Score Vandalism

[pink_silk_glove]

I think that the main indictment that this thread points out is that we have a multitude of ideas to change the scoring system and while not all of them I would be in favor of, all of them would be an improvement on the system as it is (except for requiring an account to vote).

 

[Comshaw]

(snip)
Point-blank: maliciously-damaged scores reduce readership.
(snip)

I'll have to disagree with this. I don't think the majority of readers would even notice (or give a big crap) about a maliciously damaged story. Most would just go find something else on the site that caught their interest. Perhaps a few rabid fans might get spun up about it, but for the most part, they could give a crap as long as there is something to read that entertains them.

(snip)
Readers matter more than authors do. Your feelings do not matter. The site wants to maximize readership and traffic, as it should. Scores do not exist to make us happy or boost our stories; scores exist for readers. They are a way of assisting readers in choosing the stories they want to read.
(snip)

This ↑ I agree with. This site isn't run for authors, or their feelings, or their egos. It's run to make money, so the weight of importance falls heavily towards readers. Yes they need us but the readers and the traffic to the site they provide is the most important part of the equation by far. So if it comes down to pandering to the authors or pandering to the readers, the readers it will be every time.

(snip) This, I think, is a demonstrably broken system, because the red H conveys no extra useful information beyond the score itself, and in fact it misrepresents what the score means, since it does not control for other factors, and it fools people into thinking it is a measure of quality when it's not, AND it incentivizes gamesmanship. There's literally nothing good about it, except that it's become a bauble valued by authors who get them and it's a fundamental part of the status quo, which the Site understandably does not wish to disturb. (snip)

But this ↑ I totally disagree with. I've heard over and over " there are stories that are trash that have the red H so the entire system is trash!" While the first part of that statement is true (I've never seen evidence of many of those though) the second part is wrong.
The red H isn't a perfect indicator of a good story. It does have it's flaws, but it serves its purpose as a GENERAL indicator of an entertaining story. As such helps the readers to find what they want. Again we go back to what is good for the reader, the revenue generators. Like it, don't like it, everyone has an opinion about that scarlet letter next to a story, but it does what the admins want it to do, lep keep the readers here clicking through stories, so it does convey useful information.

Simpler and more effective than that would be to delete the red H system and let the ratings speak for themselves to however individual readers want to understand them to mean in attracting a read. At one time the ratings didn't show to the readers. Now they do. Let them stand on their own. Far less bother for the website admin as well.

That makes no sense to me. The red H is based on the ratings, so how is doing away with it and relying solely on the ratings going to matter? The only thing it will do is put the readers in a position to arbitrarily pick a number to use as a cut off. And I'll bet ten to one that the majority would still use 4.5 as that number.

(snip) They were always meant to be a tool that shows how much readers liked or disliked a story, they were never meant to be a gauge of story quality. (snip)

Absolutely. The red H isn't about quality, it's about how entertaining it is. Most readers here could give a flying copulation if all the words are spelled right, all the t's crossed and i's dotted as long as they like it. It's all about like and dislike and not about each persons definition of "quality".

I have stories on another site (one that is mentioned on the front page of this site) that uses a 1 to 10 scoring system. The admin tried to keep the bombers at bay by requiring a comment if they voted a 3 or less. did it work? not hardly. They started leaving nonsense comments and repeatedly typed letters just to get by the word count requirement. The skunks are going ot find a way around the fence no matter what.

Well I think I've rattled on enough. Time to go get my boat. I was out fishing yesterday and the motor decided to stop working 9 miles off-shore. We made it in on the 9.9 HP kicker motor after 2 1/2 hours at walking speed (3.5 MPH). boats are such fun!

Comshaw

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I've heard over and over " there are stories that are trash that have the red H so the entire system is trash!" While the first part of that statement is true (I've never seen evidence of many of those though) the second part is wrong.

Hah! You haven't read much.

% of stories with Red H that suck ... about 90%
% of stories without Red H that suck ... about 90%

 

[BobbyBrandt]

What about requiring a comment from the reader submitting either a 1 or a 5 that justifies their vote?

Actually this is a common practice with online number rating systems where any assigned values requires either a voluntary or mandatory explanation of "Why did you vote that way?" If only 1 and 5 votes required explanation, we would see far more 2, 3 and 4 votes.

