"Doing Well" on Literotica

[Bramblethorn]

4. ??? Maybe something like the number of comments, quality of feedback, number of favorites and such could be used as one criterion but I am not sure how to measure this one properly

Speaking as somebody who spends a lot of time on measuring stuff: not everything that matters can be measured, and we're better off making our peace with that than trying to find a magic metric.

 

[Voboy]

Speaking as somebody who spends a lot of time on measuring stuff: not everything that matters can be measured, and we're better off making our peace with that than trying to find a magic metric.

/thread.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I'm wondering why this all matters? Why do you feel the need objective metrics for this?

I forgot to reply to this. There is certainly no "need" for this topic. I was merely trying to see the way the AH thinks in the sense of the criteria that could be used to determine the "objectively doing well" as imprecise and inaccurate as those might be. I am not pushing this on anyone, nor will this be used to determine if someone is doing well or not. Think of it as a mental exercise of a sort that might potentially yield some interesting conclusions, who knows?

I mean, on a forum where people literally create new threads just to let us know that they've seen a funny-shaped carrot at the market, I don't understand why this topic is so triggering for some people. This is all some intellectual exercise.

 

[KeithD]

In fact there are more badly written Red H stories on lit than well written ones.

Oh, come on. You have no way of knowing this is true.

 

[KeithD]

The key there, I think, is your "in my opinion." It's Laurel's site, and it's her opinion that matters in light of that.

So, getting a few Green Es from Laurel means you're doing well on Lit.? That would be fine with me.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

The key there, I think, is your "in my opinion." It's Laurel's site, and it's her opinion that matters in light of that.

She has set a threshold for a story that deserves special recognition. We don't know why she picked that threshold, but we're all subject to it. I guess I'd say that I'm fine with letting her choose that threshold, and I don't need anything much more objective. As if the site gives it to you, anyway.

I see your point... again. You are saying that if Lit has set a certain value (4.5) as a sign of "doing well" then the readers and authors are all very much affected by it so it automatically becomes a sign of "doing well" regardless if that 4.5 rating has any meaning outside of that... I have a feeling that it tramples on the "objective" part but yeah, there is logic there... I'll wait and see if someone else chimes in.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Oh, come on. You have no way of knowing this is true.

Of the Red H stories that I have read so far, at least 95% of them aren't very good - usually with hopelessly cardboard characters, meh dialogue, a complete lack of setting/place, and with what little plot there is being entirely predictable. I'm not expecting a masterpiece but come on, give us something. I think that this poll can project a winner.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I mean, on a forum where people literally create new threads just to let us know that they've seen a funny-shaped carrot at the market, I don't understand why this topic is so triggering for some people. This is all some intellectual exercise.

That's not people being "triggered", it's just people disagreeing with you.

 

[StopT]

Mommy, I'm Doing Well

All I ever craved was your love,
Yet you couldn't embrace me for who I am.
Your hugs and kisses were scarce,
Unlike the warmth other mothers willingly gave.

I longed for your pride in me,
Yet all I received were complaints and scoldings.
No matter how hard I strived, I always fell short,
"You can do better, you lazy little twat!"

But hey, look at me now, mommy,
I'm thriving! I'm doing well...
Writing porn.

 

[KeithD]

Of the Red H stories that I have read so far, at least 95% of them aren't very good - usually with hopelessly cardboard characters, meh dialogue, a complete lack of setting/place, and with what little plot there is being entirely predictable. I'm not expecting a masterpiece but come on, give us something. I think that this poll can project a winner.

You didn't specify that it was of stories you read. You used the impossible-to-substantiate generalization that discolors anything else posted/claimed. Methinks you are expecting too much--and it doesn't help when you overstate what you possibly can know what's here. If 95 percent of what you're reading at Lit. is dross, that raises the question of why you're wasting your precious time reading anything here.

 

[SimonDoom]

I had to look it up, but when I did I noticed that I have, indeed, used the phrase "doing well" a number of times in response to others' posts. Usually, it's in the context of replying to an author who is uncertain, based on the feedback they're getting, "how" they're doing. My point has been to try to reassure them that they are doing just fine within the context of the site.

I think it's perfectly OK for everyone to have their own subjective standard of "doing well." I have mine, and I'm very comfortable with it. I approach numbers with a buffet-line, "accentuating the positive" approach. Numbers are indicators, but nothing more. I focus on the numbers and comments that look good and try to ignore the rest, unless there's something constructive in it that I can learn from. If people want to see a 4.5 red H as something to strive for, that's fine, but it seems a little silly to me when for some categories that's no better than the 50 percentile. I have my own standards of what I like, and I'd say I like no more than about 10 percent of the stories I've sampled at Literotica. I try to write to that standard. It may not meet other people's standard, and that's fine, too.

My advice to people is to try to find what you, deep down, consider to be doing well, and stay true to that, and don't pay too much attention to those who try to persuade you otherwise. None of us are getting paid for this, and unless I'm quite mistaken few if any of us are actually making appreciable income that is in any way generated by what we do here. I haven't made one dime off of my fiction. For nearly all of us it's the non-monetary awards that count. That's enough for me.

 

[lovecraft68]

So, getting a few Green Es from Laurel means you're doing well on Lit.? That would be fine with me.

