Solving the dreaded one-bomb problem

[RejectReality]

The thing is, none of us have any idea how readers see or use the Red H, because we're nearly all writers. Readers, on the other hand, are mostly silent. They vote at very low rates; they comment even more rarely; they might occasionally favourite a story. But other than those tiny touches, they might not exist at all.

It's advertising 101, and it works because it's hardwired in the species. I've watched mine during launch umpteen times, and had enough hovering near the bar on day 1 to see it happening in real time. The moment that red H manifests on the new lists, engagement spikes dramatically. The moment it vanishes, engagement falls off a cliff. If it should creep back over the bar and be there when the new story lists update, engagement spikes again. The story hasn't changed. Its position on the lists hasn't changed. As often as not, the score has barely changed. The only thing that's changed is the "Oooo! Shiny!"

Readers don't have to say shit about the way they use the H as a selection criteria. The views scream it for them.

And absolutely everybody but trolls suffer for it.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Readers don't have to say shit about the way they use the H as a selection criteria. The views scream it for them.

And absolutely everybody but trolls suffer for it.

So readers do use it as a key selection criteria.

But what I don't understand is - where is the reader "suffering" displayed? Where is the writer suffering?

My higher scoring stories get more readers than my low scoring stories. I'd expect that - the readers have said they are better stories, using whatever collective criteria they use. So what if there's a threshold? I don't suffer - the stories at the top of my list get read more often, the stories at the bottom, less. So?

It's the readers who score the stories. Are they all wrong when they collectively arrive at a number? They're telling us something about our stories. What one does with that information is entirely up to each writer. I don't see the pain or the problem, to be honest.

 

[Joannexx]

I was thinking of invoking Kumquatqueens Law that every thread devolves into talking Star Wars, but I'm afraid if I do people will start discussing the ratings of each film.

This is beyond tiring, should change the forum to "Author's support group."

Hi, I'm LC68.

Hi LC!

I'm here today because I got one bombed and I want to discuss the unfairness of it and what the site can do about it.

We're here for you man! Damn this site for not changing things in forever and leaving us to keep talking about it!

Of the nine submissions I’ve, done all start by being bombed, then over the next week the scores improve. Strange.

 

[RejectReality]

So readers do use it as a key selection criteria.

But what I don't understand is - where is the reader "suffering" displayed? Where is the writer suffering?

My higher scoring stories get more readers than my low scoring stories. I'd expect that - the readers have said they are better stories, using whatever collective criteria they use. So what if there's a threshold? I don't suffer - the stories at the top of my list get read more often, the stories at the bottom, less. So?

It's the readers who score the stories. Are they all wrong when they collectively arrive at a number? They're telling us something about our stories. What one does with that information is entirely up to each writer. I don't see the pain or the problem, to be honest.

You can't tell me you haven't seen the angst of people watching their Hs vanish. We get a post about it around twice a week. Someone goes down their list, systematically dropping low votes and erasing their Hs one after the other. How many posts have you seen where people are complaining about their scores getting dropped from 4.49 to 4.45? The difference is a pittance, but because readers use that shiny bauble in such a Pavlovian manner, the loss of an H causes tremendous pain to authors — especially new authors. Losing a couple of .01s below that? Irrelevant.

Readers are missing out on buttloads of stories they'd likely enjoy because they're blinded by that bright red sign. Get rid of that, and the title/description move into first place as selection criteria because they're much more prominent than the numerical statistics. Those are far more indicative of the author's style and voice than the score or the red H, and thus far more likely to attract readers who will in turn enjoy the story. As things stand, they're the second thing people look at after pausing for the shiny.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Readers are missing out on buttloads of stories they'd likely enjoy because they're blinded by that bright red sign. Get rid of that, and the title/description move into first place as selection criteria because they're much more prominent than the numerical statistics. Those are far more indicative of the author's style and voice than the score or the red H, and thus far more likely to attract readers who will in turn enjoy the story. As things stand, they're the second thing people look at after pausing for the shiny.

That's sorta kinda saying that readers are something like idiot lemmings who respond only to a bright light. I actually give them more credit than that.

