Volatile Votes

[scouries]

Perhaps if you ceased your perpetual butting into everybody's threads with your stultifying opinions, the world would be a happier place?

[size=+2]

Great avatar! And you didn’t need to put a question mark above. You’ve caught our ace perfectly.

It’s been sad to see the poor boys fall. From a once independent (but often wrong) voice he’s fallen to toadyism and ass kissing – his integrity sold for pats on his back from her highness. “Good boy”, she coos in his ear.

‘Don’t try to change anything’, has become the mantra of this apologist for the QUEEN. And why according to him?

Because the poor little ace might be forced to read the thread. One of the 600,000+ threads here. Isn’t that too bad?

We need people like you and evanslily and polynices complaining.

The vote system on LITEROTICA is rotten.

Everyone knows it. We all have choices – you can join darkboy and ace and try to curry favor with the palace by sucking up…

ace, darkboy and little bb…

Or

…you can continue to ask for voting system transparency. Something every HONEST voting system provides.​

[/size]

[size=+2]james r scouries esq.
Multiple A.I.R. AWARD winner[/size]

 

[sr71plt]

As usual, Scouries can't (or doesn't bother to) read.

Saying that the Web site management is impervious to suggestions and doesn't read the forum is pretty much on the other side of the universe from toddying to them.

Nice to see whose side the periodic ineffectual complainers fall on, though.

I'll be looking for just how effective your complaining is. (About as effective as Souries--who is so close to management he claims they pay him royalties--has been, all bet).

 

[YoursSINSerely]

Well, I'm with the Pilot on this one. Someone seemed to have asked for help on what to do with the missing votes and he offered a suggestion: Contact the owners, explain the situation, ask for a resolution.

I, personally, have contacted the "palace" to correct a problem. I not only received a response, but a thank you note from the "queen" herself. I do believe they listen when you go through the proper channels. I do believe they try to make things right for everyone.

That said, I'll add my history on some voting: I happened to be viewing my submission page one night just after midnight wondering when if my story had been approved and posted, yet. It had not been approved, but I had 40 views showing up on it already. I doubt very much that it went through 40 Literotica employees before it was approved. I can only assume it was viewed from those outside websites who keep pirating the stories, but that is just an assumption.

My advice to the originator of the thread? Perfect your whining, learn who can actually make the correction, and keep it short. There's a million of you out there.

 

[sr71plt]

That said, I'll add my history on some voting: I happened to be viewing my submission page one night just after midnight wondering when if my story had been approved and posted, yet. It had not been approved, but I had 40 views showing up on it already. I doubt very much that it went through 40 Literotica employees before it was approved. I can only assume it was viewed from those outside websites who keep pirating the stories, but that is just an assumption.

Dark probably has a tech savvy answer to this, but the daily "new" stories post at different times on the views on the computers I have on my desk. I don't know why this should be so, as all of the computers are coming through the same ISP, but my stories go up on the view in one computer and reads are racking up before the story even makes the list in another computer within sight of the first one.

 

[Darkniciad]

Haven't spent much time examining that one, I'm afraid. My guess would be that perhaps the foreign language and mobile versions of Lit update before the English main page, or at least do so sometimes.

That wouldn't account for a story that doesn't show up as approved yet gaining more than the standard 12 or less views before posting. Perhaps views accumulate when Laurel is sorting the stories for posting order. I can't think of any reason for the code to function that way, but *shrug*

It's possible that the thief-bots that are probably used to hork stories could access the "waiting for approval" page that appears before your story goes live, or when it's rejected, and I know for a fact that anyone accessing that page cranks up views. I'm in contact with someone who played around with that and discovered it.

I'm sure that such bots could be programmed to automatically hork new stories just by incrementing the Lit ID# assigned to all stories. If they try to access your story, even when it hasn't gone live yet, it would crank up a view. If the bot was set to go off at midnight EST and try to hork X number of stories, it could possibly make multiple attempts before giving up.

Another site I post at actually has some behind the scenes code to block just that sort of robotic horking attack.

