Time to vent

[patientlee]

but I wasn't notified that my stories were even being considered as having broken any of LIT.'s rules nor that they were being taken down by Laurel or anyone from LIT. If I hadn't seen my most recent story the day it posted and read the comments, I wouldn't have known they were down and I got lucky because I checked to see if it had posted because it was down the next day.
I only saw that they were no longer in my story list after seeing that comment. I had to go to my submission summary page to even find them and found the rejection notice on all three.

I think that's how you are notified. My first submission was rejected the first time. I think you click on the word rejected or not accepted to get the additional info. I don't think you get an email or anything.

ETA: From the FAQ:

My story has been rejected. What now?

Don't panic! First, click on the "NOT ACCEPTED" words. This will take you to the submission form. Above it, the reason(s) the story was sent back to you will be written. (To decipher these reasons, see this forum post in the Editor's Forum.)
Once you've made the suggested fixes, you may copy the edited version into the same submission form as before, then resubmit the story by simply hitting SUBMIT just as you did the first time. There is no need to start a new form or rename the submission in any way.

 

[Tsotha]

You mean there are two dismembered penis eating stories? I was referring to http://www.literotica.com/s/one-kick-to-end-a-marriage

Is this story erotic? This is an actual question, I'm not trying to be flippant; it just seems to me that the only potentially erotic scene was set up from the start for dick dismemberment and a kick to the face.

 

[PennLady]

I think that's how you are notified. My first submission was rejected the first time. I think you click on the word rejected or not accepted to get the additional info. I don't think you get an email or anything.

But the problem here, according to the OP, is that the stories were accepted and posted, but then someone reported them as violating some rule, and they were taken down with no warning to the OP. They weren't rejected upon submission.

 

[PennLady]

but I wasn't notified that my stories were even being considered as having broken any of LIT.'s rules nor that they were being taken down by Laurel or anyone from LIT. If I hadn't seen my most recent story the day it posted and read the comments, I wouldn't have known they were down and I got lucky because I checked to see if it had posted because it was down the next day.

You're not disagreeing with me, so it's fine. This is what Laurel posted, in post #19, in response to my statement that Lit should notify authors of a reported story:

We do.

Every day, we receive story reports. If I check and the report seems to have validity, it is sent back to the author with a notice. The story is sent back just like a rejected story.

Some authors reply and explain to us why they feel that the report is in error. If what they say makes sense, the story is put back on the site just as it was posted with no changes.

If this isn't what happened to you, then you should discuss that with Laurel as well.

I only saw that they were no longer in my story list after seeing that comment. I had to go to my submission summary page to even find them and found the rejection notice on all three.

So you do have a notice you can check? What did it say was the reason for the rejection? That will help a lot in terms of people being able to suggest actions, although ultimately it will come down to you discussing it with Laurel.

 

[patientlee]

I understand this to mean that the procedure is the same as an initial rejection. Just my interpretation.

We do.

Every day, we receive story reports. If I check and the report seems to have validity, it is sent back to the author with a notice. The story is sent back just like a rejected story.

Some authors reply and explain to us why they feel that the report is in error. If what they say makes sense, the story is put back on the site just as it was posted with no changes.

Other authors fix the story so that it falls within our rules. The story is then returned to the site, votes and comments intact.

Other authors decide to remove the story because they wish to not change it to fall within our rules. That's fine too.

This happens every day. This is neither the first nor the last story to be retroactively sent back for clarification.

I've explained in PM to the OP that all he needs to do is send the story back to me with a note explaining why he feels the violence in the story does not qualify as snuff/abuse/for sexual titillation of the audience. If that's the case, the story will be returned to the site.

Also, FYI for all authors - the REPORT STORY feature is there to help keep the site content up to our rules and standards. It is not there to be abused by writers trying to remove other work from the site. Doing so constitutes abuse, which is childish, uncool, and wastes our time which could be better spent approving stories. If you suspect someone is doing this, let them know that is abuse. DO not reciprocate in kind, as this exacerbates the problem and potentially delays story posting.

Thank you, all!

 

[lovecraft68]

But the "notice" Laurel refers to is the rejected that shows up on your story page.

If you have a story that has been out for awhile and it gets rejected you may not know for a long time especially if you have a lot of stories and aren't the type to study their numbers all the time.

I found out about mine when someone e-mailed me and said "I see 1,4,5 where are the others?"

You will not get a notice as in an e-mail or anything else.

 

[lovecraft68]

You mean there are two dismembered penis eating stories? I was referring to http://www.literotica.com/s/one-kick-to-end-a-marriage

Oh no can't have that! That is violence against men!

