Time, satisfaction and vote sabotage

[alohadave]

It never occurred to me that someone would leave pages open in separate tabs - a slow reader, maybe?

I go through the New List every day and open stories that I want to read. Often I don't get through them in a day.

And realistically, it means that I accumulate a lot of tabs with stories that I might get to eventually, and sometimes I have to prune the set of stories that I've never made an effort to read.

 

[MillieDynamite]

You've confirmed this to be true? It suggests that a single read of a three page story would count as three views, unless only the first page counts. I had assumed refreshing worked as you mentioned, but also had assumed that bookmarks and internal navigation of page numbers did not tick the view counter, but hadn't really thought about what it would do when refreshing page 3, for example.

There probably is no way to know for sure. Even if you had your console open and refreshed it after you refreshed the page in question, there could be a new download at the same time. Bummer, I put this under the post I'm replying to, not so original when I do it that way.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Well, not sure, but I don't think a reload affects the download count, at least on your own stuff. I opened one of my stories and my control page. I reloaded it several times, and the homepage hasn't updated. However, there may be a lag in the reporting to my control panel.

 

[MillieDynamite]

I checked it after one, five, ten, and 15 minutes. Still no change. It's an older story that hasn't had a change in the past several days. And with multiple reloads, there has been no change in almost 25 minutes.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

That realization makes me laugh every time I see one of comments, just before I delete it.

If you delete it, it means that they hit you between the eyes too.

You can say that you laugh but you're lying to yourself at least on some level. You claim that a vehemently negative comment means that your story had a strong emotional impact which indicates that your work was good, yet you delete the comment. You do not delete the bouquets because they indicate that your work was good, then why would you delete the spiteful criticism if it also indicates that your work was good? You're just lowering yourself to meet spite with spite.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Sadly, you are correct: you can't put something up in the public eye without expecting that some percentage of the voters will hate it, and try to damage it. I've seen my stories go from as many as 12 with the lovely red H to only 7 with the red H. It's disappointing that there are those whose only joy in life is dragging down someone else's work, especially a creative endeavor like a story. Worse, the "vote saboteurs" seem to have an organized base.

But if you never publish, no one else will ever be able to enjoy it. Gotta take the bad with the good, it seems.

I tell myself this: 1.) I didn't start writing for those who will hate what I write. That goes double for the erotic content. I started writing for the joy of sharing stories, of sharing some things I have learned about life and what the world can offer.

And, 2.) When you get an uber-hateful reaction like that from the haters, you KNOW your story hit them right between the eyes. They're throwing a fit, sabotaging someone's ratings, and they don't even realize they are telling the world how strongly your story hit them. That realization makes me laugh every time I see one of comments, just before I delete it.

You do not have to allow useless, hateful comments to stay posted on your stories. You can delete them. If a commentator posts a critically useful comment, even if I don't agree with them, personally, I'll leave it up. We can all use honest feedback.

But any comment along the lines of "Your cheating wife story is leading to the death of Western civilization and I hope you're happy when the Soviets invade because of how you weakened America by posting that story and your man-hating is evident in every word you write ... blah, blah, blah ..." I see one of those, anonymous or signed, it's gone. Have a laugh at it, press delete, go back to writing.

In other words: write what you want and post it. Those who love it will let you know. Those who profess to hate it with awful reviews are just telling you how strongly your story inspired them. Like Rob Reiner once said, after a horrible review of the movie "North,"

"Hey, when read between the lines? It ain't so bad!"

It’s taken me a while and some heartache, but basically, what she said

Em

 

[pink_silk_glove]

eh, you read between the lines, it aint so bad. you do you.

What was inaccurate in my post?

 

[Trionyx]

I think we need to put electrodes on readers’ nipples and shock them each time they don’t complete a story, or fail to leave a comment.

Or you could tie them to a chair and with their eyes pried open, you make them watch an Emily in Paris marathon.

 

[mirafrida]

I shouldn't care, but it's hard not to think about this stuff.

Like, one of my better received stories was at 4.72 recently. Then it got a couple of 1-votes in a 5 vote span and now it's 4.66.

