The I’m not giving up ‘but’ thread

[ChloeTzang]

Just on logic it seems likely that an author with many works that has not previously thrown up any red flags is more likely to get lenient / quicker processing i.e. be "whitelisted".

There's a lot of stuff to get through every day; any normal, sane person would apply any pre-filters they could to reduce that workload.

After all, if you as the moderator miss something, a reader will likely report it at some stage.

That said. I have to say I have had a coupleof my stories rejected over the years for skirtimg the 18+ rule a bit too closely. LOL, With a good track record or not, and white-listed or not. Laurel has still pulled me up and rejected my stories now and then - and when I checked and looked, she was right. So even being "white-listed," if that's what it is, doesn't guarantee a free pass. LOL

And I have had readers report a couple of my stories in the past and they got sent back as well, in one case after being up for years. Personally, I thoght it was a pedantic quibble but rather than waste Laurel's time I fixed up the issue that was flagged, resubmitted it and it went back up. So whitelisted and popular really doesn't make a difference, believe me. I really can't see any favortism at work at all, speaking for myself of course.

And one of my stories did go into the pending black hole as Emily mentioned. So my thinking is, as Simon also said, technical glitch. Unfortunate, but I think the contingency steps if your story does go there, is pretty clearly laid out now.

 

[TheWritingGroup]

Just on logic it seems likely that an author with many works that has not previously thrown up any red flags is more likely to get lenient / quicker processing i.e. be "whitelisted".

The Writing Group has had two stories sent back out of 28 submitted, one for plagiarism and one for incorrect quote formatting. Neither was accurate, and both were published when resubmitted with an explanation in the Notes to Editor section. Our last seven stories were all approved within one day.

I wonder if Laurel put us on the whitelist just to make us stop bothering her.

--Annie

 

[Statius]

I looked at what I said. All 3. I stand by it

 

[iwatchus]

o my thinking is, as Simon also said, technical glitch. Unfortunate, but I think the contingency steps if your story does go there, is pretty clearly laid out now.

Unfortunately, the best advice to date seems to be ineffective for a small number of stories (including mine). So we wait and hope. And write something else. I saw someone post (n the other thread, I think) that they have resubmitted every 15 days and are on their fourth try now, but they got something else published. It is not personal, but it may be something in the story triggering the issue. We just have no idea what.

 

[iwatchus]

I looked at what I said. All 3. I stand by it

Set it aside for a few days and try coming back to read it. I certainly read it the way Emily took it, not the way you apparently intended it.

As a side note, if nothing else, your note raised the question of favoritism in people's minds. If you don't believe there is favoritism, you almost have a resposbility to more explicitly say it isn't there in your comment. Because you just encouraged people to believe something that you now say is false. This is a subtle case, but there's a word for doing that.

 

[crookedletter]

I guess there's a negative connotation to favoritism. But I'm a little confused at the bristling at the suggestion of favoritism on the one hand, then turning around and speaking about a very reasonable whitelisting. Is there a difference, beyond semantics?

 

[AwkwardMD]

I guess there's a negative connotation to favoritism. But I'm a little confused as to the bristling at the suggestion of favoritism on the one hand, then turning around and speaking about a very reasonable whitelisting. Is there a difference, beyond semantics?

Some people are bristling at the idea of favoritism and others are suggesting whitelisting is reasonable. I think the Venn diagram of these two groups is two separate circles.

 

[AwkwardMD]

I have done a lot of theorycrafting on my own about how Literotica works behind the scenes, as a way to explain quirks I've noticed. If my first answer to any particular question flatters me (ie, "Maybe Laurel likes me?") I keep looking until I find a theory that doesn’t.

Whitelisting doesn’t flatter me. I just have a track record of submissions over time. Maybe it's 10 stories in a row without a rejection, and with no reports that later result in rejections. I've done that, and if that's true it maybe also explains X, Y, and Z that I've also seen and can't explain.

 

[TheLobster]

I guess there's a negative connotation to favoritism. But I'm a little confused at the bristling at the suggestion of favoritism on the one hand, then turning around and speaking about a very reasonable whitelisting. Is there a difference, beyond semantics?

Favoritism is arbitrary and unjustified. Waving through authors who have proven themselves to be trustworthy is just reasonable heuristic.

 

[AwkwardMD]

Like I said originally, though. In the absence of communicated criteria, whitelisting and favoritism probably look identical.

 

[StillStunned]

I guess there's a negative connotation to favoritism. But I'm a little confused at the bristling at the suggestion of favoritism on the one hand, then turning around and speaking about a very reasonable whitelisting. Is there a difference, beyond semantics?

Irregular verb: I'm on a whitelist, you benefit from favouritism, he's bribed his way in.

 

[TheLobster]

Favoritism is arbitrary and unjustified. Waving through authors who have proven themselves to be trustworthy is just reasonable heuristic.

