Prejudice in voting/private feedback

[Varian P]

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

Not as much as if you'd voted 5 seven times, but it's a start.

 

[fursmoke11]

The problem is with that is that I have some excellent feedback privately.
Sadly...for fear of prejudice again I think....some of those people have sent it because they fear retribution by doing so in public.

But yes comments are helpful even...maybe especially...when critical.

Of course one or two "rules" of Literotica are odd. The convention of exclamation inside the quotation marks can sometimes lead to expressive error for example.

What is odd is that I have only about ten people on my story so far, and yet 2000 plus hits on some chapters.
Now either people were so disinterested that they didn't even bother to vote, or, they may be waiting to see how the story concludes. I generally try to do that when reading.

I think it is very difficult with erotic fiction as the nature of it is so subjective.
Also that some things may disturb some people. Imagine how Von Sacher Masochs' "Venus in Furs" was greeted at the time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopold_von_Sacher-Masoch
Even now. But at the time the fetishism and sado masochism was not unknown...indeed was more common than today...yet nobody admitted it: there wasn't even a word for it. Nevertheless it was brilliant; and changed h world of sexuality. If you haven't read said book I recommend it. In fact it is a must; and also a message that erotic literature can be a strong tool for other fundamental Human truths, and indeed, greatly liberating and enlightening. Though not necessarily popular as not everyone can relate to such things.

"Shiny shiny long boots of leather...whiplash girlchild in the dark"

hmm the song isn't bad either as I remember. Who of us here doesn't wish we hadn't written those lines? Velvet Underground ; though I like Christian Death's version.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

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.

I have no idea what point you are trying to make.

First, you can not assign the same logic to art and science. Science is governed by laws of nature.

My whole point is that when it comes to writing, every reader's opinion is as valid as the next reader. The weight that you, the writer, give that opinion may be different.

Yes, I object to both furs and smoking, but instead of giving you a low vote, I would just chose not to read it. That's just my opinion. And it is just as valid as someone who likes furs and smoking.

As to the panel of expert judges, what criteria would you use to give these people "expert" status? What would be the point? If you want real critique of your work there is the SDC already set up for that.

The bottom line is that you can't assign a numerical value to something that is subjective.

 

[Guest]

I have no idea what point you are trying to make.

First, you can not assign the same logic to art and science. Science is governed by laws of nature.

My whole point is that when it comes to writing, every reader's opinion is as valid as the next reader. The weight that you, the writer, give that opinion may be different.

Yes, I object to both furs and smoking, but instead of giving you a low vote, I would just chose not to read it. That's just my opinion. And it is just as valid as someone who likes furs and smoking.

As to the panel of expert judges, what criteria would you use to give these people "expert" status? What would be the point? If you want real critique of your work there is the SDC already set up for that.

The bottom line is that you can't assign a numerical value to something that is subjective.

Indeed.

And the audience here is quite varied. Some only want stroke. Some want a gentle romance. Some want a rough non consent sort of story. (Some hang around here to flirt and aren't even aware there are stories on the site.)

Bottom line, it's a porn site.

And a FREE porn site at that. Story quality varies, and so does reader quality, not to put too fine a point on it.

And anonymous voting on stories, which is subjective anyway, will vary as well.

You can drive yourself crazy if you try and worry about it.

 

[fursmoke11]

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.

Yes I agree with what you are saying I just think it is sad.
About as sad as someone reading Mills and Boon over Von Sacher Masoch. The former reader won't know the latter book exists.

And your observation on Macdonalds. Yes I agree . However what the rest of the world objects to is America valuing that profit as a virtue.; and it's export to the rest of the world often to the detriment of local businesses and cultural integrity. What the golden arches have done to Prague is an absolute disgrace. And anyone who thinks a big mac is better than a bowl of czech goulash and dumplings is an ingnoramus. Young people in particular are being conned literally by all global marketing which has ruthlessly dismissed the past as "square" and "passe" and encouraged them into new bright better cooler. Started in the 60s and my parents laughed at the idea that Bri nylon crimplene etc was better than wool, but a generation on and the kids have fallen for it under different branding hook line and sinker and it is destroying the environment to boot.

Except we all know its crap don't we? Okay you may take your hat off to people who make money like that....but not me.

And those that do are responsible maybe for this Czech joke:

Q "What is the difference between yoghurt and America?"

A "Yoghurt has culture"

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

I've been thinking about this thread and the "H"s that appear on stories. Lots of stories with the coveted "H" are stroke - many pure stroke and not really very well written. I've long thought that stories that illicit a raging hard-on and are long enough to let the wankers get off more often than not end up with an "H".

