An announcement about my future publishing on Literotica

[lovecraft68]

And it is a legit point . . . in a bookstore. But online, the sites don't stack up that way, and so my analogy of a book cover was, well, flawed. Sorry. You can't really judge a website until you have visited it, and navigated it yourself. Point. Click. Read.

Edit: That's odd, my avatar has disappeared from public posts. It's in my profile. Hmmm.

The avatar winking in and out has been another ongoing issue and we're not privy to the answer. Mine is always visible far as I can tell, but I see other people's going in and out.

When you're scrolling Smashwords which other than Amazon I believe is the top selling indy e-book site and huge for erotica, you see the gallery as you search and covers mean a lot there. Maybe not everywhere else, but especially there. I'd think titles are big too but from what I gather the cover seems to be the initial draw.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

And it is a legit point . . . in a bookstore. But online, the sites don't stack up that way, and so my analogy of a book cover was, well, flawed. Sorry. You can't really judge a website until you have visited it, and navigated it yourself. Point. Click. Read.

Edit: That's odd, my avatar has disappeared from public posts. It's in my profile. Hmmm.

Umm... sorry, but yes, online sites stack up that way. If I go to a site and it's ugly and looks amateurish then why would I waste my time there when I have other options?
First impressions matter.

 

[EmilyMiller]

I second this!!

Thanks, Frey

 

[a_horse_with_no_name]

Umm... sorry, but yes, online sites stack up that way. If I go to a site and it's ugly and looks amateurish then why would I waste my time there when I have other options?
First impressions matter.

True, you make a good point. So let me ask you this, then: is Lit your example of a fine design? The home page. Are you here because you could see the home page of this site hanging in an art gallery, or, are you here for perhaps other reasons, and you stay, for perhaps, other reasons?

Our site has colorful, sometimes humorous, banners, reasonably attractive ads, and a flow of information on the home page. I don't believe it to be ugly at all, yet, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, to be fair.

We'll never, ever, be the largest site because of our shunning of Google and other search engines (due to mandatory membership), but it's possible that people get stuck at our landing page, which arguably I didn't spend a lot of time on. Perhaps it is time for an overhaul/redesign.

 

[a_horse_with_no_name]

Thanks, Frey

Emily, Frey is an absolute breath of fresh air over at . . . oh my, almost a boo boo! Heh. But seriously, talk about a #1 recruit for 2025. And, in just a few days, she'll be guest hosting her second writing competition, and she came up with a very good idea which should yield some very funny stories.

 

[FreyaGersemi]

Edit: That's odd, my avatar has disappeared from public posts. It's in my profile. Hmmm.

Same with mine. Hmmm, indeed.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

True, you make a good point. So let me ask you this, then: is Lit your example of a fine design? The home page. Are you here because you could see the home page of this site hanging in an art gallery, or, are you here for perhaps other reasons, and you stay, for perhaps, other reasons?

Our site has colorful, sometimes humorous, banners, reasonably attractive ads, and a flow of information on the home page. I don't believe it to be ugly at all, yet, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, to be fair.

We'll never, ever, be the largest site because of our shunning of Google and other search engines (due to mandatory membership), but it's possible that people get stuck at our landing page, which arguably I didn't spend a lot of time on. Perhaps it is time for an overhaul/redesign.

Lit has first mover advantage, and scale. If you want to be the scrappy upstart, you can't point to what they did and say, "see, it's ok".
And Lit gets criticized all the time for having a dated look.

 

[lovecraft68]

True, you make a good point. So let me ask you this, then: is Lit your example of a fine design? The home page. Are you here because you could see the home page of this site hanging in an art gallery, or, are you here for perhaps other reasons, and you stay, for perhaps, other reasons?

Our site has colorful, sometimes humorous, banners, reasonably attractive ads, and a flow of information on the home page. I don't believe it to be ugly at all, yet, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, to be fair.

We'll never, ever, be the largest site because of our shunning of Google and other search engines (due to mandatory membership), but it's possible that people get stuck at our landing page, which arguably I didn't spend a lot of time on. Perhaps it is time for an overhaul/redesign.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. We're discussing book covers and you keep talking about Literotica which doesn't sell anything.

