Why Has the Quality of Submissions to Literotica Plummeted so Dramatically?

[ChloeTzang]

It certainly seems that's what they are doing every time writing BDSM comes up on the board. Instant yammering about doing it "right."

That really annoys me. I like a story with some mild bdsm and I don’t really care if the knots are tied the right way or there’s a safe word as long as the story’s good. All that rigmarole takes the fun out of reading it.

 

[ChloeTzang]

... Meanwhile, outside the building, a forlorn figure stands alone on a desolate playground, looking in, wondering why all the backs are turned.

Noooo. I am writing that forlorn figure into a story as we speak. A poet with literary aspirations, George, Percy, Mary, Claire and John. A rainy evening, a fire, a little laudanum in the claret, a little sex and stuff and then.... omg.... Ruthven... it’s a lot of fun.

 

[Blind_Justice]

*Looks in*

You're all STILL here?

Aren't there any better threads to hang around in? Just saying

 

[KeithD]

*Looks in*

You're all STILL here?

Aren't there any better threads to hang around in? Just saying

And yet you're here.

 

[Hypoxia]

I think it's possible that the average quality of story has declined...

How can ASQ (average story quality) be measured? Not by votes and faves, probably. Have we an AI smart enough to scan everything and evaluate 'quality'? Do Laurel's E scores indicate quality? Is any discussion of LIT quality-over-time doomed to irrelevance?

 

[SimonDoom]

How can ASQ (average story quality) be measured? Not by votes and faves, probably. Have we an AI smart enough to scan everything and evaluate 'quality'? Do Laurel's E scores indicate quality? Is any discussion of LIT quality-over-time doomed to irrelevance?

I don't think it can, in a meaningful way. I suppose a computer program could ID frequency of misspellings and grammatical errors, but that would be at best a rough proxy for quality. I was speaking hypothetically, I suppose.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

I don't think it can, in a meaningful way. I suppose a computer program could ID frequency of misspellings and grammatical errors, but that would be at best a rough proxy for quality. I was speaking hypothetically, I suppose.

It could be done, but then Huckleberry Finn would get an F, given all the vernacular. Damfino.

Sales don’t cut it as a standard, either. Otherwise 50 Shades would be classic literature.

Critical reviews? Let’s be serious.

Again, damfino.

 

[KeithD]

I don't see why in the hell anyone would even waste time trying to put stats to the rise or fall of "quality" on Literotica--other than as a mechanism to avoid writing.

 

[ChloeTzang]

To my mind, small and featherlite as it is, writer and reader satisfaction is what it’s all about. Obviously we all get a lot of satisfaction over writing here or we’d go elsewhere, and the readers keep on coming. That is measurable because we see the views. No readers and Literotica would fade away.... so as long as the readers come, she says, slightly tongue in cheek and..

.... hey, don’t point that thing at me.... screams and ducks

 

[Blind_Justice]

And yet you're here.

The blind guy just followed the noise. I was curious how the thread made it to six pages already.

 

[Hypoxia]

I was curious how the thread made it to six pages already.

Set your posts-per-page count to 100. Then it's only a page and a half. Meanwhile, we're troll-feeding. Fat little bugger, ain't he?

 

[ttvttp]

Set your posts-per-page count to 100. Then it's only a page and a half. Meanwhile, we're troll-feeding. Fat little bugger, ain't he?

I never liked calling these losers trolls. Gives trolls a bad name.

 

[gunhilltrain]

Well, you can always try my stuff. I don't write strokers or one pagers, at least.

There's nothing wrong with a few strokers. Just don't overdo it because it might not be good for your eyesight.

"Ain't no law against it yet, oh she bop."

 

[TarnishedPenny]

I don't see why in the hell anyone would even waste time trying to put stats to the rise or fall of "quality" on Literotica--other than as a mechanism to avoid writing.

Here? Hopeless, I fear. And as you so correctly note, probably pointless.

But this doesn't, I think, have to be limited to this happy place. The bigger question, to me, is if it is possible to quantify literary worth or value. If so, how?

 

[SimonDoom]

The bigger question, to me, is if it is possible to quantify literary worth or value. If so, how?

No. I don't think so.

Which isn't to say it isn't meaningful to talk about some literature being "better" than other literature. I don't believe it's entirely subjective. I think there is such a thing as good art and bad art, but I don't know of any test that would command widespread approval to determine what's good and what's bad.

