Views

[Bazzle]

I click into a story to look at the word count because there isn't any other way to see it.

Over 10K, I click right back out without reading the first sentence.

Is that a 'View', or not?

Was it at one time, but not now?

That's a pity

 

[StillStunned]

According to Laurel (may she live forever), the site gets one and a half million visitors every day. So someone somewhere is getting views.

 

[anthrodisiac]

I never see that in the format/view I use. Too many clicks to get to it.

Word count just needs to be visible like other details (ratings, series, dates, etc.) are.

You might not be in the beta version, so it could be the old version, which you have to do from an actual story (which is weird, hence probably why they changed it to be able to be done from user settings). Those are the only two ways, so your options are to do one of those, or just keep doing what you're doing, which you don't seem to enjoy much, so one of those two ought to at least let you see which stories are too long for you so you don't have to click them to see the word count. Hope that helps.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

You might not be in the beta version, so it could be the old version, which you have to do from an actual story (which is weird, hence probably why they changed it to be able to be done from user settings). Those are the only two ways, so your options are to do one of those, or just keep doing what you're doing, which you don't seem to enjoy much, so one of those two ought to at least let you see which stories are too long for you so you don't have to click them to see the word count. Hope that helps.

I want to see it here .....








... before I ever click into a story at all.

 

[Rob_Royale]

How many stories?

59

 

[Dodola]

I want to see it here .....



View attachment 2677372




... before I ever click into a story at all.

This is interesting. I've been reading here for several years, and I can honestly say that I probably only actually read about half of the stories I click on. It might even be less than half. I'm not trying to burst anyone's bubble or diminish anyone's accomplishments, but if my clicks are translated as reads, it's not an accurate statistic. In fact, it would be quite inaccurate if your title inspires lots of clicks, but your story didn't inspire as many corresponding reads.

 

[NotWise]

Reading between the lines: You are saying that 'most' readers dial in to scan the 'What's new" stuff and keep coming back for what's new from a favorite author. I kind of thought people dove into the categories that light them up. The shopping shelf is huge. Maybe vet what to read by popularity of the author or rating of the story. Maybe an existing view count points at a good read. Some of us have a bunch of followers and they get pinged when we post. I've never gotten the feeling that most of my followers immediately dive into my new story. One also might assume that if they follow you they would be more in the habit of rating your new work or laying down a comment. For me, only true of some really loyal folks.

You must have real strong "between the lines" glasses.

My point was that whether your views are increasing or decreasing might depend on your publishing pattern more than it does on the site's traffic pattern. Different people will see different patterns. Experiences can be unique.

My stats generally can't distinguish between readers that came from the New list and readers that picked your story from the category hub. The exception might be when the story is in a slow category and stays visible on the hub longer than it's visible on the New list.

Laurel told me at one time that most views come from the New list, but I think she was talking about the short term. In the long term more views are "at large." They may be from your followers, or from people who use the tag search, or from people who find the story on the "similar stories" sidebar, or any number of other routes.

I don't have an enormous number of followers, so my stats won't have an affect from followers that's as bid as some people's. But, when I have <1000 followers and a story pulls in 100,000 views, I know that followers are not a big part of the pot.

 

[Britva415]

If Literotica publishes 40,000 new stories every year (which is 110 a day, a number I think is probably less than actual), the library is flooded with new stories which I believe is a big factor on our stories getting less views than in the past. I'm coming up on my 10th anniversary of my first published story and without any data to back me up, I believe I can tell a significant difference in views in those 10 years.

Was it a lower rate of publishing back then?

 

[Britva415]

that means putting a stop to human-made slop

Well, that sure ain't happening.

Plus: It's frankly a bit hard to imagine Lit putting herself in the position of judging quality. "As long as it follows the rules and meets the guidelines" has always been the bar here, never "is it good enough."

 

[NotWise]

Was it a lower rate of publishing back then?