You people know I don't write stroke. God, there is hardly any sex in any of my stories. But fortunately, there are enough intelligent people on Lit that more than half still have and "H".

With this in mind, I really am not sure that an "H" means very much. I'm not too sure the vote score means very much either, frankly.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

Yes I agree with what you are saying I just think it is sad.
About as sad as someone reading Mills and Boon over Von Sacher Masoch. The former reader won't know the latter book exists.

And your observation on Macdonalds. Yes I agree . However what the rest of the world objects to is America valuing that profit as a virtue.; and it's export to the rest of the world often to the detriment of local businesses and cultural integrity. What the golden arches have done to Prague is an absolute disgrace. And anyone who thinks a big mac is better than a bowl of czech goulash and dumplings is an ingnoramus. Young people in particular are being conned literally by all global marketing which has ruthlessly dismissed the past as "square" and "passe" and encouraged them into new bright better cooler. Started in the 60s and my parents laughed at the idea that Bri nylon crimplene etc was better than wool, but a generation on and the kids have fallen for it under different branding hook line and sinker and it is destroying the environment to boot.

Except we all know its crap don't we? Okay you may take your hat off to people who make money like that....but not me.

And those that do are responsible maybe for this Czech joke:

Q "What is the difference between yoghurt and America?"

A "Yoghurt has culture"

Your latest post is distasteful as it exhibits typical Euro snobbery. And don't try to tell me that I.G. Farben, Daimler-Benz, Siemens, Phillips Electronics, BMW, all fine European companies eschew profit.

Quite personally, goulash is okay, but certainly not tops on my list, and I wouldn't go out of my way to find it.

People read for almost as many reasons as there are books. A reader of Mills and Boon probably isn't interested in Von Sacher Masoch, I read the Wikipedia article, and I have no burning desire to look for his books.

You know where you can stick your Czech joke.

 

[cloudy]

Q "What is the difference between yoghurt and America?"

A "Yoghurt has culture"

Excuse me. My ancestors have been here as long, or longer, than yours have been in Europe. We have a long and rich culture.

Stick it up your "arse."

 

[drksideofthemoon]

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 feel much the same way. I write what I want to write, I don't feel any pressure to write what I think the masses want. Stories like Cheechako, and Suzanne by the Sea are the ones I'm proudest of.

 

[Guest]

Yes I agree with what you are saying I just think it is sad.
About as sad as someone reading Mills and Boon over Von Sacher Masoch. The former reader won't know the latter book exists.

And your observation on Macdonalds. Yes I agree . However what the rest of the world objects to is America valuing that profit as a virtue.; and it's export to the rest of the world often to the detriment of local businesses and cultural integrity. What the golden arches have done to Prague is an absolute disgrace. And anyone who thinks a big mac is better than a bowl of czech goulash and dumplings is an ingnoramus. Young people in particular are being conned literally by all global marketing which has ruthlessly dismissed the past as "square" and "passe" and encouraged them into new bright better cooler. Started in the 60s and my parents laughed at the idea that Bri nylon crimplene etc was better than wool, but a generation on and the kids have fallen for it under different branding hook line and sinker and it is destroying the environment to boot.

Except we all know its crap don't we? Okay you may take your hat off to people who make money like that....but not me.

And those that do are responsible maybe for this Czech joke:

Q "What is the difference between yoghurt and America?"

A "Yoghurt has culture"

Wow.

I have no response to this.

 

[sr71plt]

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

I agree there's no "fix" to the problem (some don't even see it as a problem). I think there's a less troll-ridden system that another site or two uses: having only positive voting, as in "hot," "hotter," "hotest." Negative voters wouldn't have much incentive to vote at all, if none of the votes were negative or even "spoiler" votes. There seem to be fewer votes in total under such a system, so even the initial "hot" level would have some satisfaction for the author.

I do like Darkniciad's suggestion too of two "hot" levels rather than one. I would think there would be less "knock down/pump up" fighting over the single level the site has.

The reference to Animal Farm and the pigs, by the way, was just to the line in the book "all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others." (The more equal ones in the book being the pigs.) When you're talking inherent talent/position (as some of this discussion has been doing), I think it's a truism that everyone isn't (and can't be) exactly equal--in either ability or privilege. But when the discussion stayed on the topic here--the site's voting system--I think the site has made the voting system as equal in opportunity/weight of a single poster's vote as possible.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

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

I agree there's no "fix" to the problem (some don't even see it as a problem). I think there's a less troll-ridden system that another site or two uses: having only positive voting, as in "hot," "hotter," "hotest." Negative voters wouldn't have much incentive to vote at all, if none of the votes were negative or even "spoiler" votes. There seem to be fewer votes in total under such a system, so even the initial "hot" level would have some satisfaction for the author.

