Inner workings of voting

[snooper]

A point to consider here: If a "legitimate" one vote is an indication of poor writing, poor story-telling, or poor spelling/grammar/formating, then Literotica's editoral approval policies should completely remove any "legitimate" one votes entirely, ...

As far as I know only "poor spelling/grammar/formating" are grounds for Lit to reject a story. Certainly I have never heard of a story being rejected for "poor story-telling".

 

[CorsetLvr]

Does it surprise anyone that someone who doesn't like a story hits the [BACK] button, rather than go to the bottom and vote? Therefore many people only see the [VOTE] box if they like the story enough to finish it. Thus those who don't much like a story, but are not offended by it, probably don't vote.

I'd like to propose another group that don't vote. In my case I tend to write longer, more descriptive stories. I'm sure that a lot of my readers never make it to the end of the story where the vote box is located. They simply expend the "stroke potential" of the story before reaching the end and don't vote.

My goal in writing is to entertain as well as arouse. Perhaps I am just doing too good of a job on the arousal goal for my own good, at least when it comes to getting votes. Well... my ego likes to think so anyway. I'll just stick to my delusions and keep on posting. My scores do tend to be in the higher range so I think that the readers that do make it to the end may think that I have achieved my goal. I think a lot of writers do get judged more on the "stroke potential" then on writing skill anyway. I know that I have read some of the stories at the top of the top lists and that has been the impression I got. Many are hardly literary masterpieces but do tend to have the afore mentioned "stroke potential" in their favor. It appears that many readers would rather not be bogged down with elaborate plots and character development and would rather skip to the action scenes. Many of these top scoring stories seem to be similar to the written versions of a porn vid in that regard. Sure, there is some plot, but just enough to set up the action scenes.

If that were not the case, someone like Dr Mabeuse, who has some of the best writing and story telling skills on Lit, would be at the top of every category that he writes in. Not that I am saying his stories do not score well, but they are rarely scored at the very high extreme on the Top lists.

OK, that's my $.02.

 

[sr71plt]

And then there is the kind-hearted group of voters who only ever vote if they like a story. They don't mind giving a 4 to a story that lacks something, but they don't ever want to discourage someone by giving them a 3 or lower.

I suspect that these two factors cover the majority of the readers, because the average is so high.

The self-justification used by the person I know who never gives less than 4 is "Who am I to criticise? I doubt I could do any better." This is a fallacious position, and the error becomes obvious if you consider that few of us can play the violin, yet we know (by hearing them both) that a Menhuin recording is better playing than the kid next door who only started to play last month.

I'm in this group, but the "self-justification" you give has nothing to do with me being in that group. The reasoning is more bald than that. A. I see no reason to break anyone else's rice bowl when their ratings mean nothing to me, they have made the effort, and neither bombing them nor falsely praising them for what I think is bad work will help them develop as a writer. and B. I'd rather voters have the same response to my work, so why should I do to others what I'd rather not be done to me?

If I find a story disgusting or hopeless, as you indicated in the first paragraph of your posting, I never make it to the end where the vote buttons are. I read very little of stories by others (don't have the time from the demands of my own writing and don't want to even subconsciously pick up someone else's good ideas), so I see no reason to continue reading a story that I don't think is sterling.

 

[sr71plt]

I'd like to propose another group that don't vote. In my case I tend to write longer, more descriptive stories. I'm sure that a lot of my readers never make it to the end of the story where the vote box is located. They simply expend the "stroke potential" of the story before reaching the end and don't vote.

It isn't just "stroke potential" that's expended (although, yes, for many it is--which shouldn't be a surprise. This is a sex site; people come here to read sex; and sex is ipso facto an immediately gratification issue for many). The reality is that the commercial world for short stories has turned to shorter (the Reader's Digest approach) rather than longer. Few short stories are being published at all, and most venues that publish them want them shorter. Look at the contests (we had this argument on the Story Feedback forum and I went and looked at the guidelines on contests that were running). Most short story contests now set limits at around 3,500 words. That's one Lit. page of material.

Most of the stories published here on Lit. aren't commercial and aren't what the mainstream readers expect. With the exception of a few contest entries I felt I really should read, I have never continued reading a story on Lit. that went to the third page. In most cases, this has meant that the story was just too wordy for what I've been trained to look for (and I judge in some short story contests).

Writers of longer stories are lucky at Lit., because there are many readers here who not only tolerate, but also prefer the longer stories. This is an exception in the industry, though. The most common PC on my stories is that the reader wished they would be longer. That isn't going to happen, because I'm a commercial writer--and I write to sell to the mainstream. (That said, I have novel-length works posted here--just in very small chunks.) And this has led me to be impatient with other writers who won't write succinctly and try to pack a lot into each word chosen.

 

[Weird Harold]

As far as I know only "poor spelling/grammar/formating" are grounds for Lit to reject a story. Certainly I have never heard of a story being rejected for "poor story-telling".

I have. In fact I have tried to help someone understand why a story was rejected and wound up telling them there was simply no story there to edit, just aimless rambling non-sequiters. It doesn't happen often because poor story-tellers generally get rejected for spelling/grammar/formatting problems before their lack of story-telling skills can be detected.

However, my point was that Literotica has pretentions of being a site for "Literate Erotica" where it isn't necessary to wade through the muck of a dozen "Ones" to find single pearl of a "Five."

 

[Rad'l]

What is the preferred means of feedback?

I have read through the 'voting' thread and now have a question. Voting has problems I agree - so I'm willing to make the effort to write a few words of praise or criticism. Should these words be in the public comments section or should they be private? 'Twould be easy to say: "public praise", "private criticism" - but sometimes there is a mix of both. Several times I've said: "Good story but needs another round of editing; our language does have some rules and conventions."

 

[mysticmoon]

Another point to consider -- one that sr71 touched on -- is voter motivation: the typical ratio of votes to views suggests that people only vote on stories that affected them strongly either positively or negatively and consequently something on the order of 60-75% of votes are either ones or fives with most of the remainder being twos and fours. Very few readers are "strongly affected" by mediocrity so a Three vote is almost always that rare and precious thing, an honest, uninflated evaluation of your story.

I actually vote all the way across the board, from 1 to 5. But I generally only comment if the vote is 3 or less, which gives me an issue when they've got private comments turned off. I'm not into publically critiquing someone because some people don't take it well, no matter how nicely it's put. (I'm not the type to say "OMG, you SUCK! How could you even consider writing this dreck." I'm generally positive, even when I'm explaining why things didn't work.) So unfortunately, a lot of lower votes are unexplained to the writer. But if I gave you a 3 or lower, I told you why, if there was a private feedback option. Otherwise, I don't generally comment on the wonderful 5 scores. I figure, you're doing it right if it passed the Wet Panty Test. Do the people who receive the 5 scores prefer feedback? Because unless you hit something really outstanding, I don't send/post it.

 

[snooper]

... I'm willing to make the effort to write a few words of praise or criticism. Should these words be in the public comments section or should they be private? ...

I think this depends on the commenter. If you want to tell the world something, go public; if you want to tell the author, go private.