Valuing the "Invisible Fan"

[SimonDoom]

I want to say a few words in honor of the "invisible fan."

The invisible fan is the person who reads your story and enjoys it. But they don't let you know it. They don't vote. They don't comment. They don't text or email you to let you know how much they liked your story. But if you give it a little thought, you know that they are out there, and their satisfaction is just as real as that of the person who left you a nice comment.

Suppose you write a story and it has 7,000 views. It has 100 votes, with a score of 4.5. That means at least 50 people liked your story enough to give it a perfect 5. But the reality is that far more than that liked your story but never let you know it. It made them smile. Maybe it made them come. Maybe they liked it so much they read it again. And again. Maybe it recalled happy memories of something that happened to them. Maybe, even, it inspired them to try to write their own story.

I have no idea how many such fans I have, but I know they're out there, and I know, even with my rather limited math skills, that they far outnumber the "visible" fans. If my story has 7000 views and 100 votes and a score of 4.5, and if even one tenth the people who "viewed" my story actually read it the whole way through, then based on the score I can estimate that there are at least a few hundred people out there in the world who liked my story.

That's nice to know. We get so wrapped up in the numbers, which are just abstractions, that we forget that behind them are real people, many of whom may have treasured our story but never let us know it. Knowing that they exist gives me a sense of satisfaction.

Don't judge or dismiss readers who don't vote or comment on your story.

The point of publication is not to accumulate abstract numbers but to connect your story with real people who appreciate it. Most of those people are "invisible." But their satisfaction counts too, and if you think about it you can get satisfaction, as well, from knowing they are out there, looking forward, invisibly, to your next story.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

It's another case of the internet created need for instant gratification destroying our sense of perspective.
For most of human history artists worked to create something beautiful and them released it into the world and never got likes, scores, comments or favorites.
Michelangelo didn't hang out in the Sistine Chapel to see what everyone thought. He moved on and created more art.

Create something beautiful, hope that it brings someone joy and go one with your life.

 

[iwatchus]

It's another case of the internet created need for instant gratification destroying our sense of perspective.
For most of human history artists worked to create something beautiful and them released it into the world and never got likes, scores, comments or favorites.
Michelangelo didn't hang out in the Sistine Chapel to see what everyone thought. He moved on and created more art.

Create something beautiful, hope that it brings someone joy and go one with your life.

I think that is a little bit of rose colored glasses. Rather than likes, many artists lived and died on the reviews of critics. Bizet died a broken man at an early age because the critics had panned Carmen. It has gone from leasing patrons to pleasing critics and academies to chasing likes. Each has their own downsides and upsides.

Most of us should have it easy; our livelihoods are not dependent on the "success" of our works, however you measure that. But humans have always wanted external validation. Even my cats want to be told they are good cats on a regular basis, so I guess it goes beyond humanity..

 

[MelissaBaby]

Don't judge or dismiss readers who don't vote or comment on your story.

I'd like to see more appreciation for readers in general. A disappointingly large amount of discourse on the AH is complaining about readers. I agree with every word of your post, but would add that we need to respect their negative opinions as well, even when they sting. Not every criticism is an insult, every one vote is not cast with malice.

 

[SimonDoom]

I'd like to see more appreciation for readers in general. A disappointingly large amount of discourse on the AH is complainting about readers. I agree with every word of your post, but would add that we need to respect their negative opinions as well, even when they sting. Not every criticism is an insult, every one vote is not cast with malice.

I completely agree. I think the attitude here can get, well, a bit precious at times. There's an overweening attitude of entitlement about the consideration and "fairness" we are due as authors. I've had communications with Laurel, and with Manu, and I've read things they've posted, and things others have posted who've had conversations with them. They have made it clear that their focus is on the readers, not us. It's quite clearly not a callous, hasty, ill-considered judgment. It's a smart and fair approach to the success of the site. I don't think we have much to complain about. We're not paying anything. To those who think the Site owes us because of what we contribute to it, I'll say, for myself, I'm already getting paid, in the satisfaction I get from connecting with readers. That's all I need. The Site owes me nothing more.

Putting the focus back on readers, I find, is a helpful tonic to the navel-gazing this place can sometimes foster.