I kept track of new stories from March-October, 2017. They average about 81 posts per day, but varied from a Sunday low of less than 60 stories/day to a mid-week high of nearly 100 stories/day.

If I'd capture the whole year, then the winter activity might have bumped the averages up some, but that's a guess.

By contrast, I remember counting days during the pandemic summer with more than 300 new stories, and I think now we're probably averaging around 150.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Site traffic. That data is available through various sites.

Here's a link to a site traffic ranking comparison of Literotica with its competitors. Literotica stands far, far above all of them, as it has for 20 years or so.https://www.similarweb.com/website/literotica.com/competitors/

Not what I meant.

I am not measuring whether or not Lit is in a golden age by traffic, but by its impact, by its image, and the presence of quality authors and their work. In comparison with, say, 10 years ago, traffic could be even higher (as dubious as those estimates are by themselves), but I'd say that Lit is worse in the metrics I mentioned above.

 

[Rob_Royale]

It might be inbreeding... err ... interesting, that is, (damn autocorrect) to track views month to month. I might have a go at that.

 

[PennyThompson]

its impact, by its image, and the presence of quality authors and their work.

I'd say that Lit is worse in the metrics I mentioned above

I'm not sure that's what "metrics" means...

Unless you're going to buy into OP's weird "Claude, is this story written well?" Concept

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Ah, I misunderstood your comment.

How does the site do that though, unless it mandates some kind of editorial standards? Who sets them? More importantly, who would police them?

Good question. There are ways, IMO. But only if Lit changes its word count threshold policy and thus reduces the number of submissions considerably.

 

[BeechLeaf]

You type 'in' and your machine fills in 'inbreeding'. Yes, you have definitely established a pattern of some kind.

 

[StillStunned]

Plus: It's frankly a bit hard to imagine Lit putting herself in the position of judging quality. "As long as it follows the rules and meets the guidelines" has always been the bar here, never "is it good enough."

I think this has been one of Lit's strengths: it will publish almost any story, regardless of quality or merit.

When I posted my first stories here, I wasn't the accomplished (and modest) Booker Prize contender you all know me as. I thought I was, though, and Laurel (may she live forever) didn't disabuse me of my dreams by returning my story marked with large red ink: "Must try harder."

Because Lit welcomes stories from all kinds of writers, those of us who want to make a serious hobby of it have a place to refine our skills. I myself am a better writer for having had Lit as a place to publish, hear from readers and engage with other writers about the practicalities of writing fiction.

 

[anthrodisiac]

I think this has been one of Lit's strengths: it will publish almost any story, regardless of quality or merit.

When I posted my first stories here, I wasn't the accomplished (and modest) Booker Prize contender you all know me as. I thought I was, though, and Laurel (may she live forever) didn't disabuse me of my dreams by returning my story marked with large red ink: "Must try harder."

Because Lit welcomes stories from all kinds of writers, those of us who want to make a serious hobby of it have a place to refine our skills. I myself am a better writer for having had Lit as a place to publish, hear from readers and engage with other writers about the practicalities of writing fiction.

Lit is a great place to practice writing. It's simple, easy, low-risk, low bar to entry. You can get feedback, you can interact with other stories and pick up stuff from them, forums, really, it's a great platform and honestly why I chose here to get back into writing after 6 years: because it was low-risk and had a low bar to entry. My early stories were fairly rusty by my standards, and I've managed to shake a lot of that rust off in the last few months, as well as pick up new skills and types of writing that I wouldn't have considered before.

Plus, my content gets displayed in the same place as Booker Award-winning author and finalist for the Nobel Prize StillStunned, and how cool is that!

 

[AwkwardlySet]

"As long as it follows the rules and meets the guidelines" has always been the bar here, never "is it good enough."

You are right, of course, and that version of Lit was great, but it was a Lit for a different time. When Lit appeared, there were no impactful erotica/smut websites, basically. Lit became a paradise for amateur authors who wanted to write their dirty stuff. Off the top of my head, besides Lit, I remember a couple of kink-specific forums that had erotic stories, and that's it.