I will always contend that the collective score, from those that do bother scoring, is a sign of overall merit from those people. Sure, we have no idea what criteria they are using, but they're all using something as evidenced by the range in the scores. If one hundred or one thousand readers say, collectively, that this story overall, ranks higher than that one over there, then are they all wrong? I don't think so. That's why people rank things, and if lots of people are saying the same thing, I for one, pay attention.

 

[SimonDoom]

That's sorta kinda saying that readers are something like idiot lemmings who respond only to a bright light. I actually give them more credit than that.

But isn't this having it both ways? Either the red H is a valuable shiny bauble, which attracts readers despite providing no more real information than the score itself, or it has no value.

I think RR's analysis is pretty much dead-on. There's an absolutely enormous amount of angst on display in this forum on a weekly basis because of the concern about scores, how stories are scored, why they're getting "bombed," etc. That angst is magnified by the existence of the red H, because it superimposes an "in or out" system over the scoring system.

I don't disagree with you about scores, but that's an entirely separate matter. I strongly support preserving the scoring system for a host of reasons. I don't see the red H adding anything of real value to it. To those who say the red H "makes one feel accepted," well, it doesn't do that to those who don't get them. Somebody with a 4.49 is out, and somebody with a 4.51 is in. In terms of conferring psychic or emotional benefits to authors, it's a wash, isn't it? For every reader who feels good about being in, there are even more who feel bad about being out.

The only real reason to keep it, IMO, is that at this point it may be such an accepted institution among readers that they would be peeved if it was taken away, and that might have some incremental negative impact on traffic. I have no idea if it would, but if Laurel and Manu are concerned that it might that's sufficient reason to keep it. But if that's not the case, I see no value in it.

 

[oneagainst]

It's not really about the scoring system per se, but being valued and accepted.
Snip....
One thing these threads illustrate is how much people's values, perceptions and motivations vary from one another.

Nearly a hundred stories later, almost all have the red H, and yes, it does matter... the H=readers' views. But you're right. Being valued is more important. The train has left the station. You have bought a ticket. If you are there fifteen ch later talking about how the main character rocked your world then I will take that over the H ratings. We are here to move the dial. We are not here for some dumb popularity poll.

 

[lovecraft68]

But isn't this having it both ways? Either the red H is a valuable shiny bauble, which attracts readers despite providing no more real information than the score itself, or it has no value.

I think RR's analysis is pretty much dead-on. There's an absolutely enormous amount of angst on display in this forum on a weekly basis because of the concern about scores, how stories are scored, why they're getting "bombed," etc. That angst is magnified by the existence of the red H, because it superimposes an "in or out" system over the scoring system.

I don't disagree with you about scores, but that's an entirely separate matter. I strongly support preserving the scoring system for a host of reasons. I don't see the red H adding anything of real value to it. To those who say the red H "makes one feel accepted," well, it doesn't do that to those who don't get them. Somebody with a 4.49 is out, and somebody with a 4.51 is in. In terms of conferring psychic or emotional benefits to authors, it's a wash, isn't it? For every reader who feels good about being in, there are even more who feel bad about being out.

The only real reason to keep it, IMO, is that at this point it may be such an accepted institution among readers that they would be peeved if it was taken away, and that might have some incremental negative impact on traffic. I have no idea if it would, but if Laurel and Manu are concerned that it might that's sufficient reason to keep it. But if that's not the case, I see no value in it.

The Red H issue and how some people want it gone is the lit version of the Honor roll, something to reward student's who work hard to get exceptional grades. Well, some schools in this pathetic weak ass society are dropping that because it makes other kids feel bad. As if those kids don't have the same chance to attain the same thing. Despite what the terminally needy like to thing, we're not all created equal.

We have this here, why should someone have something I don't? Wahhh, the injustice! I have two stories here that make no sense and have shit grammar, but I deserve all the accolades of those people with a lot of high effort well written stories!