Votes and comments could remain anonymous but the action by readers would carry more value for the site (enhanced reader participation), and the writers through increased feedback.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

What about requiring a comment from the reader submitting either a 1 or a 5 that justifies their vote?

Actually this is a common practice with online number rating systems where any assigned values requires either a voluntary or mandatory explanation of "Why did you vote that way?" If only 1 and 5 votes required explanation, we would see far more 2, 3 and 4 votes.

Votes and comments could remain anonymous but the action by readers would carry more value for the site (enhanced reader participation), and the writers through increased feedback.

1 ~ comment comment comment, dot-dot-dot ...

 

[ElectricBlue]

Against that very logical argument however are several others. First, we are probably going to see fewer readers voting in the first place. (Comments probably wouldn't change as those already require registration.)

Not true. You can comment anonymously. At least half of comments on my stories are anon.

A more cogent argument against it is how easy it is to open email accounts these days and the ubiquity of VPNs. The dedicated troll will have no problem in creating a number of IDs. Sure, it would make it more trouble for them, but I doubt these creatures have much else to do with their time anyway. If somebody's really P'd at an author, it'll happen.

Anyway, good question and hopefully the site will take some more steps to deal with a very real problem. While I'm (slightly) on the Needn't Register side, I'm open to hearing arguments showing why we should.

The site has been running the sweep system for many years now, and it demonstrably changes scores, always upwards. Hostile ones get removed - what else can the site do?

Removing anon votes from stories will reduce votes, and would change nothing.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Disagree there. Number one way to score is to pander. Bar none. Although it does depend what category you're. If you post in a fractious category (like LW or BDSM) you're bound to draw criticism from the opposite camp, true.

The best way to get good good scores is to write good stories. That doesn't mean pandering, automatically, it means writing good stories.

 

[SimonDoom]

The bottom line is that unless you can make an argument that a particular change will be better FROM THE SITE'S POINT OF VIEW, NOT YOURS, you have no case to make. It's dead in the water. And hardly anybody advocating change ever does this. Getting rid of anonymous votes obviously would be bad from the Site's point of view, so they're not going to do it and they have no reason to do it.

 

[Agent0069]

Hah! You haven't read much.

I used this site for years, but I've been viewing stories by tags, and combination thereof. Sometimes even a story with a rating of 3 would be just what I was looking for, while a lot of good stories and authors went past me completely unnoticed.

Becoming an author I was shocked that normal people still use categories, and are mostly viewing by "okay, what's new in store today?", instead of what I did.

Quite frankly, I have no idea if the current system is good or bad - I'm posting stories, users are viewing those, I even get some new followers, so I have no strong opinion on the matter. If I were suggesting improvements, I would suggest by starting with a re-design of interface. Just go to literotica.com, and click on the links from there - how many different styles and pages will you end up on?

 

[alohadave]

it demonstrably changes scores, always upwards

Not always upwards. I've had scores drop after a sweep.

 

[Gamblnluck]

However, it is time to say something, epecially because several of my stories' scores are suddenly getting hammered as it is, for no good reason beyond somebody or several somebodies wanting to punish them for... what?... having the vaunted "red 'H'"? A personal squick mentioned in passing? Existing in the first place?

What did I do to you, whoever you are?

I recently returned to a long multiple chapter story. For a lark, I wrote down view and scoring stats of the older chapters. I wondered how many new views older stories would get. Some of the early chapters got up to 200 views in the first few days.
I checked a week later and was pleased with the views. My other stories seemed to pick up as well.
What did surprise me (it really shouldn't) was the ratings. Each of my first 10 chapters all had 4 new people scoring and the overall score dropped. Because of the numbers, most did not drop but a few percentage points like from 4.65 to 4.6. I skipped to chapter 20 and still 4 new readers rating the stories with a slight drop.
I know it was a single person with multiple accounts or devices and using 'anonymous' on each to 1 bomb me.
The other thing I want to say is that same week, I'd posted here on AH and been called a troll etc and generally had my opinions ridiculed.... As Arsenio used to say...'HMMMMMM'

 

[pink_silk_glove]

The best way to get good good scores is to write good stories. That doesn't mean pandering, automatically, it means writing good stories.

