Prejudice in voting/private feedback

[Guest]

I tend not to vote at all unless I can give something a four or a five, for pretty much the same reasons as sr71plt, especially if it's outside the categories I'm fond of. If it's only worth a one or a two, I'm not going to make it down to the voting form unless asked to read it. Even then, I still don't vote, I just offer the requestion feedback. I've given a very few threes, most of those during contests where I try to vote on every story when I can squeeze out the time.

I have a feeling that this is the reason contest stories trend a little lower than most non-contest stories as much as the troll target the visibility puts on them. More people will vote because of the minimum vote requirement to qualify.

I know this topic has been discussed and argued over many times, but I'm going to toss this into the heap.

Is a 5 truly worth what a 5 vote is supposed to be worth if that's the only score we give? Isn't it our duty, if we vote at all, to give those stories deserving of lesser votes their specific scores?

It's difficult, isn't it? I usually just back click fairly quickly if the story seems to have problems, especially if there are grammatical errors in the first sentence. But what I should do is read it through, and give it the vote it deserves.

Otherwise we dumb down the system, giving everyone an "A," when we should be seeing a more appropriate wide scattering of scores.

And yes, we should offer feedback. Even if it's just - nice try.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

Look Fursmoke,
It's easy. If the story is GREAT I give it a 5. It has to have good plot and character development, good editing and a high readability index. That kind of story has earned a 5.

If the story is fairly mediocre but readable and shows some effort, especially for one of the new writers who are showing progress with that story, I'd likely give it a 4.

If the story is readable, but lacks any real development, has obvious errors and such, maybe a 3.

If the story plot suck, the characters are wooden and one dimensional, the editing is crap and this person really shouldn't give up their job slinging bergers at Mickey D's... I don't even bother.

After you've been around here a while you'll know that the catagory or genre doesn't bother me. Shitty writting does.

 

[Darkniciad]

I know this topic has been discussed and argued over many times, but I'm going to toss this into the heap.

Is a 5 truly worth what a 5 vote is supposed to be worth if that's the only score we give? Isn't it our duty, if we vote at all, to give those stories deserving of lesser votes their specific scores?

It's difficult, isn't it? I usually just back click fairly quickly if the story seems to have problems, especially if there are grammatical errors in the first sentence. But what I should do is read it through, and give it the vote it deserves.

Otherwise we dumb down the system, giving everyone an "A," when we should be seeing a more appropriate wide scattering of scores.

And yes, we should offer feedback. Even if it's just - nice try.

Maybe the H's need to be eliminated and replaced with the actual scores displayed. As it stands now, unless you start digging through all the lists, the "H" is the only way to know whether most of the people reading the story liked it. This will naturally draw more readers, and cause people to ignore a story without one unless they know the author. An H is also easy for a troll to take out without much effort, changing from 4.5 to 4.49 will do it. If you see the actual scores, though, there's no read difference between the two numbers.

Of course, that's one of those "Lit needs to change" things. I've seen other scoring/ranking systems, and they're all pretty much broken.

The way I figure it, there are plenty of people who will low-blast and tear down a less than stellar story without me voting that 1 or 2. I do trend toward the higher end when I'm undecided, though. To do anything else with the H system of rating stories is to potentially relegate something I thought was well worth reading to complete obscurity.

 

[sr71plt]

As I've noted before, what has really amused me about the scoring is that my lower scoring stories have generally been the ones that have gotten the quickest and most frequent sale offers. So, whereas I think the "Hs" have meaning in attracting readers at the site, they certainly don't seem to have much effect on publishers. I think Jenny Jackson somewhere on another thread has remarked on this--saying that often the most controversial stories are the best ones, as least when it's time to make them earn their keep.

 

[cloudy]

As I've noted before, what has really amused me about the scoring is that my lower scoring stories have generally been the ones that have gotten the quickest and most frequent sale offers. So, whereas I think the "Hs" have meaning in attracting readers at the site, they certainly don't seem to have much effect on publishers. I think Jenny Jackson somewhere on another thread has remarked on this--saying that often the most controversial stories are the best ones, as least when it's time to make them earn their keep.

I agree. Here, it's all about the stroker. Something that makes a reader work a little doesn't always score as it should.