People act as if the H is a holy grail, that its so hard to get. I wonder if one of the number whizzes here could come up with what the percentage of stories here are with H as opposed to no H. Of course they will have to exclude LW to get the correct number because no other category is that ridiculous when it comes to the warring factions.

Now, on the other hand, maybe we have to remove the endless 100 chapter stories that have 95 H's because everything is an H as the 25 people still reading it give every chapter a 5.

But it doesn't seem that hard. I have an H in every category I've tried, including one in LW(years ago, it would get eaten alive now) and I don't consider myself a great writer, or think that I have some magic formula to get a decent score.

But as much as everyone can go around and around, I think you nailed it as far as it being an institution, and readers may be like WTF.
It would also be a cause of angst for people who have them and lost them to appease the whiners. So the sites option is keeping it as its always been or make major changes which could cost them authors/readers.

This forum is famous for having the zero tolerance policy of if you don't like it leave, but that doesn't seem to extend to the incessant bitching about the system which is obviously not going to change, and really doesn't need to. What needs to change is people's perspectives on what it means(not as much as its made out to) and priorities as in the story comes first, not the score. Like I said about getting that one great comment and someone else said about someone still along for the ride deep into a story, those are the wins. Not the score.

Vanity and jealousy are two ugly aspects of base human nature.

 

[Voboy]

Red Hs are unlikely to be going away.

The 5-star voting system is unlikely to be going away.

"One-bombers" are unlikely to be going away.

With those statements accepted, what "reforms" do people think are actually likely? The proposed "solutions" so many people make on so many of these threads are way, way beyond anything Laurel and Manu are ever likely to do. Meaning, it's a waste of time discussing them.

The one reform I think would be beneficial is moving the red H from 4.5 down to 4, meaning there'd be two de-facto "upvotes" instead of just one. But I'm not foolish enough to believe anyone will ever actually listen to me about that. I don't run the site. So? I learn the rules and expectations and I do my best to live and write within them. That makes more sense to me than continuing to bash my head against a wall by posting threads like this.

 

[alohadave]

Readers are missing out on buttloads of stories they'd likely enjoy because they're blinded by that bright red sign.

There are a lot of stories and you can't read them all. Everyone has ways to filter out what they are going to read.

The H, W, and E badges are one way of doing that. Scores are another. Familiarity with the author, category, keyword, word count. There are numerous criteria people use.

I'm sure that I may miss some good stories, but reading erotica is but a portion of my free time, so I use the tools I have to select what to read.

As a writer, I have a story that teeters at 4.5. It's nice when it gets a bump to hav the H, but I don't obsess over it.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I am seriously considering to write a fantasy series featuring Laurel and Manu. It would be a huge hit, I believe.

 

[RejectReality]

Red Hs are unlikely to be going away.

The 5-star voting system is unlikely to be going away.

"One-bombers" are unlikely to be going away.

With those statements accepted, what "reforms" do people think are actually likely? The proposed "solutions" so many people make on so many of these threads are way, way beyond anything Laurel and Manu are ever likely to do. Meaning, it's a waste of time discussing them.

The one reform I think would be beneficial is moving the red H from 4.5 down to 4, meaning there'd be two de-facto "upvotes" instead of just one. But I'm not foolish enough to believe anyone will ever actually listen to me about that. I don't run the site. So? I learn the rules and expectations and I do my best to live and write within them. That makes more sense to me than continuing to bash my head against a wall by posting threads like this.

Sure, why not. The overwhelming majority of submissions score over 4.0. That means almost every story will have an H, and that will make them so common that they become invisible in short order. It serves the same function as removing them so far as them being a selection criteria is concerned.

 

[Voboy]

Sure, why not. The overwhelming majority of submissions score over 4.0. That means almost every story will have an H, and that will make them so common that they become invisible in short order. It serves the same function as removing them so far as them being a selection criteria is concerned.

I think scores would self-correct over time as the "new normal" asserted itself. Might take a couple years, though. I was thinking mostly in terms of the fact that, as far as Red Hs are concerned, there is just one vote that "helps." Two (a 4 and a 5) would allow more nuance, in theory, while not "penalizing" writers. But sure. You're not wrong.