But let's say you took 100 of the authors who regularly contribute to the author's forum, and you had them blindly (meaning they didn't know who the author was ) read 100 stories, and then grade them. I'm sure that as to many stories there would a significant measure of agreement. Some stories would get bad grades from most authors, and some would get good grades from most authors. Some would get grades all over the map, but grades wouldn't be randomly distributed. Even if it's hard to pin down what, exactly, makes one story good and another bad, I think there is, to at least some degree, substantial agreement among experienced and discerning readers about what is good and what is bad. So it's not completely subjective.

 

[KeithD]

That, plus a dime, and you've got 10 cents and lost time.

 

[NotWise]

But let's say you took 100 of the authors who regularly contribute to the author's forum, and you had them blindly (meaning they didn't know who the author was ) read 100 stories, and then grade them. I'm sure that as to many stories there would a significant measure of agreement.

I doubt that we even have a consensus about what "good" means.

 

[SimonDoom]

I doubt that we even have a consensus about what "good" means.

I don't believe that. I think if one were to conduct the study there would be widespread agreement on what "good" is. Not perfect agreement, of course, but statistically significant agreement. That's all that matters -- agreement has to be statistically significant. I'd bet dollars to donuts that you'd get that from a test of 100 authors here. In a statistical sense, there probably would be a rough consensus. You could get an even better sense of the substance of the consensus if readers were tested on what they observed in the stories they graded and why they graded the way they did.

Discerning readers recognize and appreciate many of the same things: good grammar, good spelling, command of diction and vocabulary, a coherent plot, well-developed characters, believable dialogue, attention to detail, among other things.

 

[Hypoxia]

I doubt that we even have a consensus about what "good" means.

Possible definitions:

* I finished reading it.
* I masturbated on it.
* I didn't vomit on it.
* It hit all my kinks.
* It's not too illegible.
* My daughter liked it.
* It's been animated.
* It's better than in Parsi.
* I found secret codes.
* I think I grok it.
* I was paid to boost it.

 

[NotWise]

Discerning readers recognize and appreciate many of the same things: good grammar, good spelling, command of diction and vocabulary, a coherent plot, well-developed characters, believable dialogue, attention to detail, among other things.

You realize, I hope, that some people will read only strokers and anything else is "bad," and that others will view any story in certain categories as "bad" regardless of the writing.

Once you get past those (and other) gross differences you've only just started to ask what "good" might mean. I don't even want to think about how you might try to prove something like that is statistically significant.

 

[ttvttp]

Possible definitions:

* I finished reading it.
* I masturbated on it.
* I didn't vomit on it.
* It hit all my kinks.
* It's not too illegible.
* My daughter liked it.
* It's been animated.
* It's better than in Parsi.
* I found secret codes.
* I think I grok it.
* I was paid to boost it.

I do think the stories in porn that mean the most to use hit all our kinks. Certainly my view. I read stories where the author is obviously not a native english speaker but that doesn't matter. The story makes me feel enlarging in the johnson and that tells me all I need to know.

 

[NotWise]

The story makes me feel enlarging in the johnson and that tells me all I need to know.

Another common definition of what "good" means.

 

[yukonnights]

You realize, I hope, that some people will read only strokers and anything else is "bad," and that others will view any story in certain categories as "bad" regardless of the writing.

Once you get past those (and other) gross differences you've only just started to ask what "good" might mean. I don't even want to think about how you might try to prove something like that is statistically significant.

I just want to see the list of 100 authors who regularly contribute to the AH I would have guessed much fewer would be able to be rounded up...but now we have to negotiate "regularly contribute"...in addition to "good"

Wait a minute! Are we still being suckered in by that guy from the first post...or have we moved on to something new?

 

[ttvttp]

I just want to see the list of 100 authors who regularly contribute to the AH I would have guessed much fewer would be able to be rounded up...but now we have to negotiate "regularly contribute"...in addition to "good"

Wait a minute! Are we still being suckered in by that guy from the first post...or have we moved on to something new?

I think we are taking what he said and having a real discussion. We all know he is full of horseshit but that doesn't mean we can't discuss.

 

[redzinger]

Turning this around slightly, stop me if I've said this already, but I've been in awe of the response to my latest story. It's only been up 48 hours and already has more votes and comments, and almost as many likes as either of my contest placers. Not sure how this has happened, especially the incredibly high read-to-vote ratio, but this far exceeds earlier stories.

(I feared people would hit the back button due to its topic, or not read it at all as it was buried quite far down the New list.)

Anyone else have any observations about the Lit audience changing?