writer doesn't have the skills to do their otherwise promising story justice, but it doesn't necessarily correlate to them not giving a fuck.

I attempted to edit a story by a one-off writer, the story having something powerful about it, despite multiple technical issues. It proved impossible to edit without turning it into something it wasn't, but it still put its hooks in.

IMHO, you are making excuses for laziness. As I've said, I've never one bombed a story for any reason and that includes a story riddled with fixable errors. However, I do have the choice to continue reading. If an author truly cares about their audience, they would not post a story riddled with errors that could easily be fixed. YMMV

If the author doesn't want to use an online dictionary, thesaurus, and/or grammar tool, they can always use a hard copy dictionary/thesaurus and the elements of style.

 

[ElectricBlue]

IMHO, you are making excuses for laziness.

In this instance, cutting the writer some slack. The raw story impressed me enough to offer to do an edit, which is an exceptionally rare thing for me to do.

Her story was powerful because of its rawness.

As I've said, I've never one bombed a story for any reason and that includes a story riddled with fixable errors. However, I do have the choice to continue reading. If an author truly cares about their audience, they would not post a story riddled with errors that could easily be fixed. YMMV

Of course you have that choice, but that doesn't mean you get to judge my criteria for giving someone leeway.

If the author doesn't want to use an online dictionary, thesaurus, and/or grammar tool, they can always use a hard copy dictionary/thesaurus and the elements of style.

Maybe she was living on the street, trying to get by. Maybe she had drug issues, mental illness issues, maybe she wasn't as fortunate as you, I don't know, but her writing was that of a young woman with a heart and a dark place within it.

 

[SmilingLez]

In this instance, cutting the writer some slack. The raw story impressed me enough to offer to do an edit, which is an exceptionally rare thing for me to do.

Her story was powerful because of its rawness.

Of course you have that choice, but that doesn't mean you get to judge my criteria for giving someone leeway.

Maybe she was living on the street, trying to get by. Maybe she had drug issues, mental illness issues, maybe she wasn't as fortunate as you, I don't know, but her writing was that of a young woman with a heart and a dark place within it.

I am not judging your choice. You are judging mine! If you want to live in your fairy tale world of perhaps she's homeless, perhaps there are other conditions, oh the story was good so I offered my help because I'm such a good lil meat suit, then so be it. Don't you dare knock down me in order to build yourself up

Edit - all I said is if I read a story that becomes riddled with errors, I will stop reading it. I won't one bomb. I won't leave a nasty comment. I will just stop reading it and move to the next story that interests me.