 

[Guest]

Maybe the H's need to be eliminated and replaced with the actual scores displayed. As it stands now, unless you start digging through all the lists, the "H" is the only way to know whether most of the people reading the story liked it. This will naturally draw more readers, and cause people to ignore a story without one unless they know the author. An H is also easy for a troll to take out without much effort, changing from 4.5 to 4.49 will do it. If you see the actual scores, though, there's no read difference between the two numbers.

Of course, that's one of those "Lit needs to change" things. I've seen other scoring/ranking systems, and they're all pretty much broken.

The way I figure it, there are plenty of people who will low-blast and tear down a less than stellar story without me voting that 1 or 2. I do trend toward the higher end when I'm undecided, though. To do anything else with the H system of rating stories is to potentially relegate something I thought was well worth reading to complete obscurity.

Yeah, that's the problem, isn't it?

I generally read the writers I know, give them feedback via PM or Public Comments - or sometimes just on a thread. I try to get through the New Stories as often as I can which hasn't been much as of late.

But as to scoring, there are thoroughly splendid stories out there that consistently score low (just ask Ogg!) and don't even get me started on the Loving Wives!

 

[Darkniciad]

I'm nowhere near good enough for pay publishing, so I guess that part of it doesn't even enter into my mind when I think about it. I'm just after feedback and sucking people back into my fantasy world with those stories.

I doubt that more than a small portion of authors on Lit really believe they have marketable skills, they're here for some of the same sort of reasons I am. It's just hard to slap something with a lower score, knowing what it's going to do to their potential readership. Whenever I find something truly stellar, I usually follow it up with feedback beyond what I put in PCs. ( Rarely during contests, I'm pressed enough for time as it is during those! )

 

[drksideofthemoon]

You mostly are misunderstanding my point.

I have only just recently started here, and I wondred how it was possible. The answers are informative and I apreciate them .
I just wondered HOW it worked, rather than being critical of it; although I dare say if elections were run like that there would be uproar lol!

But I see that it is an attempt at getting a fair score; so fair enough.

On the point about opinion however, while I accept everyone is entitled to vote comment and have an opinion here on Literotica, some people opinions will have more worth.

Let us say for example Steven King, or a Professor of Literature turned up here and made a detailed critique...either bad or good...on one's story, then surely one would take more notice of that opinion than say, a half wit with a baised attitude who may have got upset by the content of a story and mouthed off? Or indeed, praised it ?

I also do not believe in censorship personally so would endeavour...unless it was abusive to the extent it breached civility or CoC here....to answer it even if it were critical. A short crit such as "crap" or " wonderful" is also little help. Better to have valid criticsim even if it is bad; otherwise you can't get better.

But also even an experts opinion can be invalid. I once wrote an autobiographical piece (not sex related) and it was published. A fellow author wrote that my character was "simply unbelievable". Yet it based on me and my experiences. I read his stories and what was presented as "gritty realiism" to me had very cliched characters. However, I did not retaliate by criticising him and merely presented him proof of the experiences I had had. Sometimes I guess truth can be stranger than fiction....but it didn't fit with the then current vogue for "Trainspotting" type scripts which his were.

And back to the general point I made....which was not suggesting that people be denied an opinion here, but an observation on culture.

What I was suggesting is that everyone believes that their opinion and taste is valid when it comes to Art, cinema, music etc.
I have an opinion on neuro surgery, but it hasn't the validity of that of a Surgeon, and his less than a neuro surgeon. You wouldn't let a cab driver operate on your brain but you allow him to criticise your painting or writing.
(yes yes I know.... it is just an example...many cab drivers would be experts in various fields)
Yet an Artist/Musician/wirter can regularly be judged in the modern age by anyone...and specially the lowest common denominator effect. This means that many quality movies...for example take "Pan's Labrynth", take a back seat to all action rubbish Hollywood blockbusters. Okay that did get high critical acclaim, but often many movies worthy of it do not.
Thus, only the simplest cultural expressions become available to the masses , and they as a result are shortchanged, and society decays. All because all our opinions have the same value. The other extreme manifestation of this is that culture can only be for the elite: thus high brow Art becomes the perogative of the initiated . So ironically, the reality of the sham that everyone is entitled to their own opinion and mass marketing to pander to that opinion (reality tv etc) is a new class system. One culture for the masses, and one culture for the elite. Sad. Communism didn't even do that.