I do like Darkniciad's suggestion too of two "hot" levels rather than one. I would think there would be less "knock down/pump up" fighting over the single level the site has.

The reference to Animal Farm and the pigs, by the way, was just to the line in the book "all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others." (The more equal ones in the book being the pigs.) When you're talking inherent talent/position (as some of this discussion has been doing), I think it's a truism that everyone isn't (and can't be) exactly equal--in either ability or privilege. But when the discussion stayed on the topic here--the site's voting system--I think the site has made the voting system as equal in opportunity/weight of a single poster's vote as possible.

My only suggestions would be to 1: Get rid of the "H" and 2: Disallow anonymous voting.

Yes, I knew what you were refering to in regards to the pigs.

No, not everyone is equal in regards to ability. Like I've said before, it is your interpretation of the opinions that gives greater or lesser weight to the opinions expressed.

 

[sr71plt]

"Disallow anonymous voting"

Ah, yes, that would help, I agree. No reason to let someone vote who won't register. It seems generous enough that they get to read in anonymity (and for free).

 

[fursmoke11]

Don't shoot the messenger .

I have not been rude or abusive about a race of people or a person; merely presenting the way in which some American values are sometimes seen. I did not make any inference that America has no history....merely that the golden arches look vulgar in such a historic city as Prague and I KNOW that they would be thought of as the same in many historic towns in the USA.

The Czechs are less than happy with Macdonalds and that is the reason for the joke. I did not make the joke up and am not Czech.

If you infer something more from it than that it is your issue not mine.

And I agree that many global companies are not American and have equally lowest common denominator marketing. Not all though; and certainly not all American companies would pander to it just for greed either. Some of the finest companies in the world for product integrity are American.

An opinion was expressed that a gourmand for all his knowledge and taste would not make as much money as Macdonalds and I countered it with an opinion that you did not like. So much for freedom to express one's opinion.

If you see it as Euro snobbery to say that Goulash is better than Mcdonalds then that is your perogative. But rudeness is not necessary.

Seems like everyone has the right to their opinion unless YOU don't agree with it then they can "shove it up their ass".

Uncalled for.

If you criticised some aspect of the UK I would consider if it were warranted then may even agree with you.

If you have an opinion and someone else has a radically opposing opinion the truth may lie in between or at one pole or the other. Where it does not lie is in ignorance; or putting money making over integrity.

And you may not like Sacher Masoch but if you do not appreciate it is a great work then it is sad. It is perfectly possible to appreciate something without being aroused by it or interested in it. This applies to all things creative.


On the question of science. Science is about natural laws was mentioned. Not quite. It is about observation of natural law coming up with a hypothesis and testing it.
However, a classic test for rookie forensic science students is to analyse a red splater pattern on a wall at the scene of an imaginary murder. Always the tests ensue, and a conclusion is reached by most students that the person was killed with a gun by an intruder etc by the bullet entering at a certain angle. Except the splatter pattern is red wine and the victim was stabbed. See sometimes science does not consider other possibilities; and scientific "fact" can be way off the truth. The discipline of History is more like detective work and looks at a wide range of possibilities from the evidence not just test one. That is why nurses used to have to have O level history in the UK as doctors can make erroneous judgements. As I said, the observation of "natural law" that cervical cancer was linked to smoking (80% correlation was very high and looked indisputable) was false. The disease is caused by human papilloma virus. So all it really showed is that women who smoked were more likely to be sexually promiscuous as they care less about consequences.

What does that tell us re the discussion? That expert opinion can be wrong when not balanced by experts from other disciplines.

And at the moment , we live in a society where nobody questions science, and when they do they are classed as heretics. As with global warming for example: the historical evidence is dismissed out of hand. As science tests a theory, they will often come up with whatever the theory the person paying thm to test wants them to come up with.

It is NOT fact.

And yet we dismiss Art and Literature as all being a matter of personal taste and do not value the opinon of the Arts expert. Anyone can do a painting but only an Architect can build a house yet some of the principles are the same.
A dentist can be a part time painter or writer but an artist can't become a part time dentist! Yet both require knowledge. We don't comment much on the dentist work as we respect his speciality, yet have been encouraged to believe that we can all comment on literature/Art/music and every opinion has validity. I have little knowledge of tattoos for example. So I hear some people say "they are ugly". I try NOT to express an opinion as I am uninformed, and as I gain more knowledge I appreciate it more as an Art form.