Of course, the alternative explanation that may seem equally valid is this:

Whitelisting is when my stories get through faster, because I'm such a nice and rule-abiding writer.

Favoritism is when their stories get through quickly (quicker than mine!), even though they obviously do not deserve it.

 

[AlexBailey]

I think this is an important point.

A perhaps more apt analogy than those in the OP would be a street fair or something, where throngs of people come to get snacks and souvenirs from various booths. The fair is being woefully mismanaged and vendors who have been told they have a spot are showing up to sell their wares and there's nowhere to set up. They're finding the management unresponsive, they're grumbling amongst themselves, they're talking about setting up somewhere else.

Unfortunately, there's no other street fair in town, the foot traffic is all at this one, and the visitors, finding plenty of other booths to visit, have no inkling that anything is amiss.

“Nobody goes there anymore. It’s too crowded.” - Yogi Berra.

 

[Statius]

Set it aside for a few days and try coming back to read it. I certainly read it the way Emily took it, not the way you apparently intended it.

As a side note, if nothing else, your note raised the question of favoritism in people's minds. If you don't believe there is favoritism, you almost have a resposbility to more explicitly say it isn't there in your comment. Because you just encouraged people to believe something that you now say is false. This is a subtle case, but there's a word for doing that.

Never said it was false either. And in no way did I insult anyone.

 

[EmilyMiller]

I looked at what I said. All 3. I stand by it

Your prerogative - more people than just me thought it both offensive and inaccurate. But your choice.

 

[EmilyMiller]

I guess there's a negative connotation to favoritism. But I'm a little confused at the bristling at the suggestion of favoritism on the one hand, then turning around and speaking about a very reasonable whitelisting. Is there a difference, beyond semantics?

Yes - totally. White listing is a product of previous good behavior. Favoritism is a product of a relationship which leads to better treatment than others.

I wholly reject that I am treated better. Anyone can get white listed by sticking to the rules for long enough. It’s something anyone can achieve.

Being an author who the site treats differently for some reason beyond their previous good conduct is totally different.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Never said it was false either. And in no way did I insult anyone.

I disagree.

 

[cw5523729]

Like I said originally, though. In the absence of communicated criteria, whitelisting and favoritism probably look identical.

Perhaps but by that rationale, you can also say that accusing someone of getting preferential treatment in exchange for sexual favors looks the same as preferential treatment for good behavior since we can't know which, if either, is true. But that doesn't mean that both carry the same connotation.

 

[StillStunned]

Perhaps but by that rationale, you can also say that accusing someone of getting preferential treatment in exchange for sexual favors looks the same as preferential treatment for good behavior since we can't know which, if either, is true. But that doesn't mean that both carry the same connotation.

I've seen no evidence that Laurel and Manu are open to sexual favours. I mean, I can't even attach dick pics to DMs!

 

[cw5523729]

I've seen no evidence that Laurel and Manu are open to sexual favours. I mean, I can't even attach dick pics to DMs!

You can't? I do all the time. Maybe they just have your account specifically blocked to prevent yours...? What's the antonym of Favoritism?

 

[Off_base]

Any favoritism or whitelisting, if actually true, would be done by the site, not the author.
Speculation over either one, to the point of accusations and hurt feelings, seems counterproductive to the discussion.
Life doesn't always seem fair, even when it is.

 

[cw5523729]

Any favoritism or whitelisting, if actually true, would be done by the site, not the author.
Speculation over either one, to the point of accusations and hurt feelings, seems counterproductive to the discussion.
Life doesn't always seem fair, even when it is.

Oh great, next you're going to tell me that the grass isn't really greener on the other side!

 

[EmilyMiller]

favoritism or whitelisting

These are not equivalent. White listing is based on track record and accessible to anyone willing to publish enough non-problematic stories.

Favoritism is being treated differently in a way that hasn’t been earned.

I feel like I need to post dictionary definitions.

These are not complex concepts.

 

[AwkwardMD]

We should all step back. I do not have evidence, in the hard sense, for the existence of a whitelist. It's a theory, and not one I'm as comfortable endorsing as I do my understanding of Lit's AI detector.

EDIT: Not trying to derail the conversation, just qualifying what I mean when I use the word theory. The existence of a whitelist explains a number of quirks I have noticed, and that's all.

Maybe the word I should have used is hypothesis, but I get those confused.

 

[Off_base]

I, for one, fully expect the more popular authors to get favoritism. They're a bigger part of what drives readers to the site and keeps them coming back. Than I am.
In the same way that the top salespeople at a company get the highest pay and most perks.
Either way, it feels earned in this case, not given.

These are not equivalent. White listing is based on track record and accessible to anyone willing to publish enough non-problematic stories.

Favoritism is being treated differently in a way that hasn’t been earned.

I feel like I need to post dictionary definitions.

These are not complex concepts.

Favoritism and whitelisting.
There. Fixed it.