And yes; it also seems we live in a culture where something is "wicked" or "crap" hence the 1 or 5 votes rather than 2 3 and 4. Again sad. But while that occurs, maybe Literotica do have to use their policy to achieve fairness.

There could be literotic gems hiding on here but because they may be obscure they won't be understood; yet...and come on we all do it...if we find a story subjectively erotic we can sometimes mark it high because we are biased; or if it repulses us mark it low. So all I was trying to point out is that we should at least endeavour to be objective.

UPDATE: my current votes have fallen dramatically to 2 and 3 votes cast and have 5s and 4.5s back.

Everyone's opinion is as valid as the next person's. How you interpret that opinion is completely different. In your mind Stephen King might carry more weight than someone off of the street.

Later on in your post you make the mistake of equating knowledge with opinon. A person need not know how to cook a hamburer, but they can have an opinion about the quality of the hamburger.

Art, whether it be the written word, painting, music, or film is subjective. One need not to be an art major to appreciate a painting. A person doesn't need to be an English major to know what they like to read.

 

[sr71plt]

I'm sure if Stephen King posted as Stephen King here in a way that we could accept him as genuine, his opinion would be more equal--on the topic of horror--than most everyone else's here--on the topic of horror. That's not remotely what we have going here though, is it?

As I noted up the line, every separate opinion that can be isolated as the single vote by a poster in the voting is equal on this Web site because the Web site procedures have set them up to be equal. Just the fact of the matter.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

I'm sure if Stephen King posted as Stephen King here in a way that we could accept him as genuine, his opinion would be more equal--on the topic of horror--than most everyone else's here--on the topic of horror. That's not remotely what we have going here though, is it?

As I noted up the line, every separate opinion that can be isolated as the single vote by a poster in the voting is equal on this Web site because the Web site procedures have set them up to be equal. Just the fact of the matter.

His opinion would not be more equal, it's the value that you assign to it that would differ. It's a given that you would value his opinion more about the technical aspects of your writing that you would mine. It's not that my opinion is any less valid, it's just you assume (and rightly so) that Mr. King knows what he is talking about when it comes to writing.

Let's add Louis L'Amour in. His opinion is just as valid as Stephen King's. If you were writing a horror story, you may be more inclined to give more credence to Mr. King, similarily, if you were writing a Western, you might tip the scales in favor of Mr. L'Amour.

 

[Varian P]

I find the voting system here limits me too much too on the stories I do read. If I don't hit the top and give it a full "5," I'm damaging its chances to go hot (and I do believe that the hot rating means something to the author--I do believe readers are more prone to read a hot story than one that doesn't have this designation). I'd give a whole lot fewer "5s" if there was another rating I could give it and still say it was "hot," even if not perfect in every category.

I'm with you on this; I really hesitate to even vote a story a 4, knowing that a 4 can impact the average score such that a story could lose that red H.

In particular, if an author posts in this thread or elsewhere, requesting constructive criticism, I never vote, unless I feel the story merits a 5, because I don't want people who are in earnest about improving their writing to feel penalized for subjecting their story to scrutiny.

On the other hand, if I happen to read a story and end with the suspicion that the author banged it out in forty minutes and never so much as bothered to read it through to notice that the MC's name changed from Mark to David in the last third, on top of a 25% spelling-error rate, I can click the circle next to the 1 or the 2 without shedding any tears.

But I've wholeheartedly voted lots of stories fives that haven't turned me on; an interesting plot (sometimes I think there should be an extra credit point available to stories here that actually have a plot), an experimental style, engrossing characters and just plain old good writing get high marks from me.

And I try to be impartial when it comes to category, content, etc.; those elements are so subjective--one person's pregnant gang-bang is another person's lovemaking under the elm by moonlight.

 

[sr71plt]

"His opinion would not be more equal,"

Apparently you haven't read Animal Farm then.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

"His opinion would not be more equal,"

Apparently you haven't read Animal Farm then.

Oh yes I have...

