twelveoone
ground zero
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2004
- Posts
- 5,882
Perhaps a misunderstanding over the word "feedback". Also, a question about "credentials". Both would be superseded in the marketplace, what I assume you are doing by posting here is rather a pretest, a dry run.Well, there's a false sweeping generalization. Well-grounded, experienced writers don't all (or even most, I think) look for feedback from anonymous readers with no established credentials to give constructive critique on an Internet story site. That's an amateur belief about "good" writers--as well as about the advertised purpose of this Web site. Being given the privilege of either voting or critiquing here doesn't have a thing to do with the reader's validity as a story critic. (And most readers here, I dare say, don't have any expertise in that realm.)
This certainly isn't where I come to for assessment of my writing. It's where I post stories I want to share with a broader range of readers than the marketplace accords me (and, usually, posted here several months after they have gotten a play in the marketplace).
Now any critique is either going to make sense or it is not, regardless of "credentials", you may lend a certain amount of credence to what has been said by who it came from, or you may dismiss it.
With an anonymous comment, it forces the decision back to the comment itself, and without any mention of specifics can be easily dismissed.
With anonymous voting, it provides no feedback whatsoever, not whether it is good (as if that is likely anyway) nor even if it is really popular.
My argument is just get rid of anonymous voting as it serves no real purpose. It is an illusion of importance too often abused by either system gamers or hecklers.
Sorry for what was perceived as a generalization, I should word a little more carefully, because I don't think we disagree. i.e I think we both have a "set" or the ability to "take it on the chin" and we both have the ability to distinguish what is valid criticism.
Anonymous voting, either pro or con, has nothing to do with free speech, and if Literotica wishes to retain it, it could be very easily weighed at something like one tenth value to a named vote. Right now they employ a sweeper that also can be worked around.
My argument is merely minimize the problem.
A reader will still read, an anon will still comment. You may see a little more truth in what is really popular. Or what may be more marketable.
Either way. Good Luck.