Naoko Smith’s Revue Bar … Review Thread

[curl4ever]

It was a lot of fun, wasn't it?

How about five roses? A girl does love to get roses

 

[NaokoSmith]

Thank you.

 

[Handley_Page]

You can say it how you feel it. I actually would like to get honest feedback on my blog, as I keep meaning to publicise it more widely for younger people. I have let it become quite intellectual as a lot of writers go on there at the moment. People seem to like it. Let me know.

I find myself in a bit of a cleft stick.
I do not feel very competent to criticize a story in the way I think it should (with scientific rigour, etc.,. Most of the stories I read are far better put together than anything I can write.

All I can say is whether or not I enjoyed it and possible why it did or didn't.

Will that be sufficient ?

PS. Naoko, your rose lady looks like an Elvgren. Who drew it ?

 

[NaokoSmith]

I find myself in a bit of a cleft stick.
I do not feel very competent to criticize a story in the way I think it should (with scientific rigour, etc.,. Most of the stories I read are far better put together than anything I can write.

All I can say is whether or not I enjoyed it and possible why it did or didn't.

Will that be sufficient ?

PS. Naoko, your rose lady looks like an Elvgren. Who drew it ?

Perfectly sufficient. I await your draft review eagerly. You can email it - or send it over the radio waves (see below ).

The lady blowing the kiss is a Rolf Armstrong.

I'm sorry to say that the one who has got her stockings caught, has not been properly attributed to an artist - the naughty person on pinterest just put the picture up without saying who did it.

This is an Elvgren - I picked it out specially for you

 

[Learin]

Well, honestly, I find your reviews distracting. Related humour is fine but you get carried away. As a result, the read is cumbersome and longer than necessary. I liked some of it but skimmed through the rest. I couldn't find anything wrong with your viewpoints, which were mostly great. I really wish you'd take a step back and talk to-the-point where it's needed the most.

I'm not trying to troll you. Just giving my 2 cents worth of honest opinion.

Whatever that means.

:]

Anyway, great to see another reviewer in the forum doing the community service and all that. Hope you didn't take this post as an offence.


Lee

 

[NaokoSmith]

Well, honestly, I find your reviews distracting. Related humour is fine but you get carried away. As a result, the read is cumbersome and longer than necessary. I liked some of it but skimmed through the rest. I couldn't find anything wrong with your viewpoints, which were mostly great. I really wish you'd take a step back and talk to-the-point where it's needed the most.

I'm not trying to troll you. Just giving my 2 cents worth of honest opinion.

Whatever that means.

:]

Anyway, great to see another reviewer in the forum doing the community service and all that. Hope you didn't take this post as an offence.


Lee

That's really helpful. I do appreciate it. I think the guys are used to my style, because they mostly read my thread over on AH.

I have always been a bit prone to larking about in order to hide that I actually have a planet-sized brain, as in my day we girls were not supposed to be brainy. Maybe I should do the lark-y bit on AH and make my blogposts more serious.

Thank you.

 

[Learin]

That's really helpful. I do appreciate it. I think the guys are used to my style, because they mostly read my thread over on AH.

I have always been a bit prone to larking about in order to hide that I actually have a planet-sized brain, as in my day we girls were not supposed to be brainy. Maybe I should do the lark-y bit on AH and make my blogposts more serious.

Thank you.

Lol...planet-sized brain or not, I don't think anyone needs to hide/brag about their intelligence. Being their natural selves tells a lot of things too.

I think a direct approach helps you get your point through to the readers as well as the author. By lollygagging...not so much. From my experience in the office, talking to-the-point means saving valuable time of the audience as well as yourself, showcases your precision, fluency and your expertise on the subject itself.

Use humour sparingly in a review, like when you don't want to make it harsh on the author. That's the best use I can think of humour as a tool.

I think I'll take my leave here. Don't want to turn your thread into an unnecessary lecture class.

Thanks again for being cool with it.


Lee

 

[NaokoSmith]

Lol...planet-sized brain or not, I don't think anyone needs to hide/brag about their intelligence. Being their natural selves tells a lot of things too.

I think a direct approach helps you get your point through to the readers as well as the author. By lollygagging...not so much. From my experience in the office, talking to-the-point means saving valuable time of the audience as well as yourself, showcases your precision, fluency and your expertise on the subject itself.

Use humour sparingly in a review, like when you don't want to make it harsh on the author. That's the best use I can think of humour as a tool.

I think I'll take my leave here. Don't want to turn your thread into an unnecessary lecture class.

Thanks again for being cool with it.