 

[sr71plt]

"In particular, if an author posts in this thread or elsewhere, requesting constructive criticism, I never vote, unless I feel the story merits a 5, because I don't want people who are in earnest about improving their writing to feel penalized for subjecting their story to scrutiny."

I'm not sure I agree with that. I certainly wouldn't give them a 1--or even a 2--especially since they asked for help on the story. But it would not be constructive for their development, I think, for their stories to go straight to something close to 5 if in fact its quality put it in the 3 zone. They won't develop with false (over)praise for where they are already producing. (I won't even mention, though, that most posters asking for help and providing a link to their story just want readers/voters--preferably 5s. This is probably especially so when they challenge readers not to like the story.).

"sometimes I think there should be an extra credit point available to stories here that actually have a plot"

Sure will agree with this.

 

[sr71plt]

"Oh yes I have..."

Then you must remember the oh-so-true thing said about pigs.

 

[Varian P]

In particular, if an author posts in this thread or elsewhere, requesting constructive criticism, I never vote, unless I feel the story merits a 5, because I don't want people who are in earnest about improving their writing to feel penalized for subjecting their story to scrutiny.

I'm not sure I agree with that. I certainly wouldn't give them a 1--or even a 2--especially since they asked for help on the story. But it would not be constructive for their development, I think, for their stories to go straight to something close to 5 if in fact its quality put it in the 3 zone. They won't develop with false (over)praise for where they are already producing.

I absolutely agree, and when constructive criticism has been requested, I do give honest feedback--I doubt anyone would accuse me of giving authors a "pass" on a story I think needs work. And even a wonderful story by a talented author is bound to have weak spots, and I do my best to point out what I think those are, because as a writer, that's what I want when I ask for critiques (grateful all the while, of course, for any extra reads/exposure and stealth campaigns to mysteriously and artificially inflate my story's score to a 6.23).

And I don't vote a 5 on a story I think deserves a 3--if I'm reading it because an author has asked for constructive criticism, and it's that weak, I just don't vote.

 

[sr71plt]

Ah, yes, I see. I completely agree that specific feedback is much better than any consideration of a number vote.

 

[mjl2010]

I suppose I should have said this in my original post. I have only voted a one or a two a couple of times and I've read hundreds of stories here.

I disagree with those that only vote a four or a five for the same reasons others here disagreed with that. If everyone did that, than we may as well only have two numbers to choose from. Four or five.

And if I go to a story from someone asking for feedback, if it's so bad I'd vote a one or two, I don't vote. I come back and say what I think is wrong and what I think is good.

As far as only voting a four or five. If someone's writing is mediocre, wouldn't giving them high votes discourage them from improving? I read the serious comments and take the criticism. I look at my votes. Then I look at the story I'm working on and try to make it better.

I continue to thank those here that have helped me improve and pass my own meager thoughts on to those coming up behind me.

MJL

 

[drksideofthemoon]

Ah, yes, I see. I completely agree that specific feedback is much better than any consideration of a number vote.

I totally agree. Constructive feedback is definitely better than a vote.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

I absolutely agree, and when constructive criticism has been requested, I do give honest feedback--I doubt anyone would accuse me of giving authors a "pass" on a story I think needs work. And even a wonderful story by a talented author is bound to have weak spots, and I do my best to point out what I think those are, because as a writer, that's what I want when I ask for critiques (grateful all the while, of course, for any extra reads/exposure and stealth campaigns to mysteriously and artificially inflate my story's score to a 6.23).

And I don't vote a 5 on a story I think deserves a 3--if I'm reading it because an author has asked for constructive criticism, and it's that weak, I just don't vote.

I voted 5 twice on your story, did that help? LOL!!

Seriously, the scoring is all out of whack, and I think it's because of the "H"'s, everyone wants one by each and every story. The average story at Lit should be at 3.0. The way it is now, an average story probably runs in the 4.5-4.6 range. It doesn't give a lot of room for stories that are better than average, and fantastic.

How to fix this problem? I haven't the foggiest clue.

 

[Darkniciad]

I voted 5 twice on your story, did that help? LOL!!

Seriously, the scoring is all out of whack, and I think it's because of the "H"'s, everyone wants one by each and every story. The average story at Lit should be at 3.0. The way it is now, an average story probably runs in the 4.5-4.6 range. It doesn't give a lot of room for stories that are better than average, and fantastic.