No way. Not even close.

 

[Gamblnluck]

It seems like voters are commonly out to reward an author or a story, and that creates a strong bias toward 4* and 5* votes. I think the median score should be near 3, but according to 8letters work it's more like 4.5. Not all voters are out to pat you on the back -- witness Loving Wives, where the median score probably is about 3. When you get a string of low votes it's easy to attribute it to malicious voting, when it may really be unbiased voting.

If you look at many of the stories on their own merit, many deserve their rating. Particularly if the views are in the thousands and the ratings in the hundreds. Many of the stories that are rated low deserve it. 1. They are lack a story line, (although in some categories a story comprised of a single hot wank scene gets an initial high score).
2. The story does not follow a logical premise. It is not something the reader the can follow from concept to completion. or 3. It is a story that hits the readership the wrong way.
For the third case, I wrote a sequel to a well loved story. I got mixed reviews on the way I wrote the story. It followed a consistent thought. BUT it totally went against the original author. I looked at a BTB story from the cheating wife's point of view. She was mentally ill due to a couple things and acted out. I enjoyed the writing, but not the way it was received. Oh well.

 

[Gamblnluck]

Has rating breakdown ever been proposed? Like, not change anything, just let authors see how many 5s and how many 1s they have, instead of an average?

Actually, I like that idea. It would conform to reviews on Amazon (if you really believe that) where you see 5 star reviews and 1 stars

 

[AwkwardlySet]

The bottom line is that unless you can make an argument that a particular change will be better FROM THE SITE'S POINT OF VIEW, NOT YOURS, you have no case to make. It's dead in the water. And hardly anybody advocating change ever does this. Getting rid of anonymous votes obviously would be bad from the Site's point of view, so they're not going to do it and they have no reason to do it.

This is a reasonable standpoint but I want to point out a few problems with it.

1. How can we possibly know what the website, or in other words, Laurel and Manu want? I can assume they would want more traffic as it makes logical sense, but other than that, what the hell do I or anyone else here know about their desires and motivations? They sure as hell never said anything about that. So how can I try to appeal to desires and motivations I know nothing about? It's absurd.

2. It could be argued that giving acknowledgment to some really small desires and demands many authors here agree on benefits the website in the long run. You know, a satisfied content provider = more content. And there are things that authors here almost unanimously agree on, small things that could be implemented in a heartbeat. There is no reason to believe that the small percentage of Lit authors who frequent AH are completely unrepresentative of authors as a whole. But the fact that they don't want to implement even such minuscule things proves that there is something else behind their unwillingness to do anything about any of our desires. Once again, I believe that the most recent Beta thread proved my point.

 

[SimonDoom]

No way. Not even close.

You're entitled to your opinion, but your opinion on this particular issue is idiosyncratic, not based on a sufficient review of stories here, and unhelpful to most authors.

Pandering is a good way to increase views, but not necessarily scores. Back in 2017, over about six days, I wrote the ultimate pander story, Late Night on the Loveseat With Mom, expressly for the purpose of maximizing views, and it worked. It was very successful. The most viewed story at Literotica during its 12 months from publication. But the score today is just 4.62. Good, but not spectacular. If you fairly analyze the incest/taboo stories that have done better than mine you'll see that many of them are longer, with more character development and more buildup. It's very clear that the thing that distinguishes higher-scoring incest stories from my incest story is NOT more pandering.

My story was 7600 words, so it's not just a one-page stroker. It has some buildup and development. In general, the shorter, more stroke-oriented stories might do as well in terms of views, but their scores aren't as high.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Just because you yourself haven't experienced something in your seven years here, doesn't mean it's not happening, or are you just standing in for EB here?

Cheeky bugger, thinking I don't read through threads. You could have called me, you know, @ElectricBlue.

Yes, I've been here ten years, and I've seen all the things you've talked about, and I've run the same experiments you have. Based on those experiments (on my own story file, obviously), I think I know how sweeps work - any score can get swept - and I know you can vote twice. Which therefore means you can vote more than twice - but seriously, why would anyone bother?

At the end of the day, though, ask this:

Why do trolls troll your stories?

Why are your scores lower than the next guy's?

Why do they have more Red Hs than you do?

