the star rating system

[SimonDoom]

The way I see it: the main point of voting is to give a way of comparing stories.

If no author ever votes on their own stories, that's fair. But if every author votes on their stories (once per story), that's also fair; every story gets one free "5".

The difference is that the first rule is more vulnerable gives an advantage to cheats, and to those who just aren't aware of the expectation. The second one doesn't.

So all in all, I think it'd be better if all authors considered themselves at liberty to vote, once, on each of their stories. In the long run it makes very little difference to the scores.

I agree with this, but I also take a more liberal and permissive attitude, generally, toward what people "should" do on this site. I think there is an excess of instruction and disapproval here in these forums. Pilot, for example, has been on record saying that it's wrong for people to comment on stories unless the authors have given express permission to readers to do so.

That seems to me somewhat ridiculous. My attitude is, this site provides tools, and you should, as a reader, go ahead and use them, as you wish, subject to obvious considerations of fairness and whatever limited restrictions the site owners put on you. The presumption should be in favor of using the tools, unless there are explicit guidelines or author-generated preferences against them. So, if you want to vote for your own story once, go ahead. No harm, no foul. As the author of your own story, but also as a Lit reader, you are as entitled as anyone else to give your vote and have your say. Have it, guilt-free.

 

[ColetteJulie]

I did once. It seemed like an empty gesture.

Did the same once. Gave myself 5 stars for a story that nobody else seemed to like. I felt sorry for it.

 

[ColetteJulie]

Must agree with you. Love it when people comment.

 

[JasonClearwater]

No, no no. You're taking this all wrong.

You manipulating your ratings is nothing like basking in admiration from fans. Nothing wrong with glory. OTOH, voting for yourself is like buying 10,000 copies of a book you self-published so that you'd have sales you could point to as an indicator of success.

Not really. Theoretically, casting a vote for your own story if you feel the need, doesn't even slightly balance out the 1-bomb trolling, since it takes multiple 5* votes to reach the magical red H of visibility, to recover from a single 1*.

It's also a vote, not 10,000 votes, and its likelihood of affecting your rating, unless you only get two people voting on your story for all of time, are negligible.

It's also a porn site, where the ratings don't reflect a writer's ability; just whether or not people in the single category their story's posted in, like it. The premise. The idea. The story.

I think casting that vote is meaningless, either way. And let's face it, no one's getting sales out of that single vote. No one's making an income, or getting press coverage.

 

[SophiaLux]

Views

Hey! I'm new here and recently posted my first story I've had a few ratings so far and one comment, so I know that a few people at least have read it (hopefully). My view count is still coming up as a big fat 0 though! Has anyone else had this happen?

 

[ElectricBlue]

Hey! I'm new here and recently posted my first story I've had a few ratings so far and one comment, so I know that a few people at least have read it (hopefully). My view count is still coming up as a big fat 0 though! Has anyone else had this happen?

Different parts of the site update at different times and on different cycles. They're never in synch. The info on the story's last page always has a lag (12 - 24 hours, maybe) - a while, anyway.

The views and scores on your member home page will always be current - and updates in real time. How do I know that? A simple experiment. Note the view count on a story, go to that story's first page, go back and refresh your home page. The view count on that story will be + 1.

 

[sr71plt]

Pilot, for example, has been on record saying that it's wrong for people to comment on stories unless the authors have given express permission to readers to do so.

Since you claim that's on record, cite the record--because I've never posted that "it's wrong for people to comment on stories unless the authors have given express permission to readers to do so." That's a gross misrepresentation of what I've ever posted. But, since you say I'm on record posting that, then of course you can cite where I have, right?

I've said that it's wrong for folks to give an unsolicited negative critique of a story on the assumption that everyone is posting stories here to improve their writing (including the assumption that the one giving the critique has a knowledge to improve anyone else's writing without doing more harm than good to begin with). That isn't even remotely the same as saying it's wrong for people to comment on stories.

Why don't you folks just stop dredging up misrepresentations of what I've ever posted to argue against it? Find a new hobby horse.

 

[SimonDoom]

Since you claim that's on record, cite the record--because I've never posted that "it's wrong for people to comment on stories unless the authors have given express permission to readers to do so." That's a gross misrepresentation of what I've ever posted. But, since you say I'm on record posting that, then of course you can cite where I have, right?

I've said that it's wrong for folks to give an unsolicited negative critique of a story on the assumption that everyone is posting stories here to improve their writing (including the assumption that the one giving the critique has a knowledge to improve anyone else's writing without doing more harm than good to begin with). That isn't even remotely the same as saying it's wrong for people to comment on stories.

Why don't you folks just stop dredging up misrepresentations of what I've ever posted to argue against it? Find a new hobby horse.

That was my recollection of what you said. If I recall it incorrectly, or if I incorrectly interpreted what you said, then I will admit it and apologize.

I know that you and I disagreed on this point. It's possible that I am incorrectly remembering the substance of our disagreement.

I'll look it up, as best I can, and if I'm wrong I'll be the first to say so.

And, to be clear, disagreeing with you is not a "hobby horse" of mine. I respect your contributions to this forum. In the relatively short time I've been involved in this forum I have regarded you as the most useful and helpful contributor to the Author's Forum, even though I sometimes disagree with you and think you sometimes -- O.K., more than sometimes -- express yourself too acerbically.

And, by the way, it's good to see you post something again. It's been a while. If nothing else, I managed to flush you out from hiding.

 

[NotWise]

Why don't you folks just stop dredging up misrepresentations of what I've ever posted to argue against it? Find a new hobby horse.

Hey Pilot! I haven't seen you around in a while. Welcome back.

 

[ChloeTzang]

I've said that it's .......

Pilot!!!!!! Good to see you back, you've been missed.