How to fix this problem? I haven't the foggiest clue.

You can't. I've never seen a scoring system that wasn't flawed by the same problems that plague Lit's, or a whole other crop of similar problems. If you tweak it, all that does is move the bar and cause the votes to move with it.

Any form of internet score/poll is too easy to manipulate to have more than circumstancial value when combined with large amounts of other data. There's also the general apathy of readers to bother voting - especially amongst stroke readers.

I won't expand upon that, but I'm sure everyone gets why

Most bad stories won't get a lot of the low votes, because people won't make it to the voting form. Really good stories automatically become targets for the drooling masses of trolls. Unless large enough numbers of real readers get there first, a troll attack can render something good to invisibility within a short period of time.

Lit's sweeps don't work. Creating complicated formulas to spread out the displayed scores doesn't work. Breaking down the votes into elements doesn't work.

Nothing works.

Voting on the internet is just plain flawed, and there's no way to fix it.

It might help to have a range of two Hs 4.0-4.5, and 4.5-5.0. I would be more likely to vote a four when I'm hovering between 4 and 5 that way. I still think that having the votes and scores displayed would be a far better way to determine what people think of something before you read it, though. You have to hunt for that information now.

It would only work for a while before the bar moved again, however.

 

[Guest]

I only vote 5

Or not at all.

If I feel a story could be helped by my criticism, I send it privately to the author.

Maharat

 

[fursmoke11]

Ummm sorry I opened a whole two cans of worms here!

Firly on the voting system; I am way out of my depth and clearly those of you with knowledge I acknowledge and thankyou for informing me.

Which kind of brings me to the second point, the nature of opinion. This is not necessarily applying to the voting system here, but should be borne in mind
on any discussion of voting and democracy.

I agree that those with power...like the pigs...don't necessarily have knowledge, and their opinions may not be valid. For example, when the UK government banned foxhunting they did so because of prejudice not on any scientific evidence. 600 expert veterinary surgeons pointed out that it was by far the fairest and least cruel method of fox control but they were ignored. Many Consrvationists also pointed out the benefits for habitat protection and the fact that Adolf Hitlr's ban on foxhunting in the Czech republic had led to the permanent extinction of the fox there within a few years.

So you had scientists, vets, expert witnesses, historians, animal behaviourists etc ALL giving evidence to the Burns report and what happens?
Because those with prejudice in power pandering to the ignorance (and on the face of it, if you have no knowledge of foxhunting it looks cruel) of voters,
it was still banned. All expert knowledge was ignored.

We must not allow societies to do this. If we do, we go to war without evidence of WMDs, allow them to make decisions based on popular ignorance and even paranoia etc.
For example we could see governments repatriating immigrants and bringing back capital punishment.
This is why in the UK we have a House of Lords. Now those that don't understand it object to it because they believe it based on privilige. But actually, it works as an excellent guard on prejudice. Each Lord is expected to have a specialist area of law or knowledge. It has served us well until now. Now we have a government who overule it; breaking constitutional ethics. The problem is with the US two tier system is that both are elected. That may be seen as a fine thing; but it has problems: not least of which is that your Government on either wing will act on the whims of the voters. And what is popular, is not ncessarily right. Or indeed, the best course of action for truth and justice and liberty or even pragmatism.

Those in power need to listen to legal experts, scientists, and experts in various fields NOT the opinions of the masses...or ideological advisors reflecting them... which may be based on lack of knowledge and a media that doesn't give them enough credit to make things properly explained. And evidence should be heard from every discipline. Any hostorina will tell you that the smoking ban is basd on unsound science and lack of historical analysis. Nobody asked the Historians about Nazi smoking bans or the unsoundness of statistical science (eg massive link between cervical cancer and smoking meant a link? Wrong. Very wrong. And women died because of it).

For example. Take Afghanistan. The underlying problem is simple. Yet for various reasons politicians will not address it. The Afghan economy is based on poppes and karakul....both unsavoury to western moral imperialism. There will never be peace there until those are accepted . Every officer in the armed forces and analyst will tell you that. So every soldier that dies there is the fault of those who do not address it. We need to buy the poppy crop: end of trouble. People do not know that and the media and politicians, influenced by western pharmacutical power, don't tell them. So it is doomed to failure.