Point being, there's no one solution that fixes every problem. If I were L&M, I probably wouldn't budge either. There's nothing wrong with setting a standard (which will be admittedly arbitrary), sticking to it, and expecting everyone to work within it.

The problem are the sweeps, because they are not transparent. But? Those are an established practice now too, and writers have learned to work within them.

 

[lovecraft68]

There are a lot of stories and you can't read them all. Everyone has ways to filter out what they are going to read.

The H, W, and E badges are one way of doing that. Scores are another. Familiarity with the author, category, keyword, word count. There are numerous criteria people use.

I'm sure that I may miss some good stories, but reading erotica is but a portion of my free time, so I use the tools I have to select what to read.

As a writer, I have a story that teeters at 4.5. It's nice when it gets a bump to hav the H, but I don't obsess over it.

I think the part I put in bold is a big portion of what they choose to read. This is why they fav authors and stories and of course some people come here wanting to only read the category they're in the mood for at the time.

 

[lovecraft68]

What people who bitch about the H or W and E don't understand is they can also be a nice shiny bullseye to trolls and bombers. They're not going to bomb a 4.2 story but they see that H and the other letters and they pull the trigger on the petty gun.

Looking at the angst some people have on the forum on this topic makes it easy to see how widespread it could be among readers.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

The problem are the sweeps, because they are not transparent. But? Those are an established practice now too, and writers have learned to work within them.

Sweeps are a mediocre tool at best. They have removed a 1* for me a couple of times, but they have removed dozens of 5* for some reason. I am not responsible for those 5* and I am reasonably sure I don't have any fired up fan who would do that for me, so I don't understand really why. Yet, at the same time, none of the Hall of Fame sniping 1* were removed. As voting is essentially anonymous, I can assume the voting was done from a legit account so swipes don't really touch those, which is obvious BS. Someone can argue 1* is a legit vote, and it probably is sometimes, but I am certain a story that kept 4.9+ score for a couple of months with a good number of votes isn't deserving of a sudden 1*, then another after a couple of days and then another after a few weeks. Almost no other voting was done on that story in that period. Also worth noting is that no other story of mine was touched, not even in that same series, as they weren't in the Hall of Fame, just the one that took a high spot in all time Hall of Fame.
Once again, I am not that bothered with all of it, as I have made my conclusions about validity of scores long ago, I am just pointing out yet another arbitrary tool that is supposed to help, but doesn't really work well.

Edit: Yeah it happened to another Hall of Fame story of mine first, but at the time I didn't pay so much attention, yet now when I started paying more attention, I am recognizing the pattern

 

[Voboy]

Edit: Yeah it happened to another Hall of Fame story of mine first, but at the time I didn't pay so much attention, yet now when I started paying more attention, I am recognizing the pattern

Yep. Same thing's happened to me. Wahh.

When it has, and I've cared, I've just written another story that's been good enough to rise back to the top on its merits, too.

That's what I mean by "writers have learned to work within them." You'll note I did say that sweeps are problematic.

 

[gunhilltrain]

I haven't attempted to read all of the comments and complaints here but, yes, I feel your pain. I just screwed up a story by putting it in the wrong category by accident, and it will probably be several days before the "edited/corrected" version is posted. But it is worth seeing what a really big failure is like compared to our efforts here. "Success walks hand in hand with failure along Hollywood Boulevard."

 

[RejectReality]

I think scores would self-correct over time as the "new normal" asserted itself. Might take a couple years, though. I was thinking mostly in terms of the fact that, as far as Red Hs are concerned, there is just one vote that "helps." Two (a 4 and a 5) would allow more nuance, in theory, while not "penalizing" writers. But sure. You're not wrong.

Point being, there's no one solution that fixes every problem. If I were L&M, I probably wouldn't budge either. There's nothing wrong with setting a standard (which will be admittedly arbitrary), sticking to it, and expecting everyone to work within it.

The problem are the sweeps, because they are not transparent. But? Those are an established practice now too, and writers have learned to work within them.