Lee

No no! I want more feedback. Seriously. I am very keen to get some perspective on how I write my reviews. For years I was just turning out my review blogposts into a void. I knew people were reading them but I never got comments or heard from anyone. Recently I got some great feedback and it's enabling me to re-think how I write. Please keep an eye on the blog and let me know if I am hitting the tone better. I have a couple of blogposts I already wrote, and they are a bit heavy on the humour, but I am having a good think about how to clear the posts up.

 

[NaokoSmith]

As Christmas is coming and people start to get desperate for presents to give, I have provided a review of calendars.

Thanks to Handley_Page and CharlieB4 for mentioning to me that Oxford University's women's team have produced a nude calendar . What slags - you could expect nothing less of the gels in dark blue, could you.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Naoko,

you're chasing feedback on your blog style. I reckon you got a good balance with your PWD review (I declare my vested interest here), perhaps because it was a serious topic (not that your other topics are less serious, more that this one was more serious - if that makes sense).

Some of your other reviews, yes I see that you are going for the lighter side, but the 'non language' does get in the way for me (as for others, both here and on your blog). Txt speak, Twitter talk, your own shorthands - we don't all share that lingo. Would you use an emoticon or a <snerk> in a conversation? lol - maybe (Phil Jupitus style on QI), but I would doubt the rest of it?

Write as you would talk, surely? That's your voice, isn't it?

two bob, ta

A

 

[NotWise]

I think that Naoko's audience for the blog is younger readers who need to be encouraged to safe sex. I don't see her emoticons and asides as being far out of bounds in that context.

For reviews aimed at a geriatric audience, maybe those features are less appropriate. But honestly, if I could get her to review any of my stories then an occasional <wink> or <snerk> and maybe a rose or two wouldn't bother me at all. It is the content of the review rather than the form of the review that I look for.

 

[Learin]

No no! I want more feedback. Seriously. I am very keen to get some perspective on how I write my reviews. For years I was just turning out my review blogposts into a void. I knew people were reading them but I never got comments or heard from anyone. Recently I got some great feedback and it's enabling me to re-think how I write. Please keep an eye on the blog and let me know if I am hitting the tone better. I have a couple of blogposts I already wrote, and they are a bit heavy on the humour, but I am having a good think about how to clear the posts up.

Well, at the cost of the receiver calling me a heartless bitch, I wouldn't even ask myself for feedback.

Just sayin'.

I left these points out because...honestly, I've no clue what these might mean at first glance. Rude, obviously, but also bitchy. And criticising some critic for their review on a erotica website implies that someone has got a lot of free time on their hands. Which I'd really like to have, but don't.


Please post a link to the Lit Stories before you link the blog.

At first glance, this ^^ tells me that your post actually has something to do with Lit. I don't want to circumvent through your blog to read the stories. That's just a manipulative way to rope people in. I want the stories first, then your review. I like the way Bard and Lien first let the readers read it for themselves, and then put their review up for consideration. It implies that it's more about the story up there than the review down here. Moreover, it'll also stop users from complaining that this thread is more about your blog.

One more thing that I find irritating is your blogpost link with every review.

It's not the link that is offensive. It's the way you put it. A combination of rub-it-in-your-face promotion and the usual spam that we get to see. It feels as if you're not promoting Lit stories through your blog, but the other way around. Your use of hyperlinked pictures with every post reminds me, (unfortunately) of scouries.

Sorry, but it does.

As much as I find offsite links offensive, I take exceptions when people give me a hint of what to expect when I click that link. You don't give any such hint or even a description of what you wrote in your blogpost. Even a small "I felt it was this and this but not that and that" would suffice. Tell me some more before I click that thing.

And finally, this I speak because of personal tastes, please make your links inconspicuous. Give it a coating of black colour or put it in the side. Anything that stops it from being a constant, spammy pop-up on my screen. For example:

see here

The black molds in perfectly with your font colour and doesn't make it look like a spam. If I like your description, I might even be tempted to give an innocent click to see the complete story.

Like the gals in advertisement dep say - It's all about luring customers in rather than rubbing it on their faces. Subtle, yet compelling. This is what you should aim for.

Do I think you're spamming Lit?

No. Not in the least.

There must be a perfect reason for you to post reviews for Lit stories on your blog, and I won't bug you for it, but please remember that you're walking a very thin line between genuine help and outright spam. There's no in-between thingy here.

I like this forum because of the no ads, no spam policy. It's a mighty relief as compared to other websites. Seeing a thread like this breaks the norm, sure, but as long as it has non-spammy invitations to read your blog, it's all good.


L

 

[NaokoSmith]

This is terrific! Really helpful. I will give it all some thought. To start with, I'll stop posting the 50s pictures in here.

