BOSTONFICTIONWRITER
The Wizard Of Literotica
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2007
- Posts
- 3,037
That's an interesting proposition. I find myself intrigued by this idea. It randomizes the story situation for the general readership (that is, those who do not populate the board and chatrooms) by removing the interesting elements that tend to create bias in voting (sexually provocative female names, for example).
The problem is that it relies on the ethics of the writers of the story. Can the writers be trusted not to run to their fanbases and send private messages requesting a vote on specific stories? No, they cannot. Can writers be trusted not to use an IP spoofing vote-bot? No, they cannot. Can writers be trusted not to publicize which story is theirs? No, they cannot.
I think that you are generally an honest person, Freddie (if I may call you that). You would hold to the bounds of the contest. sr71plt is generally an honest person. So is michchick, DarkNiciad, et al. There is at least one person on this thread that I know of that can personally create an IP spoofing vote-bot and and interest in creating the alts to go with it. It's not that difficult. I cannot create one on my own (the codes running php sites are too complex for me these days), but it's not that hard for a script kiddie. Actually, given a month or so and some crack sites, I could probably figure it out. Well, my ISP would shut me down first. Warez, not so c00l.
Now, how could a randomized contest be run so that writer fraud be reduced? Reducing reader bias is simple enough. A double blind would be best---writers unable to view the contest in progress and readers unable to know who wrote which story. If such a contest were set up, where stories were posted with no identification for a period of time for the public to vote on, would you trust the voting results? The stories would have to fit certain parameters of course, same setting and character archetyps, same category, same level of kink, etc.
But the question remains, if there were a special "Blind" contest, where writers submitted a story that met parameters, all were posted on the same day to collect votes for, say three weeks, with daily top billing on the new lists under the same title, all writers agree to say nothing of who wrote what to anyone until the end of the contest, would you believe the results of the contest were geniune or would you think that somehow, fraud was committed or the results were rigged? If the vote did not go for you and you did not win? Would you doubt the honesty of others in the contest?
Thank you for this post.
Would I more believe a contest conducted in the way you described? Yeah, I would, more than the way that the contest is conducted now. Presently, it's a popularity contest.
I'm just one guy with one computer and one IP address. I just write stories.
Further, I don't care if I win or lose a contest. My big thing is writing the story. Then, when I post it, reading the comments. I don't care so much about the score because I realize that people will down vote my story if it's better than their story.
Perhaps, the answer is a combination of things. Leaving off the author's name, having the public vote, those who contribute a story cannot vote, and having a panel of 3 or 5 volunteer judges that change with each contest. The votes count for 50% and the judges count for the other 50%.
When I see the same people winning over and again, when I read some of the stories from those writers who never win, it's just not fair.
Maybe if we all put our heads together, this could be a better place.
I agree with the people you named as being honorable. After a while, with everyone have so many alts, I just don't know who is friend and who is foe and who is cheating and who is honest (lol).
Can we all just get along (lol)?