story rejection

[fannyrat]

I have just received notice that a story of mine has been rejected.

This would not surprise me much except the fact that this story of mine has been on the Literotica site for 5 years!!!!

Any thoughts?

 

[lovecraft68]

Does it say why the story has been rejected now; for what reason?

Someone may have reported the story. If you disagree with the reason for rejection, you may send a PM to Laurel to complain. But know that things have changed; topics that were acceptable a couple of years ago may now be considered an issue. And on the other hand, quite often stories with 'forbidden' content do slip through, but that doesn't mean they follow the rules.

The rules have been the same since I've been here, nothing has changed, including the half ass enforcing of them.

The story could get republished, but I think they lose all the votes, comments, etc it gained over the last five years so personally if it were me I wouldn't bother.

 

[RejectReality]

The rules have been the same since I've been here, nothing has changed, including the half ass enforcing of them.

The story could get republished, but I think they lose all the votes, comments, etc it gained over the last five years so personally if it were me I wouldn't bother.

No, if you resubmit contesting the rejection, or edit to remove whatever problem content prompted the rejection, it's the same as editing any other story. It goes back up with everything intact.

 

[KeithD]

I have just received notice that a story of mine has been rejected.

This would not surprise me much except the fact that this story of mine has been on the Literotica site for 5 years!!!!

Any thoughts?

Don't think you give enough information for anyone other than Laurel to have thoughts about it. Yes, a story can be pulled after five years if someone flags it for Laurel to review against standards.

 

[jaF0]

Any thoughts?

Not unless you tell us what the story is about and what the notice said.

 

[jaF0]

Scan of OP's submissions finds a lot of non-con and abuse.

 

[jaF0]

Part 2 of the war story?

 

[ElectricBlue]

I have just received notice that a story of mine has been rejected.

This would not surprise me much except the fact that this story of mine has been on the Literotica site for 5 years!!!!

Any thoughts?

Someone's reported it, and the rejection notice will clue you in as to why.

You've got three choices:

1. address the issues being flagged as if it was a new story being submitted now, under today's application of the content policies, and resubmit;

2. argue why it should remain as is (which more than likely won't fly, because it's already been reported); or

3. do nothing, it which case it stays down forever (and coming here's been a waste of time).

 

[gunhilltrain]

Scan of OP's submissions finds a lot of non-con and abuse.

Most of it looks like very dark themes, but it's been there for a while. He hasn't added anything in over a year, and much of it is quite a bit older than that. He's popular, however; he's got 679 followers with only thirty-two submissions and many red H's.

I wonder why one story was chosen out of the whole lot.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Most of it looks like very dark themes, but it's been there for a while. He hasn't added anything in over a year, and much of it is quite a bit older than that.

I wonder why one story was chosen out of the whole lot.

Someone going through a back catalogue - although if it's five years old, and someone is reading non-con, there's some sort of a hierarchy of acceptable non-con for that reader, which I find a bit odd.

 

[gunhilltrain]

Part 2 of the war story?

Part 1 is missing. Maybe the Nazis and the Holocaust were a bit too much. Yet the second half survived.

 

[jaF0]

Yeah OK, part 1.

 

[Auden James]

Probably someone reported your story because she was offended by it, and the site administrator has been rather willing to reduce offensive—or reported as such—content on here in the last few years.

 

[gunhilltrain]

Probably someone reported your story because she was offended by it, and the site administrator has been rather willing to reduce offensive—or reported as such—content on here in the last few years.

Part 2 is pretty rough in itself. Go read it if one wants to. Part of it takes place in Berlin right before the end of the war. Some of it involves a German woman who is trying to hide the fact that she is Jewish. Anyway, I don't find anything about the supposedly self-loathing character that is plausible.

 

[Bramblethorn]

The rules have been the same since I've been here, nothing has changed, including the half ass enforcing of them.

I think there have been some changes, but since the FAQs haven't been updated the only way people find out about them is by getting stories rejected. If you're not writing in the affected areas, it's hard to tell just what the lines are.

Around the 2016 election season Laurel started rejecting "political" stories (IDK exactly where that line is drawn) and a friend had a story about the withdrawal from Afghanistan rejected for that reason quite recently, although Laurel let it through on appeal.

