What gives with the tops lists

[EldridgeinOO]

We do have different perspectives on chaptered stories. I can't say I think much of series put together in stream of consciousness over a two-year--or neverending--period. I can see posting a novel in chapters. I don't really think that posting a year's worth of chapters while you are still wondering where the novel is going is much of anything in terms of a high-quality read. I wouldn't normally do anything like that to a reader I wanted to keep. Having said that, I'm guilty of having added to a novelization here after it was posted--but was a writing exercise in and of itself.

The problem of having different heat levels in different chapters--or even some meaty-activity in some chapters and others mostly transition--is a given with erotica. It's up to the writer to be good enough to figure out how to structure around that.

Just my opinion, of course (although a few others here have expressed it as well), but a novelization is one work, and when works are being compared against each other here for rating and listing, it shouldn't have the advantage of being treated as more than one work. This has recently been addressed in the periodic contests. So the definitions seem already to have been settled.

Yeah, nothing wrong with having different opinions.

Also, I'm not necessarily talking about something that goes on for two years. But if a story is ten, twelve chapters, released over a couple of months, why is that somehow held to a higher standard of excellence than a single two pager? (Because it has to RETAIN its average 12 times, rather than a single shot.)

From what you're saying, it seems that the only thing that can win periodic contests now is a single story? That seems radically unfair, but meh, whatever. The Powers That Be make weird decisions all the time. If they wish to basically exclude chaptered stories from any and all consideration for anything, and encourage writers to just write single chapter stories without plot or any kind of character development, then I guess that's what they might get...

You say an author should be good enough to write around it, which is fair. I say he/she shouldn't HAVE to, just to be included for consideration in awards. It's easy to just add sex to each chapter, does that make a story better?

If such a decision was indeed made, it is again a decision that does NOT benefit overal literary quality on this site.

And here's the funny thing. Say I lose my top ranking, because my story has to be considered as a whole. If I want a shot at winning 150 bucks in a monthly award, what's to stop me from deleting my lower ranked chapters, and leaving the higher ranked ones?

It's just a strange, strange decision... In effect it encourages authors to just write sex, rather than care about story. That is already the predominant motivation amongst Lit's readers, is it now the motivation from its guiding authority as well?

:|

 

[sr71plt]

Also, I'm not necessarily talking about something that goes on for two years. But if a story is ten, twelve chapters, released over a couple of months, why is that somehow held to a higher standard of excellence than a single two pager? (Because it has to RETAIN its average 12 times, rather than a single shot.)

It's not held to a higher standard. As far as I'm concerned the rating can be averaged across the work. That's how they do it at eroticstories.com. If that's a bother to the author, the author can submit it all as one entry (which is also done here). The unfairness now goes in the other direction--multiple shots at high marks by a single work. And the lists are bogged down by all those multiple entries of a single work.

From what you're saying, it seems that the only thing that can win periodic contests now is a single story? That seems radically unfair

Yep. A chaptered series IS a single story. The contests caught up with the sectionalizing of single stories and separate submissions as contest entries to increase the shot at winning. So it doesn't seem radically unfair to me at all--just the opposite. Returning to fair.

You say an author should be good enough to write around it, which is fair. I say he/she shouldn't HAVE to, just to be included for consideration in awards. It's easy to just add sex to each chapter, does that make a story better?

Perhaps you shouldn't be writing erotica or you should be more clever in structuring your chapters. Go to just about any erotica e-book publishing site, and you'll find the submissions guidance suggests (or indicates it will only select manuscripts that have) a sex scene in each chapter. it's just the way the genre works.

You don't have to do that here. But if you don't you can just live with the consequences. The guidance is built on reader preference in the genre. Can't tell the readers what they have to do/vote. Just don't complain about it if you want to go your own way.

And here's the funny thing. Say I lose my top ranking, because my story has to be considered as a whole. If I want a shot at winning 150 bucks in a monthly award, what's to stop me from deleting my lower ranked chapters, and leaving the higher ranked ones?

Can't have separate chapters in the contest, so I don't know what you're asking. You could enter them as separate stories, certainly. But if they didn't stand alone as stories as well as come together in an overarching story (which is exactly what I did in a Christmas contest last year), you shouldn't count on high ratings anyway. They would be incomplete as stories.

It's just a strange, strange decision... In effect it encourages authors to just write sex, rather than care about story. That is already the predominant motivation amongst Lit's readers, is it now the motivation from its guiding authority as well?

Not at all. What it prevents is trying to pass a single story off as multiple, separately eligible works. I think you are looking through the wrong end of the telescope on this one.

 

[Auden James]

A little analysis

After a while I did look up the "Top Lists" again today, and apart from the corrected 1000 votes treshold for incest (now 100 again) nothing of particular interest seems to have been changed. Now again the treshold for the most categories seems to be 100 votes which in my humble opinion is unfair to the stories of less popular categories.

So, what is "popular" in this case? Well, since there don't exist any available official statistics on vote numbers, there are only the number of stories which indicate the apparent popularity of a category. From this point of view the tresholds for the "Best of All Time" lists - without 'discriminating' current stories and writers - should be based on each category's popularity, i.e. number of published stories.

Therefore I've made up this treshold-key:
http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z28/Toby_photo_bucket/Chart1x.png
Ad hoc I reasoned that 15 votes should be the minimum because 10 votes are already enough for a story to be "hot", thus a story should have a little greater popularity for the "All Time" list, and 100 votes should be the maximum because otherwise it would be too unfair for current writers.

Moreover I've done a little analysis on the current "Best of All Time" lists regarding each category's popularity based on the available stories in total numbers and the corresponding vote tresholds. The chart shows each category followed by the current treshold, the number of published stories, and next the "corrected" tresholds of greater fairness to current writers and stories:
http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z28/Toby_photo_bucket/Chart2x.png

So, tell me what you think?

Besides this should solve the problem with the "Top Lists" on the much less frequented German Lit.

 

[sr71plt]

I think Photobucket doesn't like you very much.

Thanks for the thoughtful effort, though.

 

[Auden James]

I think Photobucket doesn't like you very much.

Thanks for the thoughtful effort, though.

Er, I hope the links work now...

 

[Darkniciad]

Still think that every category that has 500 stories should have a 500 place category toplist. If -- as I suspect from Manu's replies and looking at the numbers -- the category and overall toplists alogrithms are linked, then perhaps a function to reduce the number of votes necessary when generating the category toplists?

I can understand the higher threshold when generating the overall toplist. The less popular categories ( all of mine *laugh* ) have an unfair advantage without some equalization.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I do have a suggestion for the toplists. With the recent change, scores in the last 30 days are included. this should be changed to the last 46 days. The reason is that everybody interested would be able to see, on the 15th of a month, what stories will win the prizes as the highest ranking for the previous month and which stories or poems in individual categories should be nominated for annual awards for those categories.

Currently, these winners and nominations are announced as much as six months after the relevant dates, and the announcements are quite anticlimactic.

 

[manyeyedhydra]

I do have a suggestion for the toplists. With the recent change, scores in the last 30 days are included. this should be changed to the last 46 days. The reason is that everybody interested would be able to see, on the 15th of a month, what stories will win the prizes as the highest ranking for the previous month and which stories or poems in individual categories should be nominated for annual awards for those categories.

Currently, these winners and nominations are announced as much as six months after the relevant dates, and the announcements are quite anticlimactic.

I foresee carnage and lots of stories being machine-gunned on the 14th.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I foresee carnage and lots of stories being machine-gunned on the 14th.

So do I, but that already happens. Admittedly, it would be made easier to select targets.