My point is that while sometimes a lay person can come up with great insight,
their opinion can often be based on misinformation, economic and marketing pressure, politics or jut pure prejudice, etc rather than a multi discipline knowledge approach.
So to appreciate tattoos, somone must know about Art, but also History and anthropology and some science re skin/ink. Otherwise, we may say "I like that" or "I don't like that" but we should counter by saying..."hey but what do I know. Better ask an expert".

So in the case of Literotica, one person voting with some degree of knowledge and literary appreciation MAY have a more valid opinion than someone else; especially if they vote with prejudice based on ignorant beliefs.

And when I saw a situation where I was getting 1s or 5s I thought: this is odd. As I was rightly reminded, prejudice can be favourable too.

What I have learned though, is to ignore the voting.

Sadly, I am also coming to the conclusion that while we believe that all opinions are equal, democracy is also doomed.


Here is an intresting little article about where I am coming from:
http://evolvingtrends.wordpress.com/2006/07/07/web-25-from-hunter-gatherer-to-democratic-society/

and another:
http://tampa.creativeloafing.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid:2752

A poem:
http://www.authorsden.com/visit/viewpoetry.asp?id=192410

And this is interesting. the concept of unanimous consent. If consent is NOT unanimous..or virtually so...we should not legislate/judge on it. When we do, a majority opresses a minority...often through lowest common denominator ignorance. That can lead to polarisation; societal breakdown, loss of liberty and conflict. OR consensus oppression.
http://www.lneilsmith.org/tyrannyd.html

That would allow freedom of cultural expression WITHOUT judgement by those who understand or are educated on something. But this model requires that we do NOT have equal opinions on them; despite the apparent contradiction.

These do not necessarily reflect my views; they are just interesting.

So as far as the stories are concerned, if you don't "dig" something read it and learn. Don't vote if you don't dig it. Unless of course, it is badly written and you know that beyond doubt. And remember there can even be reasons for that. One of the best books I ever read was in an unrecognised and "badly spelt" patois dialect. But I got the basics and it was superb: a story of fundamental human truth.
And one person's truth can be enlightening about another's.

Try substituting "he" for "she" in a few stories in your head; or "Aunt" instead of "girlfriend" depending on what your vibe is. That can make it erotic when it may be turgid subjectively. Imagine a few changes and you get a better idea of the story interest wise.
So for example if leather floats your boat not fur, try substituting that.
Subjective erotica can be good if you use your imagination. I am not into Sand M but Sacher Masoch's stuff is amazing!

And one story I read for ages was getting bogged down. there was a reason; and I didn't know it until the end. Good job I didn't vote then, and left it to the end...the 2 suddenly became a 5 !


It is food for thought.

And PLEASE do not think I am getting at anyone because I am not! (Well...maybe Macdonalds a wee bit )

And my opinion on certain things can be ignorant too. As it was on the nature of the voting system here; or neuro surgery or appreciation of an Art form I am unfamiliar with. I am not a genius on literature either. That is what I was hoping to get feedback for form some expert writers so I could improve!

 

[Varian P]

We were (I thought) talking about how stories are rated. I was merely extending the metaphor you proffered:

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...

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...

And your observation on Macdonalds. Yes I agree . However what the rest of the world objects to is America valuing that profit as a virtue.; and it's export to the rest of the world often to the detriment of local businesses and cultural integrity. What the golden arches have done to Prague is an absolute disgrace. And anyone who thinks a big mac is better than a bowl of czech goulash and dumplings is an ingnoramus. Young people in particular are being conned literally by all global marketing which has ruthlessly dismissed the past as "square" and "passe" and encouraged them into new bright better cooler. Started in the 60s and my parents laughed at the idea that Bri nylon crimplene etc was better than wool, but a generation on and the kids have fallen for it under different branding hook line and sinker and it is destroying the environment to boot.

Except we all know its crap don't we? Okay you may take your hat off to people who make money like that....but not me.

I can see why you misinterpreted my comment, as I wasn't as clear as I should have been.

I was in no way valorizing profit for its own sake, or fast food culture, or rampant capitalism. I was merely positing that, while some authors might aspire to being validated by having "experts" praise their work, others might take as much pleasure in knowing "the masses" enjoy their stories. That is all I meant in extending your analogy.

 

[Varian P]

I am not a genius on literature either. That is what I was hoping to get feedback for form some expert writers so I could improve!

If that was your goal all along, it wasn't clear from your first post.