4.66 makes me very happy. I don't know that it 'deserves' 4.72 more than 4.66. Who knows?

But I do believe it's a pretty good story, and that 'objectively,' it would be very hard to claim that it is in the lowest 20% of stories in the category, by basically any metric you might choose. So even though I'm happy with my score, I still find myself wondering about those 1-votes.

If a reader thought the story was 'meh,' or didn't really do it for them, then I do not at all begrudge them a 3 or 4 vote. They don't owe me a 5. They deserve their opinion as a reader. But even so... what were those 1-voters thinking? It's not a story that is going to challenge any contests or top lists. It's not a new story. It's not a story that trips any of the usual red-flags that make people flame my stories. It really has no negative comments at all. Is it plausible that they really truly hated it and thought it was one of the worst stories they'd read in a while?

My guess for today is they opened it expecting a 4.72 story, and then felt it landed short of that mark by a good deal, and decided it was their duty to 1-vote it as a corrective measure. But it's hard not to scratch your head sometimes...

 

[EmilyMiller]

Or you could tie them to a chair and with their eyes pried open, you make them watch an Emily in Paris marathon.

I’d quite like that .

Em

 

[EmilyMiller]

I shouldn't care, but it's hard not to think about this stuff.

Like, one of my better received stories was at 4.72 recently. Then it got a couple of 1-votes in a 5 vote span and now it's 4.66.

4.66 makes me very happy. I don't know that it 'deserves' 4.72 more than 4.66. Who knows?

But I do believe it's a pretty good story, and that 'objectively,' it would be very hard to claim that it is in the lowest 20% of stories in the category, by basically any metric you might choose. So even though I'm happy with my score, I still find myself wondering about those 1-votes.

If a reader thought the story was 'meh,' or didn't really do it for them, then I do not at all begrudge them a 3 or 4 vote. They don't owe me a 5. They deserve their opinion as a reader. But even so... what were those 1-voters thinking? It's not a story that is going to challenge any contests or top lists. It's not a new story. It's not a story that trips any of the usual red-flags that make people flame my stories. It really has no negative comments at all. Is it plausible that they really truly hated it and thought it was one of the worst stories they'd read in a while?

My guess for today is they opened it expecting a 4.72 story, and then felt it landed short of that mark by a good deal, and decided it was their duty to 1-vote it as a corrective measure. But it's hard not to scratch your head sometimes...

In my experience, you will drive yourself mad trying to figure out people’s motivations.

I’ve told myself - after some heartache - that it really doesn’t amount to a hill of beans. And who am I to question what someone else likes or hates? Sure some one bombs are malicious, but others are probably genuinely reflective of what the person thought. There is nothing to say that people have to like my stuff. There is no prohibition on people loathing it either. Either way, I’ve learned not to sweat it. If some people like a story and - most importantly - if I like it, then that’s more than good enough. It took some time for me to get there, but glad I eventually did.

Trying to just go with the flow. The alternative isn’t a great one IMO.

Em

 

[Bamagan]

In my experience, you will drive yourself mad trying to figure out people’s motivations.

I’ve told myself - after some heartache - that it really doesn’t amount to a hill of beans...

What size hill, and what kind of beans?

 

[EmilyMiller]

What size hill, and what kind of beans?

Kinda Olympus Mons size and 2.68 Googolplexian beans.

Em

 

[MillieDynamite]

EM, I'm no good at being noble, but it doesn't take much to see that the problems of three little people don't amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world. Someday, you'll understand that. If don’t finish that fucking fuck story, you'll fucking regret it. Maybe not fucking today. Maybe not fucking tomorrow, but soon and for the rest of your fucking life.

In my experience, you will drive yourself mad trying to figure out people’s motivations.

I’ve told myself - after some heartache - that it really doesn’t amount to a hill of beans.

Em

 

[EmilyMiller]

EM, I'm no good at being noble, but it doesn't take much to see that the problems of three little people don't amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world. Someday, you'll understand that. If don’t finish that fucking fuck story, you'll fucking regret it. Maybe not fucking today. Maybe not fucking tomorrow, but soon and for the rest of your fucking life.