TBH, I thought this was a very quiet place and nobody would really notice my thread, so I decorated it in a way that my regular pals over on AH would like. I will take it a bit more seriously, though.

Good idea about posting the story link first so you can read the story before the review; I often do have to write spoilers when I review a story.

NotWise is right about the txt tlk, unfortunately, electricblue66. If I tell my young daughter a joke, she will often not laugh, instead she'll actually say: "lol". So I think I probably should keep the LOLs and <snerk>s, to make it look like the reviews are light-hearted enough for the younger audience. They are a bit like Marmite, either you love them or hate them, and those who hate them admit they can just skip them and read the rest of the review.

NotWise, I will put you on my enormous To Be Read list. Right now I have to sort out my ballgown for the burlesque I'm going to and do my nails, but you are allowed to remind me every so often that I said I would and ask when I might get round to it.


This is the latest blogpost. It was written by curl4ever and is not about a story, rather it's a riposte to one of the comments on my blogpost about calendars, which questioned whether Serena Williams is sufficiently feminine to be attractive.

Although neither this nor the blogpost it discusses were about Literotica stories, I don't regard them as spam. When I write about non-Literotica stories or other things like calendars, this is still writing which reflects on erotica, sexuality, the representation of women, and other topics which are of interest to writers here.

 

[Gorza]

Please post a link to the Lit Stories before you link the blog.

At first glance, this ^^ tells me that your post actually has something to do with Lit. I don't want to circumvent through your blog to read the stories. That's just a manipulative way to rope people in. I want the stories first, then your review. I like the way Bard and Lien first let the readers read it for themselves, and then put their review up for consideration. It implies that it's more about the story up there than the review down here. Moreover, it'll also stop users from complaining that this thread is more about your blog.

It is good to have a few people who offer a systematic approach to review stories on Lit. Bard, Lien and Naoko do us all a service, and drive traffic to our stories however they do it.

I agree in part with Learin. Often I find myself reading a story because I'm drawn to it by the review, and would not read it if it weren't for the review. Sometimes the review (especially Naoko's or curl's) are better reads than the story. Perhaps [highlight]the forum posts should have a short précis of the story (and the review) with links to both the story and the blog post reviewing it[/highlight]. Then Learin could go read the story first, and I could read the review first.

As much as I find offsite links offensive, I take exceptions when people give me a hint of what to expect when I click that link. You don't give any such hint or even a description of what you wrote in your blogpost. Even a small "I felt it was this and this but not that and that" would suffice. Tell me some more before I click that thing.

Yup, I think I little introduction to what the story and the review here will give us positive incentive to engage with the blog.

I'd imagine if I kept a blog that I would want to encourage people to read and comment at every opportunity. I think that's only natural; we want our projects to succeed. I think there is a world of difference between this and mass-manufactured spam.

This is terrific! Really helpful. I will give it all some thought. To start with, I'll stop posting the 50s pictures in here.

I like the pictures. I think they're fun.

TBH, I thought this was a very quiet place and nobody would really notice my thread, so I decorated it in a way that my regular pals over on AH would like. I will take it a bit more seriously, though.

Yes, it's quiet here. Courage for brightening the place up!

Good idea about posting the story link first so you can read the story before the review; I often do have to write spoilers when I review a story.

NotWise is right about the txt tlk, unfortunately, electricblue66. If I tell my young daughter a joke, she will often not laugh, instead she'll actually say: "lol". So I think I probably should keep the LOLs and <snerk>s, to make it look like the reviews are light-hearted enough for the younger audience. They are a bit like Marmite, either you love them or hate them, and those who hate them admit they can just skip them and read the rest of the review.

It's a question of fitting the register to the audience. I cannot gauge how this is going down. I've certainly heard lecturers trying to be 'down with the kids' and failing miserably. This isn't that by any means, but maybe we are not the people you should ask for feedback on this matter.

This is the latest blogpost. It was written by curl4ever and is not about a story, rather it's a riposte to one of the comments on my blogpost about calendars, which questioned whether Serena Williams is sufficiently feminine to be attractive.

Although neither this nor the blogpost it discusses were about Literotica stories, I don't regard them as spam. When I write about non-Literotica stories or other things like calendars, this is still writing which reflects on erotica, sexuality, the representation of women, and other topics which are of interest to writers here.

Yes, I agree. Sometimes the discussion that goes off topic is useful as long as it doesn't eclipse the topic itself.

 

[sr71plt]

I'd imagine if I kept a blog that I would want to encourage people to read and comment at every opportunity. I think that's only natural; we want our projects to succeed. I think there is a world of difference between this and mass-manufactured spam.