The site is very lenient to violence towards women I think "Tricky" was the word used. But the trick always favors the women being tortured raped etc...

Hurt men? Oh, no no rejection notice please.

We can't have the guys who read rape stories having their dicks shrivel in fear can we?

I'll leave it at that.

Okay well one more, it is not surprising that the mod who announced the Non consent rule can "never be argued about" in her forum has an av of a woman who looks like she is half beaten getting her face rubbed in the floor.

Rejections on the fly are subject to the amount of attention paid to it (which I am sure cannot be much with as many stories as go through here) rejections after that are readers and authors.

some with good reason, some to be petty.

 

[PennLady]

I understand this to mean that the procedure is the same as an initial rejection. Just my interpretation.

And it looks like you're right. I didn't realize, and if I had, would have asked the OP earlier what the rejection said.

 

[sr71plt]

Who's going to know that a story already up has been pulled down just because an "approved" slug has been changed to "rejected" on their submissions page? Am I, for instance, supposed to check through listings of more than 650 already-posted stories on my submissions page periodically to catch such a change--and this is considered notification? The Web site has registered members' e-mail addresses.

 

[Tsotha]

Oh no can't have that! That is violence against men!

The site is very lenient to violence towards women I think "Tricky" was the word used. But the trick always favors the women being tortured raped etc...

Hurt men? Oh, no no rejection notice please.

We can't have the guys who read rape stories having their dicks shrivel in fear can we?

I'll leave it at that.

Okay well one more, it is not surprising that the mod who announced the Non consent rule can "never be argued about" in her forum has an av of a woman who looks like she is half beaten getting her face rubbed in the floor.

Rejections on the fly are subject to the amount of attention paid to it (which I am sure cannot be much with as many stories as go through here) rejections after that are readers and authors.

some with good reason, some to be petty.

It's actually funny that you're defending this story, Lovecraft68. You do realize the dick dismemberment occurs at the same time the woman receives a kick to her jaw, which is shattered, along with her teeth?

Just checking.

 

[mikoli5763]

I have put in

the effort necessary to get my stories reinstated and they are in the pending stage so I can't access the rejection reason, but basically it said that the story had been reported by another member of LIT. as a "snuff" story with a woman being beaten, losing a baby as a result of the beating, and having her face scarred for life from same beating.
Her abuser was a "boyfriend" not the husband. Husband and wife reconcile after meeting in a bar owned by husband's life long friend who hints at the killing of the abuser while he is in jail awaiting trial for what he did to wife.
Abuser is killed in jail, but not by husband who definitely doesn't receive any sexual gratification from the fact that abuser is killed.
When any murder of a character in a story is enough for the "snuff" label to be pasted to it, then there is definitely something wrong with the system.
Other two stories have characters being murdered and yes the husband does the deed in both, but again no sexual gratification is achieved by him from his acts and yet the "snuff" label got them rejected. One of them had been up since May of 2013 which is one of the reasons I was so angry last night.

 

[PennLady]

Who's going to know that a story already up has been pulled down just because an "approved" slug has been changed to "rejected" on their submissions page? Am I, for instance, supposed to check through listings of more than 650 already-posted stories on my submissions page periodically to catch such a change--and this is considered notification? The Web site has registered members' e-mail addresses.

I don't know. I'm confused on the issue myself. Laurel's response led me to believe that the site actively notified the author, but then the OP's statements don't back that up.

I definitely think there should be an active notification on something like that.

 

[PennLady]

the effort necessary to get my stories reinstated and they are in the pending stage so I can't access the rejection reason, but basically it said that the story had been reported by another member of LIT. as a "snuff" story

Sounds like you have a good chance of getting them reinstated. Also sounds like someone had it out for you. sorry for that.

 

[patientlee]

I agree that an email would be nice. I'm just saying that this is what I understand to be the case based on Laurel's post here and the FAQ. One person doing the approving and rejecting is not conducive to personalized service. But then again, we're not paying for premium service.

 

[patientlee]

Sounds like you have a good chance of getting them reinstated. Also sounds like someone had it out for you. sorry for that.

And that is like high school bullying nonsense.