A year or two back when people were discussing what was and wasn't allowed on Lit, I checked the "vore" tag and found a bunch of stories. When I checked the same tag about a month ago, there was nothing. I'm not sure whether those stories have been taken down or just the tag, but either way it looks like a quiet change to what's permitted here.

I think the "no non-con in Celeb/Fanfic" and "no Disney/Harry Potter/Simpsons characters" rules were introduced some time after I started, but it's hard to be sure.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

Someone's reported it, and the rejection notice will clue you in as to why.

You've got three choices:

1. address the issues being flagged as if it was a new story being submitted now, under today's application of the content policies, and resubmit;

2. argue why it should remain as is (which more than likely won't fly, because it's already been reported); or

3. do nothing, it which case it stays down forever (and coming here's been a waste of time).

Option 2 works, I think.

Simplistic example. The story was accepted initially, meaning it met site standards. Then somebody reported is for not meeting site standards. Let's say that they complainant said, "It includes underage sex!" If you resubmit the story and include a note to Laurel in the appropriate box showing that the characters are all over 18, with reasons, then it should go back up with no problems.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Option 2 works, I think.

Simplistic example. The story was accepted initially, meaning it met site standards. Then somebody reported is for not meeting site standards. Let's say that they complainant said, "It includes underage sex!" If you resubmit the story and include a note to Laurel in the appropriate box showing that the characters are all over 18, with reasons, then it should go back up with no problems.

Except Laurel's already done a quick review and taken it down, and from what the others are saying, it sounds like the content might be extreme in terms of her criteria in 2021 vs 2016.

At this point though, it up to the OP to do something.

 

[jaF0]

If it is the war story, was there something in it that triggered German authorities or the ADL?

 

[gunhilltrain]

Option 2 works, I think.

Simplistic example. The story was accepted initially, meaning it met site standards. Then somebody reported is for not meeting site standards. Let's say that they complainant said, "It includes underage sex!" If you resubmit the story and include a note to Laurel in the appropriate box showing that the characters are all over 18, with reasons, then it should go back up with no problems.

Maybe it has nothing to do with age, but maybe it came too close to non-consent. One of the main characters in Part 2 seems too mentally-ill to give proper consent, and she is raped by a number of men. "Rape" is the word she uses, but she thinks to herself that she deserves it and doesn't try to resist. How would one classify scenes like that?

 

[MillieDynamite]

Maybe it has nothing to do with age, but maybe it came too close to non-consent. One of the main characters in Part 2 seems too mentally-ill to give proper consent, and she is raped by a number of men. "Rape" is the word she uses, but she thinks to herself that she deserves it and doesn't try to resist. How would one classify scenes like that?

She must not only think she deserves it but must enjoy (to some degree) the treatment to be inside the guidelines here. And while I understand some women orgasm during rape, the orgasm doesn't really constitute enjoyment to me. I can write that way, just don't buy it due to personal experience.

But Rules are Rules!

 

[fannyrat]

I now have had a second story deleted. Pity the woman was fine with it for 5 years.

 

[KeithD]

I now have had a second story deleted. Pity the woman was fine with it for 5 years.

I doubt she read it every day for five years. She didn't actually read it the first time. She only has time for a quick, shallow scan in initial submission. Another way of looking at this was that you got to have it posted for five years.

 

[jaF0]

I now have had a second story deleted. Pity the woman was fine with it for 5 years.

So, part 1? Is there a reason you're not more involved in this discussion?

 

[gunhilltrain]

She must not only think she deserves it but must enjoy (to some degree) the treatment to be inside the guidelines here. And while I understand some women orgasm during rape, the orgasm doesn't really constitute enjoyment to me. I can write that way, just don't buy it due to personal experience.

But Rules are Rules!

Part 2 is gone now too, so I can't read it again. I knew someone would bring up the enjoyment issue. It was pretty borderline to me.

I'm not a psychologist (although I play one on Literotica), but it seemed like the character may have had - and had for years - what is now called "hypersexual disorder" (nymphomania for you old-timers). I guess there is a difference between "porn trope" nymphomaniacs and real-life ones, and this was closer to a real one. She seemed compelled to do it rather than truly choosing it. She wasn't merely promiscuous.

Plus there was the disorder and stress of a city (Berlin) about to be invaded by the Soviets. It didn't seem like there was anything "fun" or playful about it for her.

I don't really know, but it's gone now.

 

[jaF0]

Oh well, I get my 1s and 2s mixed up.