It means you're doing well with one person.

 

[KeithD]

On doing well on Literotica--I guess it's about as basic as it can be for me. I started posting on Literotica to have a repository outside of my computer or that could be connected to my computer to store my dirty stores. So, I guess "doing well at Literotica" for me is having Literotica continuing to exist and archive stories.

 

[KeithD]

It means you're doing well with one person.

But, as we both know, that's highly subjective. The Green Es can stop for reasons that have nothing to do with the perceived quality of the stories.

 

[SimonDoom]

Of the Red H stories that I have read so far, at least 95% of them aren't very good - usually with hopelessly cardboard characters, meh dialogue, a complete lack of setting/place, and with what little plot there is being entirely predictable. I'm not expecting a masterpiece but come on, give us something. I think that this poll can project a winner.

I'm not sure about the percentages, but in general I would say I enjoy fewer than 10 percent of the stories published at Literotica, so to that extent I would agree with you that a 4.5 doesn't strongly correlate with a story being good, by my own very subjective standards.

To the extent you imply that there is an inverse correlation between the score and the story quality, which I think (if I am not mistaken) you have suggested before, I strongly, strongly disagree, based on having read thousands of stories here. A 4.5 is no guarantee of quality. But there's a much stronger chance of a story with a 4.75 being a quality story than of a story with a 4.25 being a quality story (controlling for things like category and chapter v. standalone stories). You may disagree, and that's fine. But there's no doubt whatsoever in my mind that there's a strong correlation between score and quality.

That being said, I personally find that searching by score is not a very effective way to find a story I like. I gravitate more toward subjects that look interesting to me and authors whose stories I've enjoyed before. I also open many, many stories and scan the first few paragraphs. I can usually tell within a few paragraphs whether it's something I might like or something I probably won't.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

You didn't specify that it was of stories you read. You used the impossible-to-substantiate generalization that discolors anything else posted/claimed. Methinks you are expecting too much--and it doesn't help when you overstate what you possibly can know what's here. If 95 percent of what you're reading at Lit. is dross, that raises the question of why you're wasting your precious time reading anything here.

Keith, you've agreed with me on very similar assertions on the same topics in the past and other times you have disagreed. I know that you just like to contradict people here and there randomly to show how smart you are. It's really immature and it's a shame because without this behavior you're one of the smartest people in this forum with tons of literary experience to share with us.

 

[lovecraft68]

But, as we both know, that's highly subjective. The Green Es can stop for reasons that have nothing to do with the perceived quality of the stories.

Like you being branded a troll? I remember that post when we both got scolded for telling the truth. I think it was about the site pocketing pay outs by not notifying monthly winners when they were announced a year after the fact.

Kind of proves the merit of them. You don't get anymore because you were out of favor, so were you getting them because you were in favor?

 

[pink_silk_glove]

To the extent you imply that there is an inverse correlation between the score and the story quality

Stop right there. I have never ever asserted an inverse correlation. Not once. Ever. It's you keeps asserting that I believe this. I have always maintained that score is simply irrelevant to quality with the possible exception of N/N where plot and depth are actually part of the brief.

 

[lovecraft68]

Stop right there. I have never ever asserted an inverse correlation. Not once. Ever. It's you keeps asserting that I believe this. I have always maintained that score is simply irrelevant to quality with the possible exception of N/N where plot and depth are actually part of the brief.

You think only N/N has plot and depth?

There is plot and depth in every category, you just have to find the authors who deliver it.

But going back to the basic premise of this being an erotica site, many "poorly written plotless stories" are meant to stroke to, meaning they fit the criteria of why many come here. If it got them off, it succeeded. Cerebral is not high on the quantifier list for Lit.

 

[KeithD]

Stop right there. I have never ever asserted an inverse correlation. Not once. Ever. It's you keeps asserting that I believe this. I have always maintained that score is simply irrelevant to quality with the possible exception of N/N where plot and depth are actually part of the brief.

Yeah, not inverse. More subject to more factors than informed ability to assess the degree of quality on some objective basis.

 

[KeithD]

so were you getting them because you were in favor?

No, obviously because they were pure platinum. I guess I forgot how to write since then.

 

[EmilyMiller]

"Doing Well" on Literotica​

My rule of thumb (a metric is not possible for Lit IMO):

Of the stories I post in higher-traffic categories, ones in which the assholery of the few makes only a —0.1 to —0.2 difference, a decent number of ones rated 4.65 or greater.

Emily

 

[pink_silk_glove]

You think only N/N has plot and depth?

There is plot and depth in every category, you just have to find the authors who deliver it.

But going back to the basic premise of this being an erotica site, many "poorly written plotless stories" are meant to stroke to, meaning they fit the criteria of why many come here. If it got them off, it succeeded. Cerebral is not high on the quantifier list for Lit.

Actually often N/N doesn't. Of course there is plot and nuance and depth in every category. It just doesn't reflect in the scores, except maybe a little in N/N.

 

[KeithD]

with the possible exception of N/N where plot and depth are actually part of the brief.

You're not aware that there are novel-length works posted to other categories here? Really, your sweeping generalizations aren't helping you much.

 

[lovecraft68]

No, obviously because they were pure platinum. I guess I forgot how to write since then.

Or you write too much, and she can't choose.