Why do you think your story is so important all these trolls are attacking it?

It's the same system, the same categories, the same block of readers who even bother to vote, the same trolls, the same people who only ever vote fives, the same people who might vote three as their starting point, the same people who vote and comment publicly, the same people who never vote or comment at all. We're all within the same place, the same broken place. None of us are in any other place.

It seems to me the ONLY variable is what you write, and how you write it.

Maybe that's what you need to go look at, because that's what all the readers see. Your writing. Look to yourself first - why is it always someone else's fault? It's your story that's attracting all this supposedly malicious behaviour. Ask yourself why that might be. Maybe it is the calibre of the writing, after all... just sayin'

Edit: "You" is the general you, not a specific person. If it was old school grammar, it would be"one".

 

[SimonDoom]

This is a reasonable standpoint but I want to point out a few problems with it.

1. How can we possibly know what the website, or in other words, Laurel and Manu want? I can assume they would want more traffic as it makes logical sense, but other than that, what the hell do I or anyone else here know about their desires and motivations? They sure as hell never said anything about that. So how can I try to appeal to desires and motivations I know nothing about? It's absurd.

We can infer that, like any Internet business, they want to maximize traffic and their financial return from the Site. Maybe that's wrong, but it's a reasonable inference. That's certainly what would motivate ME, putting on my cap as a Site owner rather than as an author. They've indicated as much in threads before by explicitly saying that they're not going to cut off anonymous comments because most comments are anonymous.

It could be argued that giving acknowledgment to some really small desires and demands many authors here agree on benefits the website in the long run. You know, a satisfied content provider = more content.

Maybe. But I see no reason to believe it. What matters is the satisfied consumer, not the satisfied provider. If all of the people who complain about anonymous voting in this forum suddenly left, would it make any difference to the success of the Site? I doubt it.

And there are things that authors here almost unanimously agree on,

Like what? I don't see much of this. I'm 100% opposed to requiring registration to vote, and I'm 100% opposed to eliminating anonymous commenting. I've made numerous suggestions for changes, and few people seem to agree with my suggestions. I don't see much unanimity about ANY suggestions for change in this forum.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

You're entitled to your opinion, but your opinion on this particular issue is idiosyncratic, not based on a sufficient review of stories here, and unhelpful to most authors.

Stop that argument. You base it in a comment that I made over a year ago that I had admitted that I hadn't read much, and you trot it out a hundred times since.

First of all, even though I hadn't read tons, I had read enough of a sample size. Furthermore, since then I have read substantially more and I have still not seen any correlation whatsoever between quality prose, strong plot and character development, and score (with the exception of N/N and even there it's negligible).

I am sure that these elements do figure into people's scoring, but if there was a pie chart breaking down the factors that go into readers' scores, quality prose, strong plot and motive, and characterization (beyond sluttiness) would be the thinnest slices, so thin that they do not make an observable difference in the scores.

And further to that, plot-heavy stories probably tend to attract plot readers, who would probably score harsher than the fap crowd (the skank jumped on and made me cum 5!!). I have no evidence for that, but I wouldn't be surprised.

I have found zero correlation between quality of prose and score at all (other than in N/N).

So you can stop dismissing my argument on the basis that I keep no data until you show me the spreadsheet of your data demonstrating otherwise, complete with your definitions for determining quality factor for each story to compare to each individual score. Until them, our methods of hypothesis are IDENTICAL. So just stop it.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Cheeky bugger, thinking I don't read through threads. You could have called me, you know, @ElectricBlue.

Yes, I've been here ten years, and I've seen all the things you've talked about, and I've run the same experiments you have. Based on those experiments (on my own story file, obviously), I think I know how sweeps work - any score can get swept - and I know you can vote twice. Which therefore means you can vote more than twice - but seriously, why would anyone bother?

At the end of the day, though, ask this:

Why do trolls troll your stories?

Why are your scores lower than the next guy's?

Why do they have more Red Hs than you do?

Why do you think your story is so important all these trolls are attacking it?

It's the same system, the same categories, the same block of readers who even bother to vote, the same trolls, the same people who only ever vote fives, the same people who might vote three as their starting point, the same people who vote and comment publicly, the same people who never vote or comment at all. We're all within the same place, the same broken place. None of us are in any other place.