I don't know if anyone here would label themselves an "expert writer," but if you want constructive critiques of stories you've posted on the site, just start a thread saying so, and provide a link to the piece(s) you want critiqued, and I'm sure you'll get a range of responses.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

If that was your goal all along, it wasn't clear from your first post.

I don't know if anyone here would label themselves an "expert writer," but if you want constructive critiques of stories you've posted on the site, just start a thread saying so, and provide a link to the piece(s) you want critiqued, and I'm sure you'll get a range of responses.

I thought you were our expert...

 

[Varian P]

I thought you were our expert...

Merde! We're doomed!

 

[DeeZire]

When stories live or die according to public voting, we're stuck with the mindset that brought us George Bush. Is that really what we want to strive for?
I'd like to see the editors/screeners implement a more comprehensive ratings system. Perhaps there could be little e's for stories the editors/screeners like but can't, in good conscience, grant a big E to. Or P's for plot, S's for stroking potential, EM's for emotion (Suzanne by the Sea would get an EM from me.)
Perhaps, in lieu of that, knowledgable readers could start 'sticky' threads with their own top lists. For instance, Jenny's top list would interest me, since I prefer plot and character develpment over OBGYN reports.
I suppose reading your favorite authors is one approach, but then you miss the new authors who get lost in the shuffle.
So many stories - so little time!

 

[drksideofthemoon]

When stories live or die according to public voting, we're stuck with the mindset that brought us George Bush. Is that really what we want to strive for?
I'd like to see the editors/screeners implement a more comprehensive ratings system. Perhaps there could be little e's for stories the editors/screeners like but can't, in good conscience, grant a big E to. Or P's for plot, S's for stroking potential, EM's for emotion (Suzanne by the Sea would get an EM from me.)
Perhaps, in lieu of that, knowledgable readers could start 'sticky' threads with their own top lists. For instance, Jenny's top list would interest me, since I prefer plot and character develpment over OBGYN reports.
I suppose reading your favorite authors is one approach, but then you miss the new authors who get lost in the shuffle.
So many stories - so little time!

I don't worry much about the votes. It's the comments I get. Did I achieve what I set out to do. Did the reader taste the salt spray from the Irish Coast? Do they feel what it's like to be in the mountains of Montana? Can they feel the sand and heat from the Egyptian desert.

Did the characters make them feel anything? Did the story remind them of something or someone in their life?

That's the things that look for. I always say that if I make one person stop and think for a minute or two abous what I've written, then what I have penned has been a success.

 

[fursmoke11]

I don't worry much about the votes. It's the comments I get. Did I achieve what I set out to do. Did the reader taste the salt spray from the Irish Coast? Do they feel what it's like to be in the mountains of Montana? Can they feel the sand and heat from the Egyptian desert.

Did the characters make them feel anything? Did the story remind them of something or someone in their life?

That's the things that look for. I always say that if I make one person stop and think for a minute or two abous what I've written, then what I have penned has been a success.

I agree wholeheartedly with that.
My thought....and also it was balanced that this can work in favour too.....that people don't appreciate it like this but judge it either on personal sexual preference or a prejudiced view.
"Up the Junction" was condemned hysterically in the UK for example because of abortion. Yet it did indeed make you taste hear and feel that sordid back street life. But the mere subject matter was enoughfor hysterical narrow minded people to call for it to be banned. They would have given it a "1" here no doubt.

But yes; as I say I am concerned less about the voting and more about those who I have managed to "stop and think for a minute or two about what I have written". And indeed, that can be someone with little knowledge of literatature.

One comment made by email said:
"I am not a fur fetishist but you have made me understand the intensity of sensuality to those who are. And that is an achievement...."

This I like:

"Did the reader taste the salt spray from the Irish Coast? Do they feel what it's like to be in the mountains of Montana? Can they feel the sand and heat from the Egyptian desert."

 

[cloudy]

I did not make the joke up and am not Czech.

If you infer something more from it than that it is your issue not mine.

Um...no.

You seem to possess some intelligence from what I have seen of your posts, so that excuse doesn't fly. It doesn't matter one whit if you are or are not Czech; you posted the joke, and clearly knew what reaction it would elicit.

I recognize backpedaling when I see it, and to be honest, a sincere apology would serve you better than some lame rationalization.

I'm out. I can no longer take anything you say seriously.

Enjoy.

 

[jomar]

I've been thinking about this thread and the "H"s that appear on stories. Lots of stories with the coveted "H" are stroke - many pure stroke.... I've long thought that stories that illicit a raging hard-on and are long enough to let the wankers get off more often than not end up with an "H".

I resemble that remark! Though, less and less as time goes by.