So how can anyone have a valid opinion about what should hapen there without this information?

Opinion should be based on knowledge.

One doesn't have to know how to make a hamburger to appreciate it. But someone who has never tasted a hamburger bfore is no judge of whether a big mac is good or not yes? It may taste good to him, but he maybe hasn't tasted one made by BK or one made by a top chef.

Now where I am going I suppose, is that there should be a panel of expert judges voting, and also a public voting system. Comments too.
Sometimes of course the experts will be wrong and the public will love a story.
OR as this would maybe be impossible, an expert judge would maybe carry a double vote?

But at the moment, vote cast by someone who is prejudiced as equal as one who attemts to judge the story objectively are two different things.
If you objct to furs and smoking for example, you would maybe give my story a low mark.
However I do see that Litrotica makes some effort to address this...and vice versa.

Now I realise that some people here will believe I am making an attack on democratic principles, but while we are all encouraged to believe our opinions are of equal worth, it actually will ebentually undermine democracy itself; plummetting us into poor governments acting without full possession of the facts. My solution is that schools should teach people NOT to have an opinion about something they do not research and have good knowledge on. And my experience is that does not happen.
Everyone has an opinon about Iraq for example; I am only interested in the opinions of soldiers, enemies, analysts etc. and not that of the masses (except maybe those who live there) and certainly not politicians pandering to the general consensus of ignorance of the electorate on EITHER side of any debate. Because if governments do not make informed decisions, they will always make dreadful mistakes.

Not all expert knowledge is good either. Statistical science is notoriously misleading. Because it is not a true discipline. Yet again as a society we take great stock in it.

Oh well sorry about the meandering but food for thought. Sorry for attacking sacred cows here.

 

[Varian P]

Or not at all.

If I feel a story could be helped by my criticism, I send it privately to the author.

Maharat

I don't leave PCs criticizing people's stories.

But I do reply to threads in this forum and the Story Discussion Circle, because I think the discussion of any given story can easily benefit other writers, and also because when multiple people come together to comment on a single story, the author gets a chance to see where they agree and where they disagree, which, when not horribly confusing, can be immensely helpful.

 

[Varian P]

Opinion should be based on knowledge.

One doesn't have to know how to make a hamburger to appreciate it. But someone who has never tasted a hamburger bfore is no judge of whether a big mac is good or not yes? It may taste good to him, but he maybe hasn't tasted one made by BK or one made by a top chef.

Now where I am going I suppose, is that there should be a panel of expert judges voting, and also a public voting system. Comments too.
Sometimes of course the experts will be wrong and the public will love a story.
OR as this would maybe be impossible, an expert judge would maybe carry a double vote?

I suppose it depends on what the goal of the individual writer is: a judgment of the literary value of their story, or a temperature reading on popularity of a story.

A fast food burger might be a little slice of revulsion to the gourmand with a delicate and carefully honed palate, but the best chef in the world is never going to make the profits McDonald's has.

While literary experts of the commercial or theory variety might be able to rank stories on a variety of technical merits, I'd wager that only the public or the individual is qualified to decide what "works" for them in a piece of fiction, and all the more so in a piece of erotic fiction. Hence, Borders will probably sell more copies of the latest Stephen King novel novel this year than copies of Joyce's Ulysses.

Personally, I've accepted the fact that the kinds of stories I write don't appeal to the majority of people who come to Lit to read porn/erotica, and am thrilled that there is a wee little pocket of people who like my stories.

I don't think I'd care to have a panel of experts weighing in on the merit of the stories here. I'd rather take cues from the other writers here whom I respect for reasons of my own, and read their work and the work they admire. And the opinions of those people about my own work means a great deal to me--more, I think, than an anonymous body of "experts" would.

But, then again, some of the people I'm talking about and many of the contributors here are experts--professional writers, people in the publishing industry, veterans of academia, etc. I suppose, in a sense, their favorites lists, their PCs, and comments they make on the boards could be taken as a kind of expert vetting, though they don't have more power than any of us, when it comes to impacting story scores.