Readers vote emotionally, and almost always on the extreme edges of the scale. Nothing you change is going to affect that. Scores would keep chugging along right where they are from the average reader.

The only question is how trolls and cheerleaders would react. I suspect the numerical value of the score or presence of an H is largely irrelevant to cheerleaders. They would likely keep chugging right along doing what they've been doing. Trolls are the true question. Would they step up their efforts to knock stories down that additional .50 to kill the H? Seems like a bridge too far. At the very least, they'd be leaving additional traces that were likely to get all those malicious votes swept if they knuckled down and tried to trim that additional .50.

Same question if you remove the H, and same probability that they overdo it without that artificial stopping point.

( Toplist manipulation excluded, because it has its own numerical target for trolls and cheerleaders to aim at )

 

[SimonDoom]

With those statements accepted, what "reforms" do people think are actually likely? The proposed "solutions" so many people make on so many of these threads are way, way beyond anything Laurel and Manu are ever likely to do. Meaning, it's a waste of time discussing them.

The one reform I think would be beneficial is moving the red H from 4.5 down to 4, meaning there'd be two de-facto "upvotes" instead of just one.

I agree with what you said about what's realistic to expect.

The problem with moving the red H threshold down to 4 is that it then becomes a joke. There's nothing "hot" about it. In most categories two-thirds or more of the stories would have a red H. That's absurd on its face.

My compromise suggestion would be to allow voting in increments of .5. Then you could give a story a 4.5 OR a 5. You could give a story a score that's less than perfect without imperiling the author's ability to retain the red H. This is something I, as a reader, would actively take advantage of, and it would cause me to cast more votes. As it stands now, there are stories I think are good enough or close to it that I don't want to deprive the author of their red H, but I don't feel they quite deserve a perfect score of 5. If the site moved to the system I propose, nothing basic would change: not the red H, not the 5-point system. But it would become more finely grained and it might encourage more voting and more accurate voting and less gamesmanship. I don't think it would be that difficult to implement, and it wouldn't require going back and completely changing the scoring of existing stories. It MIGHT change the pattern of voting and scoring, making post-change story scores incommensurate with pre-change story scores. The site may well decide it's not worth it if they think that's the case.

This strikes me as a fairly modest change, but I'm not holding my breath that it will happen, and it doesn't bother me if it doesn't.

 

[SimonDoom]

I'll just add this, although I've said it before. I have been following my story statistics closely for almost six years. I do NOT see the relationship between the story score, or red H, and the number of views that the story gets, that others seem to. I'm very doubtful of this relationship, long term. I tend to think authors greatly exaggerate the importance of having a high score to continue to get attention from readers. It's important while the story is on a new story list. It matters if your score is so high that you are near the top of a category toplist. But other than that, I'm not sure it matters that much. With my own 54 stories, I see very little long-term relationship between the score and the amount of attention the stories get. So my advice, like that of others, is to stop focusing on the score and just focus on writing as well as you can and often enough that your attention is focused forward not backward.

 

[alohadave]

We could go the opposite and just have upvote and downvote. Up if you like it, down if you don't.

Stories are ranked by the vote count.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Your views could be reconciled by adding another letter, let's say an orange S - as sexy at let's say 4.0 rating. So stories over 4 are orange sexy and over 4.5 red hot. I mean, ratings would remain as crap as they are, but it might sway a certain percentage of viewers to switch their thresholds to 4.0 instead of 4.5, resulting in more story views at least. We are witnesses that anything with a letter in color attracts readers

 

[lovecraft68]

We could go the opposite and just have upvote and downvote. Up if you like it, down if you don't.

Stories are ranked by the vote count.

So like You Tube, likes and dislikes.
Then we get threads about people giving unfair dislikes "Thumbs down bombing."
Ranked by vote count leads to accusations of cheerleading.

There is no solution because....

People suck.

 

[alohadave]

So like You Tube, likes and dislikes.
Then we get threads about people giving unfair dislikes "Thumbs down bombing."
Ranked by vote count leads to accusations of cheerleading.

There is no solution because....

People suck.

That's the point. No solution fixes human nature.