 

[YoursSINSerely]

Dark probably has a tech savvy answer to this, but the daily "new" stories post at different times on the views on the computers I have on my desk. I don't know why this should be so, as all of the computers are coming through the same ISP, but my stories go up on the view in one computer and reads are racking up before the story even makes the list in another computer within sight of the first one.

I'm impressed that I'm not on ignore.

I'm sure he can explain that, but just sounds like a refresh problem to me.

 

[sr71plt]

I'm impressed that I'm not on ignore.

You're not--quite--but mainly because you didn't post on the day I did a major ignore registration. But even if you were, I have a system. When I'm in the mood to check on what someone on my ignore list (like Scouries above) has to say in a thread, I can easily open it. Otherwise, I don't have to look at it. And when someone is on ignore, it gives me an extra incentive not to respond even if I peek at the posting. There's no law on how I choose to use ignore--which I only recently started using anyway. Having started using it, though, I find I have a hell of a lot more time for writing and thinking about writing than I did before.

 

[scouries]

Well, I'm with the Pilot on this one. Someone seemed to have asked for help on what to do with the missing votes and he offered a suggestion: Contact the owners, explain the situation, ask for a resolution.

If only he had offered a suggestion. And in a kind, polite, helpful tone. But he didn’t. Read his posts on the subject my dear. He starts his suggestion as you call it by suggesting the threadmasster do something constructive and stop his yammering. This is not how someone truly interested in being helpful offers a suggestion. Nor does calling a poster a cheater help matters. Nor are the following words very useful in a constructive conversation: ‘yammering’, ‘ineffectual’, ‘irritating’ , ‘whining’, ‘get stuffed’.

ace never imparts his information or ideas in a friendly way. He lectures. He insults. His posts are rude. Always have been. Argumentative. Smug. Ugly. Mean. He always has to get in your face.

They’re who the ace is. And I’ve never understood the reason why.


QUOTE ace Post 1 Because to do otherwise is largely a waste of time and effort and opportunity to be doing something else constructive. Certainly yammering to the forum, where we go through this three times a week, isn't getting anywhere. You/I don't have a vote. It's a free use site belonging to someone else. Our choices are either to post to it or not. You have good reason to complain and make suggestions as far as I can see--but making them to the forum, where we'll all been through this a thousand times to no avail, rather than directly to the site owners/managers who don't read the forums is just so much spitting in the wind--and at other posters who have nothing to do with the decisionmaking around here.

So, not getting used to the system and ineffectually complaining to the forum is just an irritant to the rest of us who have decided to get used to the system given us and going on about our writing or posting (or going away). The site mangers, Laurel and Manu have PM addresses and there are "give us your suggestions" here and about. Use them.

Post 2 …It's ineffectual because it never has resulted in anything that I've seen; it's irritating to other authors, because we're all affected by it, I've seen no one who is happy with it (although in most cases vote stripping has improved the rating), the forum is not the place to make suggestions those in power will read them, and it's frustrating to see the complaint come up over and over again--when combined with it being ineffectual. So, I'll just stick with the phrase.

I will say, though, that I have little sympathy for someone who loses 200 votes. I gotta believe there was massive cheating going on in these cases. I have over 400 stories here and I've never lost more than four or five votes in a sweep.

Post 3…Maybe when you've been here for a while, you'll see the point--and the utility of whining about what's not going to change in the wrong venue to the wrong folks.


Post 4 …What did I "correct"? I augmented. I often do that. If that irritates you, perhaps you have too low a threshold of irritation. As for your whining about my comments on the whining of the two of you, get stuffed.


[size=+2]james r scouries esq.
Multiple A.I.R. AWARD winner[/size]

 

[scouries]

QUOTE ace I have a system. When I'm in the mood to check on what someone on my ignore list (like Scouries above) has to say in a thread, I can easily open it. Otherwise, I don't have to look at it. And when someone is on ignore, it gives me an extra incentive not to respond even if I peek at the posting. There's no law on how I choose to use ignore--which I only recently started using anyway. Having started using it, though, I find I have a hell of a lot more time for writing and thinking about writing than I did before.