But these days? There are so many websites that all offer the same thing, and some of them have good readership numbers too. Then there is a literal ton of absolute and very targeted slop being offered on Amazon and such websites for a couple of bucks only, or free for those with Kindle Unlimited.

The times have changed drastically, and I think they require a different approach. Or Lit could continue to offer mostly human-made slop instead of AI-made slop and see where that leads. I don't think that it leads to a bright future in these circumstances.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I'm not sure that's what "metrics" means...

Unless you're going to buy into OP's weird "Claude, is this story written well?" Concept

It wouldn't be easy for sure, but I think there are ways to slowly weed out slop. I've got ideas, but I'm definitely not going to discuss them here.

 

[SmilingLez]

It wouldn't be easy for sure, but I think there are ways to slowly weed out slop. I've got ideas, but I'm definitely not going to discuss them here.

Creating semantic-based (vs current pattern based) filters are a bitch.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Creating semantic-based (vs current pattern based) filters are a bitch.

No doubt about that. I don't think there is a fully automated way to do that, no matter what. There has to be some editorial presence for sure. And for that to be feasible, the number of submissions has to go down by a considerable margin, which means increasing the word count limit drastically.

I know it's not a popular idea, but I think it has merit.

 

[SimonDoom]

but I'd say that Lit is worse in the metrics I mentioned above.

Based on what?

You weren't here ten years ago. On what do you base a comparison with ten years ago?

The site definitely operates better than it did ten years ago. It has some new and updated features, and its interface has been improved, although not by as much as one would have hoped during that period.

I know some people think story quality has gone down, but I think that's a result of nostalgia and the rose-colored glasses syndrome. I've been reading stories here for 20 + years and I think the quality is comparable.

What are your metrics, other than your subjective opinion? Not that there's anything wrong with your subjective opinion, but it's not enough to make a reasonable case for change.

 

[SmilingLez]

No doubt about that. I don't think there is a fully automated way to do that, no matter what. There has to be some editorial presence for sure. And for that to be feasible, the number of submissions has to go down by a considerable margin, which means increasing the word count limit drastically.

I know it's not a popular idea, but I think it has merit.

Yup, working on a semantic bestiality filter. It's hard to get this sentence through my current version - "Earl watched his dog fu*k the neighbor's poodle" while rejecting, Earl watched his dog squat and knew he wanted to fu*k...". I have a feeling semantic csam filters will be harder to develop and ai detection semantic filters an impossibility at this time

 

[LargoKitt]

Especially if you've got a rep for slow burn.

I write some slow burn stories, but also stories (which may start slow) that triple down on the raunch. I've gotten complements about 'really being there with the character' and others in the 'I had to change my shorts' category. What is most fun for me is imagining what will really appeal to women. That's a continuing education because one can get really down and dirty but you want to really get how the people feel.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

You weren't here ten years ago. On what do you base a comparison with ten years ago?

Says who? I've been a reader here for more than 20 years on and off, albeit a far less aware one.

The site definitely operates better than it did ten years ago. It has some new and updated features, and its interface has been improved, although not by as much as one would have hoped during that period.

Does it, though? Sure, I like some of the changes in the UI, and it was probably about time they made them, but the website has also become considerably more sluggish. I don't think improving the UI somewhat is going to cut it in preset circumstances. AI has changed the paradigm completely, IMO.

I know some people think story quality has gone down, but I think that's a result of nostalgia and the rose-colored glasses syndrome. I've been reading stories here for 20 + years and I think the quality is comparable.

What are your metrics, other than your subjective opinion? Not that there's anything wrong with your subjective opinion, but it's not enough to make a reasonable case for change.

So you criticize the undeniable subjectivity of my view that Lit had a stronger impact and a better image once compared to today, and then offer your own subjective view as a counterargument. I think that warrants an immediate and obvious "objection, your honor!" in your profession?