I've said in the past that Lit leaves a lot to be desired in how they're a bit behind the times and don't upgrade unless they have to. That applies to some other issues here as well and lack of response, yada yada.

The site is flawed but has its charm and a great readership and some good folks here in the forum as well.

Having said that, if you're going to continue to run it down while talking up some other amazing site-which FWIW is not that amazing but I'm not going to denigrate as you are-you are going to wear out your welcome here quickly, and the OP sucking into it is just proof of the intent of this thread, to run down the site and play victim.

So maybe dial it back a notch is what I'm saying.

Lit could be run much better for sure, but it's where I-and many others- started and I owe this site for providing a place for me to get that start. I've built a name here which has helped build a name and a brand elsewhere. It may annoy me, but I'll never forget what its done for me and how many loyal readers got me through tough times with their comments and support, how many people who have come and gone here have helped me in various ways even it was just being friends.

This is a good place to write and If you're going to keep thrashing it in a desperate bid to recruit people to your site, you won't be doing so much longer.

And if this thread keeps going in that direction, I feel it may not be going that much longer either.

Enough is enough @EmilyMiller you hate this place then leave it to people who don't.

 

[Voboy]

Having said that, if you're going to continue to run it down while talking up some other amazing site-which FWIW is not that amazing but I'm not going to denigrate as you are-you are going to wear out your welcome here quickly, and the OP sucking into it is just proof of the intent of this thread, to run down the site and play victim.

So maybe dial it back a notch is what I'm saying.

This, I tend to agree with.

@a_horse_with_no_name, your site sounds intriguing. And you're marketing it VERY cleverly in this thread. My hat's off to you for putting your money where your mouth is and for coming up with a good way to advertise it this way, but it's probably impolite to come here and do this...

 

[a_horse_with_no_name]

Whoa whoa there folks. I was simply responding to one person's thoughts on first impressions, and asking if Lit is considered fine design. I don't believe so, but I also don't believe that my site is fine design either. Not at all. It's functional (my site), and quite frankly, you might be the one(s) needing to dial it back. I've been polite. And I will continue to do so. I'm not thrashing Lit. I was asking one person for an opinion.

I envy Lit's success. It's far more successful, in many of the ways that I measure success, than my site. It has more stories. It has more authors. It ranks #1 in the search engines. I'm willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that it generates far more money than my site does, or ever will.

No no, make no mistake. My momma raised ugly ones, not dumb ones. You don't go into the 800 pound gorilla's house and kick the gorilla! If I got a little touchy it was perhaps me bristling at the comments denigrating my site's design. It's not great, but given the limitations of the software, and the lack of funding, when I compare it to the design, or lack thereof, of some sites (SOL, Blue Hell), I think ours is better. Then again, Blue Hell made more money 10 years ago than my site has made in 8 years, so there's something to be said about simplicity.

My apologies. If I offended some of you, it was unintentional. I shall step back and STFU, sometimes the wisest of all choices, and retreat back to my hole, pulling the rock over top of it. Good day.

 

[lovecraft68]

Whoa whoa there folks. I was simply responding to one person's thoughts on first impressions, and asking if Lit is considered fine design. I don't believe so, but I also don't believe that my site is fine design either. Not at all. It's functional (my site), and quite frankly, you might be the one(s) needing to dial it back. I've been polite. And I will continue to do so. I'm not thrashing Lit. I was asking one person for an opinion.

I envy Lit's success. It's far more successful, in many of the ways that I measure success, than my site. It has more stories. It has more authors. It ranks #1 in the search engines. I'm willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that it generates far more money than my site does, or ever will.

No no, make no mistake. My momma raised ugly ones, not dumb ones. You don't go into the 800 pound gorilla's house and kick the gorilla! If I got a little touchy it was perhaps me bristling at the comments denigrating my site's design. It's not great, but given the limitations of the software, and the lack of funding, when I compare it to the design, or lack thereof, of some sites (SOL, Blue Hell), I think ours is better. Then again, Blue Hell made more money 10 years ago than my site has made in 8 years, so there's something to be said about simplicity.

My apologies. If I offended some of you, it was unintentional. I shall step back and STFU, sometimes the wisest of all choices, and retreat back to my hole, pulling the rock over top of it. Good day.

Don't be insulting, it's obvious what you're doing just by the thread you decided to enter because its by someone disgruntled with the site and fueling other people to gripe as well.