Like you I hadn’t used the ignore list much. Just twice until about three months ago. My first was oily but he didn’t stay on long. It was more just a test of the system. Then I put that nut from Canada (mr 666) on the list for a long while – for some reason his posts just drove me nuts. I also hated his AVATAR. He’s been off the list for a couple of years now but he doesn’t seem to be around much anymore anyway (which is good).

I have only two on now.

No ace you’re not one. You don’t post much on my threads and I don’t venture on to that many besides mine.

Nor is darkboy in spite of his horrible AVATAR.

Nor have I put irritants like missode or cloudy on my list. I simply don’t run into them that much and at least both of them have acceptable AVATARS.

The lesbians and politicos aren’t on my list either. I suspect if I spent a lot of time in AHland I would – certainly the greekmissomega would be exiled immediately and probably that babbling amicus guy would go on it too.

To get exiled by yours truly you have to be STUPID (your posts over a period of time demonstrating a complete lack of intelligence), and the posts themselves have to be UGLY.

I put two on a couple of months ago. Both have demonstrated consistent stupidity and both have no sense of what constitutes an aesthetically appealing post. Gabby followed suit with the same two a month ago. My biggest complaint so far with the system is that the fact that they’ve posted on my thread shows up. If I’m ignoring someone I certainly don’t need to be reminded of it every time they post.

Other than that it’s been a complete success. Just check out the last page of the SCOURIES thread – try it with their posts showing and then with them on ignore.

Remove user from ignore list
TxRad

This message is hidden because TxRad is on your ignore list.

Remove user from ignore list
michchick98

This message is hidden because michchick98 is on your ignore list.


[size=+2]james r scouries esq.
Multiple A.I.R. AWARD winner[/size]

 

[YoursSINSerely]

Well, I'm with the Pilot on this one. Someone seemed to have asked for help on what to do with the missing votes and he offered a suggestion: Contact the owners, explain the situation, ask for a resolution.

If only he had offered a suggestion. And in a kind, polite, helpful tone. But he didn’t. Read his posts on the subject my dear. He starts his suggestion as you call it by suggesting the threadmasster do something constructive and stop his yammering. This is not how someone truly interested in being helpful offers a suggestion. Nor does calling a poster a cheater help matters. Nor are the following words very useful in a constructive conversation: ‘yammering’, ‘ineffectual’, ‘irritating’ , ‘whining’, ‘get stuffed’.

ace never imparts his information or ideas in a friendly way. He lectures. He insults. His posts are rude. Always have been. Argumentative. Smug. Ugly. Mean. He always has to get in your face.

They’re who the ace is. And I’ve never understood the reason why.


QUOTE ace Post 1 Because to do otherwise is largely a waste of time and effort and opportunity to be doing something else constructive. Certainly yammering to the forum, where we go through this three times a week, isn't getting anywhere. You/I don't have a vote. It's a free use site belonging to someone else. Our choices are either to post to it or not. You have good reason to complain and make suggestions as far as I can see--but making them to the forum, where we'll all been through this a thousand times to no avail, rather than directly to the site owners/managers who don't read the forums is just so much spitting in the wind--and at other posters who have nothing to do with the decisionmaking around here.

So, not getting used to the system and ineffectually complaining to the forum is just an irritant to the rest of us who have decided to get used to the system given us and going on about our writing or posting (or going away). The site mangers, Laurel and Manu have PM addresses and there are "give us your suggestions" here and about. Use them.

Post 2 …It's ineffectual because it never has resulted in anything that I've seen; it's irritating to other authors, because we're all affected by it, I've seen no one who is happy with it (although in most cases vote stripping has improved the rating), the forum is not the place to make suggestions those in power will read them, and it's frustrating to see the complaint come up over and over again--when combined with it being ineffectual. So, I'll just stick with the phrase.

I will say, though, that I have little sympathy for someone who loses 200 votes. I gotta believe there was massive cheating going on in these cases. I have over 400 stories here and I've never lost more than four or five votes in a sweep.

Post 3…Maybe when you've been here for a while, you'll see the point--and the utility of whining about what's not going to change in the wrong venue to the wrong folks.