It seems to me the ONLY variable is what you write, and how you write it.

Maybe that's what you need to go look at, because that's what all the readers see. Your writing. Look to yourself first - why is it always someone else's fault? It's your story that's attracting all this supposedly malicious behaviour. Ask yourself why that might be. Maybe it is the calibre of the writing, after all... just sayin'

As always, you amuse me with your post but I won't reply to jabs in it. It wouldn't serve any purpose.
It wasn't really my intention to call you out EB, otherwise I would have tagged you. I speak openly, and the context I mentioned you in is the same thing I already said to you several times. You are Literotica's number-one fanboy. You have shown so many times that you are incapable of thinking critically about Literotica or Laurel. So I called out Simon for replying to me in the tone that he did - which looked like the reaction of a fanboy. It was mostly a small joke, nothing else. For what it's worth, I think you are generally easy to talk to and I believe I can talk about many topics with you in a very constructive and satisfying way, just not about Literotica and Laurel.

 

[Gamblnluck]

The best way to get good good scores is to write good stories. That doesn't mean pandering, automatically, it means writing good stories.

I tend to agree for the most part. The second part is to choose your audience. Don't write a wild perverted fetish story and put it in front of the wrong audience.And yes I am talking about Loving Wives.
Even there, a well crafted story where the plot line evolves to the way most people would respond, gets decent reviews.
If you have an unsuspecting sap come home to be told by his wife and her three boyfriends he has to accept her rules or suffer the consequences , don't expect him to go "Oh, I love it!"
But the authors who complain about the 'incels' and 'trolls' who downgrade their stories go even further. They have the wife' new boyfriends sodomize the husband and if/when he gets hard or ejaculates, they tell him he loves it and the idiot believes them.
They can even stomp his dog to death and he thinks he deserves it. (Wait, sorry, against the rules on Lit) but they can destroy his life otherwise.
No normal person would accept that kind of thing. Any normal man or woman would retaliate.
But certain authors think, "I wrote a hot story, good grammar, great descriptions. I should be rewarded for my efforts." But when their story bombs and they get criticized, they blame it on incels and trolls and say "it is only a story", "It is mine, the author's idea of good."
The worse thing they can say is "Take it for what it is worth" because the audience does EXACTLY that and gives them a 2 plus rating.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Like what? I don't see much of this. I'm 100% opposed to requiring registration to vote, and I'm 100% opposed to eliminating anonymous commenting. I've made numerous suggestions for changes, and few people seem to agree with my suggestions. I don't see much unanimity about ANY suggestions for change in this forum.

I'll just give you the tiniest example, the one that can be implemented in a matter of minutes, and the one I have seen supported and liked unanimously. Displaying the word count for series and standalone stories on the Author's page. You can find it in Manu's Beta thread so go and see for yourself. It's a mind-numbingly tiny request that literally requires displaying a number that is already there. As someone who programmed in HTML, I know that it takes five minutes to implement such a thing. It's such a minuscule thing but one that shows the enormity of not caring about our requests. And all that in a thread Manu started, a thread that specifically asked for our feedback

 

[Bamagan]

Things have gotten too civil and agreeable on this thread. Let's churn that poop harder, people!

 

[Gamblnluck]

I have found zero correlation between quality of prose and score at all (other than in N/N).

What some people call quality of prose is exactly the opposite of what many readers want. I still remember back in junior high when I got in all kinds of trouble for saying Charles Dickens had a great story but the way he told it sucked. It was considered great prose.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Displaying the word count for series and standalone stories on the Author's page. You can find it in Manu's Beta thread so go and see for yourself. It's a mind-numbingly tiny request that literally requires displaying a number that is already there. As someone who programmed in HTML, I know that it takes five minutes to implement such a thing. It's such a minuscule thing but one that shows the enormity of the carelessness of our requests. And all that in a thread Manu started, a thread that specifically asked for our feedback

Could not agree more with that, but it was not a matter of this thread. I think that Simon was exaggerating when he said that no one was agreeing on anything (I said I 'think', I won't speak for him). There has been much agreement on certain things like removing or changing the definition of Red H, but there has been very much disagreement on the point of limiting voting to registered accounts.