I sure that's the way Naoko looks at it too, but it flies in the face of the Web site's interests and its forum rules (Rule #6, which Lit. is giving Naoko a pass on for some reason). I'm with Learin that Naoko's blanket promotion of her blog on the forum is purposeful spam with the intent to get readers to leave here (at least temporarily) and read her blog. This is highlighted when she has something to post about Lit. stories and such and doesn't post them here--she sends you to her blog. I think her spamming is pretty blatant and her priority is her blog, not Lit. Not everyone on the AH is impressed with her razzle dazzle promotion of an off site--but she carefully worded that to be her friends on AH who love it. I've stopped reading it, because it's very Barnum and Bailey in content and too much of a personal daily blog right here--and because she is sending you off this site to read what she has to say.

 

[Gorza]

I sure that's the way Naoko looks at it too, but it flies in the face of the Web site's interests and its forum rules (Rule #6, which Lit. is giving Naoko a pass on for some reason). I'm with Learin that Naoko's blanket promotion of her blog on the forum is purposeful spam with the intent to get readers to leave here (at least temporarily) and read her blog. This is highlighted when she has something to post about Lit. stories and such and doesn't post them here--she sends you to her blog. I think her spamming is pretty blatant and her priority is her blog, not Lit. Not everyone on the AH is impressed with her razzle dazzle promotion of an off site--but she carefully worded that to be her friends on AH who love it. I've stopped reading it, because it's very Barnum and Bailey in content and too much of a personal daily blog right here--and because she is sending you off this site to read what she has to say.

The point is that she was given the OK by our Benign Pornocrator. The ruling was quite clear. The blog is non-commercial and is primarily focused on reviews of Lit stories. That is, the blog's priority is publicising Lit stories, and it directs a small amount of traffic to Lit. The content might not be to everyone's taste, but that is just that, a matter of taste.

 

[sr71plt]

The point is that she was given the OK by our Benign Pornocrator. The ruling was quite clear. The blog is non-commercial and is primarily focused on reviews of Lit stories. That is, the blog's priority is publicising Lit stories, and it directs a small amount of traffic to Lit. The content might not be to everyone's taste, but that is just that, a matter of taste.

I don't have to think the ruling is any less dopey just because it is given from on high. If the review is of a Lit. story there is no reason--other than off-site blog promotion--that the review isn't posted here just like everyone else does.

 

[lovecraft68]

I sure that's the way Naoko looks at it too, but it flies in the face of the Web site's interests and its forum rules (Rule #6, which Lit. is giving Naoko a pass on for some reason). I'm with Learin that Naoko's blanket promotion of her blog on the forum is purposeful spam with the intent to get readers to leave here (at least temporarily) and read her blog. This is highlighted when she has something to post about Lit. stories and such and doesn't post them here--she sends you to her blog. I think her spamming is pretty blatant and her priority is her blog, not Lit. Not everyone on the AH is impressed with her razzle dazzle promotion of an off site--but she carefully worded that to be her friends on AH who love it. I've stopped reading it, because it's very Barnum and Bailey in content and too much of a personal daily blog right here--and because she is sending you off this site to read what she has to say.

I've mentioned this before, but like Devilus was told it doesn't matter.

I have no issue with anyone linking anything in their sig, their books, their website, a blog, but when its incessantly linked in posts it becomes sickening and too much.

She has been here for three years, everyone knows she has a blog and it is linked in the sig so if people are curious they can click it, but this "look here, look at my blog, you can see this here' is spam and a serious effort to jack traffic from the site.

 

[Gorza]

A direct quote from Laurel:

Generally, we don't allow promotion of offsite links. However, we have allowed people to post links to, say, articles which mention Literotica or link to Literotica stories. This blog appears to link to and promote Literotica authors, it doesn't appear overly ad-filled/spammy or covered in popups/popunders/adware/etc, and seems to be a geniune attempt to promote/discuss Lit stories. If any of those factors change, then we'll take a second look - but for now, it's okay so long as the linking to said blog is confined to that thread.


So, this thread stays as long as it meets Laurel's T&C. Anyone having any more issues with this thread can take it directly to her through a private message.

In case anyone forgets, this is the official line. PM Laurel with questions. Posting complaints about blog links here is a nuisance.

 

[sr71plt]

In case anyone forgets, this is the official line. PM Laurel with questions. Posting complaints about blog links here is a nuisance.