 

[mikoli5763]

As I suspected

the malicious individual who has targeted me has no stories of his own on the site.
It is sad that someone who evidently doesn't know how it feels to see your work being available and read by others or the pride one has for afore mentioned work, be able to do what this person has done.
Yes, it has hit me hard and yes, I feel like its a personal attack on me, but short of contacting this person, which ain't going to happen because he'd then have my e-mail address thus opening myself up to even more abuse; I can't even "vote' my displeasure over what has happened.
I have resubmitted the removed stories with my explanation as to why they aren't "snuff" stories and hopefully they'll be reinstated.
I have also PM'ed laurel with a concern of mine that has arisen from this ordeal and yes to me that is what this is an ordeal and hopefully her answer will put to rest my concern.

 

[Laurel]

the effort necessary to get my stories reinstated and they are in the pending stage so I can't access the rejection reason, but basically it said that the story had been reported by another member of LIT. as a "snuff" story with a woman being beaten, losing a baby as a result of the beating, and having her face scarred for life from same beating.
Her abuser was a "boyfriend" not the husband. Husband and wife reconcile after meeting in a bar owned by husband's life long friend who hints at the killing of the abuser while he is in jail awaiting trial for what he did to wife.
Abuser is killed in jail, but not by husband who definitely doesn't receive any sexual gratification from the fact that abuser is killed.
When any murder of a character in a story is enough for the "snuff" label to be pasted to it, then there is definitely something wrong with the system.
Other two stories have characters being murdered and yes the husband does the deed in both, but again no sexual gratification is achieved by him from his acts and yet the "snuff" label got them rejected. One of them had been up since May of 2013 which is one of the reasons I was so angry last night.

Have you reported either of these stories, as I already specifically asked that people do?

There is a clear and easy way to report rule-breaking content.

I'm not understanding why, after reading a story which clearly breaks our rules, people are bypassing the REPORT feature which would bring the violation directly to our attention - which is on the very same page as the story - and instead navigating all the way to the forums so they can post it on a thread which I may or may not see.

 

[Saxon_Hart]

I liked your old AV better Laurel...

 

[StrangeLife]

Have you reported either of these stories, as I already specifically asked that people do?

There is a clear and easy way to report rule-breaking content.

I'm not understanding why, after reading a story which clearly breaks our rules, people are bypassing the REPORT feature which would bring the violation directly to our attention - which is on the very same page as the story - and instead navigating all the way to the forums so they can post it on a thread which I may or may not see.

The problem here is the other way around Laurel. It's not that people can't find the REPORT function - but apparently it's too easy use it for harassment-purposes in its present form.

Would you maybe consider changing the procedure to not take the story down right away but simply send a notification about the violation to the author instead? Like give him/her 30 days to react before you push the delete button?

That way the trolls couldn't abuse the system and it would be a lot easier for the more prolific writers to keep up with problems in their portfolio...

 

[Euphony]

The problem here is the other way around Laurel. It's not that people can't find the REPORT function - but apparently it's too easy use it for harassment-purposes in its present form.

While the OP is banging his drum quite loudly over a perceived "slight" by either a fellow Litster or the site ownership itself, I'm not ready to classify this as endemic here.

There are PLENTY of AHers who engender all sorts of hate ill will, and every conceivable form of harassment possible. They haven't stepped forward in large numbers to claim "me too." You'd think they would if the system is so abused.

Would you maybe consider changing the procedure to not take the story down right away but simply send a notification about the violation to the author instead? Like give him/her 30 days to react before you push the delete button?

The flip side to this is offending/illegal content is given home for 30 MORE days. 30 more days of liability on the sites part and in many cases the only benefit is to spare the authors often oversensitive feelings/sense of entitlement.

I wouldn't risk my own ass for someone else's content that either didn't meet or was questionable in regards to my private site's guidelines. Would you?

That way the trolls couldn't abuse the system and it would be a lot easier for the more prolific writers to keep up...

The bulk of this thread seems to me to be ONE author harassed by ONE "troll" that he has been able to give a name (thereby someONE to obsess over) tbecause of a comment made on his story. It's become a wee bit obsessive claiming censorship, unfairness, site dysfunction, favoritism, etc etc etc.

I get it. It sucks having someone so easily spoil your author party. If your stories are on the fence as to the rules, a simple review and explanation should likely get you right back up and running. If not, or if it becomes too frequent, perhaps your gift to the world is better suited to someplace else.

Even if does end up that worst case scenario, is it really worth all the stressing?

So little of what goes on at Lit should be taken personally yet so much of it is.

Seems... self destructive to me.

 

[sr71plt]

When a story is challenged like this, doesn't Laurel give it a look and decide for herself whether it should be taken down on the basis of unacceptable (to the Web site) content? If so, I don't see the issue here. If the editor decided on closer inspection that the content was unacceptable, she could just take it down; if she decides it is acceptable, she could just leave it up. If she hasn't made this judgment on this story, why not?