Like @Voboy said, clever, but not really all that clever because you couldn't help pressing it to far.

No one can tell people they can't post here or aren't welcome here, and that's not what I'm doing but discussing another writing site in the context you are should not be welcome here. You don't walk into someone else's house and shit on them.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Well, I'm always open to learning about new story sites, so I'd appreciate it if you'd DM me the name or link to your site. @a_horse_with_no_name

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Lit's design stems from a different era of the internet, so its looks being archaic isn't unusual. It might surprise most people here, but I actually like how they updated the look of their front page. It's a blend of the website's history with a touch of a more modern design. I think it works very well.
There are many reasons I relentlessly criticize Lit for, but its looks isn't one of those.

 

[FreyaGersemi]

Emily, Frey is an absolute breath of fresh air over at . . . oh my, almost a boo boo! Heh. But seriously, talk about a #1 recruit for 2025. And, in just a few days, she'll be guest hosting her second writing competition, and she came up with a very good idea which should yield some very funny stories.

 

[TheExperimentalist]

You don't walk into someone else's house and shit on them.

Not unless that's their kink and they ask you to, anyway...

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Not unless that's their kink and they ask you to, anyway...

 

[alohadave]

Back to SOL. It does draw quite a bit of readership, and posting to the home page works. However, once you've posted there, you're done. A year later, will all new readership, you cannot repost. Two years later. Three years later. It doesn't matter. So, after sales in the hundreds of a book, after your run is over, your sales fall off a cliff. With almost two dozen authors that I assist, I have seen it happen over and over. I can understand not reposting a book that sold two dozen copies, but one that sold 100, 200, 500? If readers from "this time period" to "this time period" found it exciting enough to buy despite getting free chapters on SOL, why wouldn't readers a year later do the same? I could never get an answer. ::: shrug :::

Reposting a previously published story is spamming. If you are worried about your back catalogue not getting views, the answer is to publish new works, not continually reposting old work.

This is a universal truth in publishing. New work drives sales of new and old titles.

Your authors need to keep publishing new works if they want to remain relevant.

Edit: Also tell JTrevor to finish Kyle's Story and Gooseberry Ridge.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Your book on the ebook can be updated, but that doesn't get you a new posting. It's still available to purchase on the site, and continuing to post on the free site (with advertising), you still drive people to work. Even on Amazon, you can't repost the same work as new work. The main flaw with his ebook store is that it has no system for supported advertising or promotion. However, if your work is erotic, you can't advertisie at Amazon either.

SOL is an interesting example. I have conversed with the site owner many times over the past two years. I have brought the man many thousands of dollars each year by being an author's agent and posting books on his eBooks site, and utilizing SOL as a focal point for traffic to said eBook site. However, the mentality behind the site is as woeful as the 2002 design, and has caused me to direct staff to create two new alternatives, one an eBook site (of which there are many) and another that is similar in concept to Patreon, but without one of their major logistics problems.

With Patreon, an author can post there for say two years, and offer a monthly subscription service, allowing subscribers to read what they post. All good. The author gets supported, the readers can pick and choose what they wish to read, new chapters arriving weekly, bi-weekly, whatever. However, the flaw is that along comes Smarty Pants Johnny, who subscribes for a month, downloads ALL of said author's work for the past two years, then cancels. Our site, when finished, won't allow that to happen.

Back to SOL. It does draw quite a bit of readership, and posting to the home page works. However, once you've posted there, you're done. A year later, will all new readership, you cannot repost. Two years later. Three years later. It doesn't matter. So, after sales in the hundreds of a book, after your run is over, your sales fall off a cliff. With almost two dozen authors that I assist, I have seen it happen over and over. I can understand not reposting a book that sold two dozen copies, but one that sold 100, 200, 500? If readers from "this time period" to "this time period" found it exciting enough to buy despite getting free chapters on SOL, why wouldn't readers a year later do the same? I could never get an answer. ::: shrug :::

If you wish to know the name of the site, you may ask and I will tell. But not in this open forum. And my cover analogy is probably not a good one. Our home page is the epitome of simple, at least for me. It may not win awards for design, but after having designed websites for the past 30 years, I would expect a story repository to be just that, an easy-to-navigate library.