No one has said it wasn't the official line. I said I thought the official line was dopey. Tough on you if you believe in totalitarianism and favoratism-based inconsistency. I don't give a rat's ass if you do. I repeat, there is no reason other than off-site blog promotion to post on the Lit. Feedback forum that someone has to go to another Web site to read a review by a Lit. author that's tagged to the Lit. Feedback forum. I don't care if you or the powers that be don't understand Internet etiquette or the Web site's own interests or the Web site's own posted rules (although the forum rules here seem to be eroding away to no longer represent forum function anyway. One of the stated "rules" is that posts won't be erased. We'll see if this one is.)

The only nuisance in this is all of the off-site blog promotion being done by a Lit. member.

And YOU are becoming a nuisance just by parroting what was already acknowledged was the policy. Policies won't change if discussion of why they should change is choked off. It's a bad policy. I'm suggesting it should change and Naoko should be required to do what everyone else is doing on the Feedback forum--post the feedback to the forum, not shunt us off to her off-site blog. That's spamming even by the stated Forum rules (#6). I don't expect the policy to change. Doesn't mean I won't post that should--which I've done. I only continue to post on it because you won't shut up about it.

 

[NaokoSmith]

Oh dear, slight troll infestation with the old farts getting bored slagging each other off on Authors' Hangout. Just ignore it, dahlinks. They can PM Laurel as Forum Moderator instructed them if they seriously think they have a case

Although neither this nor the blogpost it discusses were about Literotica stories, I don't regard them as spam. When I write about non-Literotica stories or other things like calendars, this is still writing which reflects on erotica, sexuality, the representation of women, and other topics which are of interest to writers here.

I think on second thoughts, that posting about reviews of stories which are not Literotica stories in Story Feedback could be defined as spam, so in future I'm going to stick to posting only my blogposts which review Literotica stories in this thread. You are very welcome to come and read my thread in AH, where I also post the links to blogposts for the other writers to check out, and we often have a nice chat over afternoon tea.


Gorza, I liked the 50s pictures too! but I think Learin' is right, they look a bit spammy. I will see if I can use them over on the Shoes thread in AH.

 

[Carnevil9]

I don't have to think the ruling is any less dopey just because it is given from on high. If the review is of a Lit. story there is no reason--other than off-site blog promotion--that the review isn't posted here just like everyone else does.

Bolding mine. There is one potential reason. Not everyone in the world is on Literotica, or has even heard of Literotica. Some percentage of blog traffic comes from elsewhere, and this is a way for them to discover the wonders of Literotica. It drives new blood to this site, which can certainly be considered a good thing. If the only promotion of Lit stories happens at Lit itself, we're just a snake eating our own tail.

 

[sr71plt]

Bolding mine. There is one potential reason. Not everyone in the world is on Literotica, or has even heard of Literotica. Some percentage of blog traffic comes from elsewhere, and this is a way for them to discover the wonders of Literotica. It drives new blood to this site, which can certainly be considered a good thing. If the only promotion of Lit stories happens at Lit itself, we're just a snake eating our own tail.

I don't see where that's relevant. What does what she puts on her blog have to do whether she shunts Lit. readers off to her blog before they can read a review of a Lit. story she's written and indexed on the Lit. Feedback forum? What she's doing on the Lit. Feedback forum is blatantly trying to get Lit. readers of the Feedback forum to leave Lit. and go to her blog to get her review of a Lit. story.

We'll see if, having had it pointed out by three posters, Naoko just starts posting her reviews here like everyone else (and also on her blog, if she wants) or if she truly is intentionally spamming the board and hides behind what I think is a bad policy call that's inconsistent with the forum's own rule #6.

 

[lovecraft68]

Bolding mine. There is one potential reason. Not everyone in the world is on Literotica, or has even heard of Literotica. Some percentage of blog traffic comes from elsewhere, and this is a way for them to discover the wonders of Literotica. It drives new blood to this site, which can certainly be considered a good thing. If the only promotion of Lit stories happens at Lit itself, we're just a snake eating our own tail.

Something tells me lit has no trouble gaining readers, but a small blog does, let's face it, she's helping her cause, not literotica. She is looking to draw eyes to her blog, her articles, her books for sale, her friends books for sale etc and anyone going there from lit already knows lit so how does it help lit?

 

[JackLuis]

Naoko:
Considering the controversy raised by this thread, perhaps you could write a review and post it on BOTH, this thread and your blog. I nominate my "Sexual Therapy" as a safe sex story.

It is mature, safe sex and bi-sexual-ish three chapter series about a Dr. It has scored medium well (Low 4's) and has lot of things to be critical of, while still is (I think) an interesting story.

When you only review H stories, you don't show your skills, with just glowing praise reviews.