Wasn't/isn't it the decision of the site editor, not the one who reported it, to either take the story down or leave it up?

 

[mikoli5763]

Yes

I TOOK IT PERSONAL.
Having never had children, I have feelings for my stories as if they were my children. Tell me anybody outside of a sociopath who wouldn't take it personal if something bad was happening and continuing to happen to their children.
Maybe my understanding of what "snuff" means is not the same as Laurel's or anybody else's but people being murdered in the story automatically making it "snuff" does seem a little extreme.
On the same day my Valentine's Day entry posted there was a story titled "The Murdered Wife" which had two people being murdered and it didn't get taken down.
I haven't mentioned the malcontent by name or the other author he had mentioned as a target for his crusade to "Rid LW of non-erotic violence laced stories" and I'm not going to. If the other author doesn't want to complain, vent, pout, whatever TF people want to label my tirade as, then that's his right.

 

[StrangeLife]

I don't know if you're a writer yourself Euphony, but I can assure you that Mikoli's feelings aren't unusual for a writer caught in the same situation. A story on Lit represents a significant amount of work and getting it taken down is a big deal. Most writers will take such a step very personally.

"So what's the big deal about one sole sulking sour-puss," you might imply?

Well, each writer contributes something to the variety of Lit - something that we would lose if he/she left. Mikoli represents 49 stories and he has many fans - and just imagine if something similar happened to Just Plain Bob (757 stories) or DG Hear (330 stories) and discouraged them.


You are right of course,- This isn't a big problem so far, but why not nip it in the butt when it's so easy to do? Would it kill anybody to give the writer the benefit of the doubt and get his/her comment before taking down the story? It would definitely make a big difference for the writer - that I can guarantee.


Remember that this is not about DMCA take-down notices which must be effectuated immediately for legal reasons. This is about Lit's internal rules, that Laurel can enforce at her own discretion.

 

[Tsotha]

While the OP is banging his drum quite loudly over a perceived "slight" by either a fellow Litster or the site ownership itself, I'm not ready to classify this as endemic here.

He is angry over having his story taken down. He defends it doesn't break the rules.

There are PLENTY of AHers who engender all sorts of hate ill will, and every conceivable form of harassment possible. They haven't stepped forward in large numbers to claim "me too." You'd think they would if the system is so abused.

Problems can exist independent from people choosing to report them. If you read above, you'll see that people other than the OP see potential for abuse, and that it could be difficult for authors with a large number of stories to even notice that one story is missing.

The flip side to this is offending/illegal content is given home for 30 MORE days. 30 more days of liability on the sites part and in many cases the only benefit is to spare the authors often oversensitive feelings/sense of entitlement.

Yes, as you say; the benefit is to spare authors, who give their content freely away to this site, and who deserve at least a bit of respect for doing so, from having their non-rule breaking stories from being taken down randomly and without warning. I like your choice of words, though. Very diplomatic.

I wouldn't risk my own ass for someone else's content that either didn't meet or was questionable in regards to my private site's guidelines. Would you?

What is the point of this question? Of course the site owner isn't supposed to keep a rule-breaking story online. But how is this even related to what is being discussed?

The bulk of this thread seems to me to be ONE author harassed by ONE "troll" that he has been able to give a name (thereby someONE to obsess over) tbecause of a comment made on his story. It's become a wee bit obsessive claiming censorship, unfairness, site dysfunction, favoritism, etc etc etc.

Because of a comment? Again, the OP is angry because his story was taken down.

I get it. It sucks having someone so easily spoil your author party. If your stories are on the fence as to the rules, a simple review and explanation should likely get you right back up and running. If not, or if it becomes too frequent, perhaps your gift to the world is better suited to someplace else.

Funny, you seemed quite willing to be compassionate on this matter in another occasion. It makes one wonder what would make you react differently this time.

Even if does end up that worst case scenario, is it really worth all the stressing?

So little of what goes on at Lit should be taken personally yet so much of it is.

Seems... self destructive to me.

Again, such a change in attittude.

 

[Laurel]

The problem here is the other way around Laurel. It's not that people can't find the REPORT function - but apparently it's too easy use it for harassment-purposes in its present form.

I would agree - were this the case.

Like I said, we get dozens of reports every single day. This is the first case I can remember in over 15 years of the site existing - where two authors were reporting each other's stories for vindictive reasons. This is not normal authorly behavior.

This case is an anomaly. A single anomaly is not a reason to change a procedure which has worked well for years.