I totally this. Love that movie.

Em

 

[MillieDynamite]

Me fucking too!

I totally this. Love that movie.

Em

What the fuck is with all the fucking fuck words? Oh, that's me sorry for the over use of FUCK.

 

[Bamagan]

Kinda Olympus Mons size and 2.68 Googolplexian beans.

Em

I meant, are they lima beans (meh) or red beans, pinto beans, black beans, etc. (yum). But that's a large enough pile to live off of.

 

[EmilyMiller]

I meant, are they lima beans (meh) or red beans, pinto beans, black beans, etc. (yum). But that's a large enough pile to live off of.

If there is over a Googolplexian, the type of beans is pretty immaterial.

There are less than a Googol particles in the observable universe. A Googolplex is 10 to the power of a Googol. A Googolplexian is 10 to the power of a Googolplex. It’s kinda big.

Em

 

[Bamagan]

If there is over a Googolplexian, the type of beans is pretty immaterial.

There are less than a Googol particles in the observable universe. A Googolplex is 10 to the power of a Googol. A Googolplexian is 10 to the power of a Googolplex. It’s kinda big.

Em

The type of beans is entirely material, if the plan is to eat some of them! I just hope my rice supplies hold out.

 

[Voboy]

I shouldn't care, but it's hard not to think about this stuff.

Like, one of my better received stories was at 4.72 recently. Then it got a couple of 1-votes in a 5 vote span and now it's 4.66.

4.66 makes me very happy. I don't know that it 'deserves' 4.72 more than 4.66. Who knows?

But I do believe it's a pretty good story, and that 'objectively,' it would be very hard to claim that it is in the lowest 20% of stories in the category, by basically any metric you might choose. So even though I'm happy with my score, I still find myself wondering about those 1-votes.

If a reader thought the story was 'meh,' or didn't really do it for them, then I do not at all begrudge them a 3 or 4 vote. They don't owe me a 5. They deserve their opinion as a reader. But even so... what were those 1-voters thinking? It's not a story that is going to challenge any contests or top lists. It's not a new story. It's not a story that trips any of the usual red-flags that make people flame my stories. It really has no negative comments at all. Is it plausible that they really truly hated it and thought it was one of the worst stories they'd read in a while?

My guess for today is they opened it expecting a 4.72 story, and then felt it landed short of that mark by a good deal, and decided it was their duty to 1-vote it as a corrective measure. But it's hard not to scratch your head sometimes...

You have to remind yourself that the VASTLY OVERWHELMING majority of readers, and voters, are not people who've ever even remotely thought about writing for publication on this site. It is likely that they have no concept whatsoever of "one-bombing," and I very highly doubt they are aware that there is such a high level of navel-gazing here in the AH that aims to explain or examine the phenomenon of the 1* vote. I doubt they're even aware, most of them, that there even is a forum on the site, where writers talk to each other about anything.

I base that on the fact that I read here for about 15 years with no idea that there was anything but a few stories posted anywhere on Lit. I noted the stars at the bottom of the page, but it never once occurred to me to click on any of them. The idea of creating an account and sending feedback to a writer was not even a blip on my radar. Never once did I vote. I think about that now, the joy that my humble 5* vote (for I loved a lot of the stories I read) could have brought to any number of writers had I simply cast it. I had no idea. Nor would I have thought all that much about a 1* vote.

To a reader like I used to be? There's no reason to think they attach any special significance to the voting at the end of the piece. They judge the stories they read according to their own criteria and smash a star accordingly, and I seriously doubt any of those kinds of readers think all that much about the effect of their vote on the writer.

In sum, I think there are undoubtedly small cabals of readers who know what a one-bomb is and who wield them proudly. I cannot imagine they're anywhere near the majority of voters, most of whom (I suspect) just vote from their heart, with scant awareness that that vote might be endlessly parsed and discussed by a fretting writer.

Take heart. We have no clue why people vote. Most of us are grateful when they do; if we aren't? We can always disable voting!