 

[yowser]

"The Silent Sorority."

 

[Gamblnluck]

I don't think we have much to complain about. We're not paying anything. To those who think the Site owes us because of what we contribute to it, I'll say, for myself, I'm already getting paid, in the satisfaction I get from connecting with readers. That's all I need. The Site owes me nothing more.

I totally agree. I see authors here say "we aren't getting paid so who cares if they like the story I wrote." They often follow that with, "I write only for myself." or worse, "I wrote a story to shove in their faces." Then they complain how their efforts were 'unappreciated' or panned.

I personally write what I'd like to read. It may not reflect my personal kinks and desires. I go out into a realm outside myself. But I am an avid reader as well. I might spend 3 or 4 hours daily reading stories written by others. I don't read all the categories.

But with so many stories available and so little time to read them, how do I choose? I start with scoring. In some categories like LW I read stories that have a 3.5 score or higher unless I know the author and liked previous work. I also look at comments. Often, when I get bored with the days offering, I take a quick look at others. I generally find low scoring to reflect/confirm my original idea: that I will not like the story either.

Critique by readers is essential and I totally agree there many readers who don't comment or score. Also remember a view is NOT a full read. A person might have opened the story to read a few comments before he committed to reading it.

 

[Gamblnluck]

My reply got long so I'll continue: When I quit writing, I hope to leave behind a body of work that makes me proud. I get some degree of satisfaction that it was (for the most part) well received. It touched or entertained somebody. I connected.

 

[NuclearFairy]

This is exactly why I keep posting my work. Whenever I think, "Eh, maybe I won't, I don't get very many reactions." I think about all those people who never react to anything, they just read it and love it and maybe they add the author to their favorites, but most likely they just move on. And after rethinking it I decide that it's worth it, even if I can't see their reaction it's worth it.

 

[Bamagan]

I want to say a few words in honor of the "invisible fan."

The invisible fan is the person who reads your story and enjoys it. But they don't let you know it. They don't vote. They don't comment. They don't text or email you to let you know how much they liked your story. But if you give it a little thought, you know that they are out there, and their satisfaction is just as real as that of the person who left you a nice comment.

Suppose you write a story and it has 7,000 views. It has 100 votes, with a score of 4.5. That means at least 50 people liked your story enough to give it a perfect 5. But the reality is that far more than that liked your story but never let you know it. It made them smile. Maybe it made them come. Maybe they liked it so much they read it again. And again. Maybe it recalled happy memories of something that happened to them. Maybe, even, it inspired them to try to write their own story.

I have no idea how many such fans I have, but I know they're out there, and I know, even with my rather limited math skills, that they far outnumber the "visible" fans. If my story has 7000 views and 100 votes and a score of 4.5, and if even one tenth the people who "viewed" my story actually read it the whole way through, then based on the score I can estimate that there are at least a few hundred people out there in the world who liked my story.

That's nice to know. We get so wrapped up in the numbers, which are just abstractions, that we forget that behind them are real people, many of whom may have treasured our story but never let us know it. Knowing that they exist gives me a sense of satisfaction.

Don't judge or dismiss readers who don't vote or comment on your story.

The point of publication is not to accumulate abstract numbers but to connect your story with real people who appreciate it. Most of those people are "invisible." But their satisfaction counts too, and if you think about it you can get satisfaction, as well, from knowing they are out there, looking forward, invisibly, to your next story.

I dunno... these invisible readers sound about as believable as birds...

 

[TheLobster]

I dunno... these invisible readers sound about as believable as birds...

Less so, actually. Birds at least you can see, even if everyone knows they are just gov’t spy drones in a flimsy disguise.

But those “invisible readers?” Clearly, they are just a ridiculous conspiracy theory borne out of @SimonDoom’s overactive imagination!

 

[Areala-chan]

I dunno... these invisible readers sound about as believable as birds...

If they could build spy drones that didn't crap all over my car, that would be great.

In all seriousness though, I've always enjoyed the idea that what I created was being consumed, even if most people never say anything and just click on to the next one. I mean, I don't rate films and TV shows on IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes because I don't keep accounts there. I just pop in from time to time to look up info I need.

How many people actually rate something once they watch it on Netflix?

 

[SimonDoom]

I don't have anything to add, but this whole thread has been cathartic on several levels.

Although I admit to spending WAY more time that I should have on @SimonDoom 's math about how many 5-star ratings out of 100 it takes to get a 4.5 overall score (I came to the same conclusion but it took me some time to convince myself)

Think of it logically, without doing math.

4.5 is halfway between 4 and 5. So it could be 50 5s and 50 4s. That yields 4.5.

If you have more 5s, it means you must then have some scores under 4 to offset them.

Conversely, 50 is the MINIMUM number of 5s you can have, because the only way you are going to have 50 5s is if EVERY OTHER SCORE IS 4, the maximum alternative score. You can't get to 4.5 if out of 100 you have fewer than 50 5s.

Someone has posted the actual math formula for it, but this is the non-math way to get to the minimum.

 

[SimonDoom]

I totally agree. I see authors here say "we aren't getting paid so who cares if they like the story I wrote." They often follow that with, "I write only for myself." or worse, "I wrote a story to shove in their faces." Then they complain how their efforts were 'unappreciated' or panned.

I think there's a general factor "G" for complaining. People who are likely to complain about one thing are more likely to complain about another as well, even if the second complaint is unrelated to or inconsistent with the first complaint.

 

[Gamblnluck]

How many people actually rate something once they watch it on Netflix?

I do fairly often. It is right there in my face. Their rating is just a thumb up or down. I think it contributes to the 'recommended' shows they offer.

 

[iwatchus]

I do fairly often. It is right there in my face. Their rating is just a thumb up or down. I think it contributes to the 'recommended' shows they offer.

It used to, but they minimally consider it these days. At one point in my career, I was building recommender systems and Netflix was considered the pinnacle of the practice. They famously ran a competition for who could write the recommender that would do the best job of finding movies that the customers would like. The winning entrant actually built a very accurate model, but by the time it was resolved, they had decided to stop trying. The current recommendations are primarily what they want you to watch, based on business factors, rather than what you would actually like that they offer.

 

[Gamblnluck]

It used to, but they minimally consider it these days. At one point in my career, I was building recommender systems and Netflix was considered the pinnacle of the practice. They famously ran a competition for who could write the recommender that would do the best job of finding movies that the customers would like. The winning entrant actually built a very accurate model, but by the time it was resolved, they had decided to stop trying. The current recommendations are primarily what they want you to watch, based on business factors, rather than what you would actually like that they offer.

Well crap! Then I won't bother. I noticed I get far different recommendations than my wife, so I thought it was valid.

 

[iwatchus]

Maye they have gotten better again, I have not been working in that field for several years now. And there is real competition now unlike a decade ago. At that point, there weren't a lot of streaming alternatives, so they figured they had a captive audience and reducing their costs was paramount to their bottom line.

 

[filthytrancendence]

I dunno... these invisible readers sound about as believable as birds...

I can assure you, the birds are quite real.

 

[ThatNewGuy]

The invisible fan is the person who reads your story and enjoys it. But they don't let you know it. They don't vote. They don't comment.

I'm often an invisible fan. I just used a story as an example in the "Making the reader finish" thread. I read it years ago and really liked it. Before using it as an example, I went back to check the comment I'd left to refresh my memory ... only to find I'd never left one. Didn't even rate it!

My problem is that I tend to leave long comments or none at all. When I enjoy a story, I'm excited for the author! I want to tell them about specific touches that I liked or lines of dialogue that made me smile or moments that made a character feel alive.

Then I remember all that takes time. And I just bail.

So Simon's right. Invisible fans are out there. It's fun to be reminded of that sometimes.

 

[filthytrancendence]

I feel like I have an easier time empathizing with this kind of reader, because this is exactly my reading habit. Or at least it was before I got deeper into publishing my own stuff. I'm a lot more pragmatic now that I'm deeper into the guts of the site.

The thought of rating something immediately after finishing it prompts a specific kind of anxiety in me, and then I start thinking too hard about how my honest opinion is going to effect their rating, and then I start thinking too hard about whether my reductive 1-5 star opinion is actually useful to anybody because my tastes are outside the norm of the site, and then...

 

[SimonDoom]

I'm often an invisible fan.

I was an invisible fan for something like 12 years, before I ever wrote a story. I might have voted on or commented on a story once in a while, but rarely. To be honest, it never occurred to me that I "should" vote or comment. I liked to slip in, read the story, and slip out. I had no interest in being part of something. It wasn't a deliberate choice. My failure to comment wasn't a reflection of dislike; on the contrary, I had a great deal of fun getting acquainted with the stories here at Literotica.

It was only in 2016 when I started writing that I thought about things from the author's point of view. I think because of all those years looking at things only from the reader's point of view I may be more sympathetic to it than those who came charging into Literotica writing stories without spending time as quiet, silent readers.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I think that is a little bit of rose colored glasses. Rather than likes, many artists lived and died on the reviews of critics. Bizet died a broken man at an early age because the critics had panned Carmen. It has gone from leasing patrons to pleasing critics and academies to chasing likes. Each has their own downsides and upsides.

Most of us should have it easy; our livelihoods are not dependent on the "success" of our works, however you measure that. But humans have always wanted external validation. Even my cats want to be told they are good cats on a regular basis, so I guess it goes beyond humanity..

Perhaps, but humans exist on a spectrum. There are people like Bizet on one extreme, and there are people who are completely detached and don't care on the other end (although those people are invariably not the ones who are constantly going on about how they don't care what other people think).

The internet has wired us to seek that instant gratification in pursuit of a dopamine hit. It wasn't always this way. Look at the history of naughty stories on the internet. Those of you who are a bit more chronologically gifted than I am can correct me if I'm wrong, but in the early days when sites like ASSTR and the Kristen archive existed (and others I'm sure, but those are the only ones I've heard about) people uploaded a story and that was it.
No likes, no votes, no favorites, no followers. It was just out there. In spite of that thousands of people uploaded stories.
They weren't getting any feedback at all, yet they continued to do it.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

There's an overweening attitude of entitlement about the consideration and "fairness" we are due as authors. I've had communications with Laurel, and with Manu, and I've read things they've posted, and things others have posted who've had conversations with them. They have made it clear that their focus is on the readers, not us. It's quite clearly not a callous, hasty, ill-considered judgment. It's a smart and fair approach to the success of the site. I don't think we have much to complain about. We're not paying anything. To those who think the Site owes us because of what we contribute to it, I'll say, for myself, I'm already getting paid, in the satisfaction I get from connecting with readers. That's all I need. The Site owes me nothing more.

Putting the focus back on readers, I find, is a helpful tonic to the navel-gazing this place can sometimes foster.

While I don't dispute the reader-centric approach of Lit, and I find nothing wrong with it, there is a small fallacy in what you are saying.
Lit features aren't a zero-sum game. Introducing some tiny benefits for authors doesn't take away from the reader experience in any way. We've discussed small site improvements here many times that would benefit both.
We know it all falls on deaf ears, but still, expressing ideas and desires isn't harming anyone. I don't understand the attitude of some denizens here who see website criticism as heresy. Not talking about you, of course.

What I am saying is that it's fine to be satisfied and happy about what Literotica offers to authors. The reader-centric approach is absolutely fine. But it's also fine to wish for more.

 

[SimonDoom]

We know it all falls on deaf ears,

I don't know this, and I don't believe this. As I wrote above, I don't believe the Site owners are merely ignoring you. I believe, based on years of experience at this place, that they have considered suggestions like yours and rejected them. They have reasons for taking another path. That's not "deaf ears."

You are entitled to your opinion. But I think you persist in the idea that nobody is listening to you or taking you seriously, and the reality is that they/we ARE listening to you, and they/we just don't agree with you. I've had enough communications with Laurel and Manu over the years that I think this much better describes their attitude than your description.

With respect to the author-reader zero sum game, you're right on some issues, but not others. Getting rid of anonymous votes is an example. It might make (some) authors happier (not me), but it would take away something that many readers want -- the right to anonymously vote. There's also the amount of limited time. Were time unlimited they would be able to devote plenty of time to both readers and authors and please both. With limited time, which is what I think they have, there's a certain amount of triage necessary, and it makes sense to tend to the readers first.