Post 4 …What did I "correct"? I augmented. I often do that. If that irritates you, perhaps you have too low a threshold of irritation. As for your whining about my comments on the whining of the two of you, get stuffed.


[size=+2]james r scouries esq.
Multiple A.I.R. AWARD winner[/size]

Good morning, Jim I'm doing a proper quote (MichChick advice) so the Pilot doesn't have to jump through all those ignore hoops to see what i'm talking about:

Being the nice person that I am, I read all of the Pilot's posts in a different tone than you seem to have read them. Someone has to tell me they're pissed off before I can read it that way. Although, I do believe he was disgusted with the lengthy posts that preceded his first one. I also read it that some one was getting a little pushy and he shoved back a little. That's human nature. I get it.

I do find there is a rather lack of respect around here from the newbies for those who have been here for a longer period of time. The experienced writers offer help and the newbies sometimes don't want to accept it. I'm not opposed to change and there's always room for improvement and sometimes it takes fresh eyes to pick up on the problems and correct them, but when someone is telling the how's and why's of the way things are, they should accept them, move on, or get out.

We all know there are problems with the voting system, but we all know we choose to be here on a free site. I'm staying cuz I like it here, as I suspect you do, too. I've learned to accept that some people are just old and crotchety, but maybe there's a good reason for it, too. I just hope I never get like that.

Enjoy this beautiful Sunday afternoon.

 

[evanslily]

I will say, though, that I have little sympathy for someone who loses 200 votes. I gotta believe there was massive cheating going on in these cases. I have over 400 stories here and I've never lost more than four or five votes in a sweep.

Massive cheating? Well, I can see how you might think that's possible. And no matter what I say here to say I didn't cheat you're only going to say, "Well, you would say that, wouldn't you?"

Perhaps if you had lost more than 4 or 5 votes in a sweep, you'd feel differently about it. This is the second time I've lost a significant number of votes in a sweep - a sweep that has taken place a year after the chapter first posted, as I said, to whittle down the contenders for one of the monthly reader awards. I'm not throwing my rattle out of the pram, 'cos one, what would be the point, and two, there's nowhere better on the Internet to post one's stories and get the kind of feedback you can get from Literotica readers. If that means that every once in a while I have to lose a couple of hundred votes, then so be it.

I didn't cheat though, for what it's worth. I don't need to. For whatever reason, people seem to like my stories. Now it could well be that some well-meaning fans of my work think that voting for my stories more than once is a good thing to do. I guess I should take it as some sort of compliment that 238 people thought they liked the chapter in question so much they voted twice. Even though that isn't supposed to be possible anymore.

Am I bleating? Yeah, probably, a bit. But another function of these forums is to come and share your successes and commiserate when things don't go so well. This is me, getting the loss of my votes off my chest. I'll probably still post the next chapter of my story when it's finished. Just for those 238 repeat voters, mind.

(P.S. There were originally 500 votes, Dark. I haz proof, LOL - I had to do a Google search and use cached pages - but I took a screen shot when I found it.)

 

[Darkniciad]

(P.S. There were originally 500 votes, Dark. I haz proof, LOL - I had to do a Google search and use cached pages - but I took a screen shot when I found it.)

Ouch. That is painful, and highly unusual -- even for a contest sweep. Those usually max out at around 35% for stories in categories like Loving Wives, where there's a lot of notorious multi-voting.

 

[sr71plt]

Massive cheating? Well, I can see how you might think that's possible. And no matter what I say here to say I didn't cheat you're only going to say, "Well, you would say that, wouldn't you?"

Perhaps if you had lost more than 4 or 5 votes in a sweep, you'd feel differently about it. This is the second time I've lost a significant number of votes in a sweep - a sweep that has taken place a year after the chapter first posted, as I said, to whittle down the contenders for one of the monthly reader awards. I'm not throwing my rattle out of the pram, 'cos one, what would be the point, and two, there's nowhere better on the Internet to post one's stories and get the kind of feedback you can get from Literotica readers. If that means that every once in a while I have to lose a couple of hundred votes, then so be it.

I didn't cheat though, for what it's worth. I don't need to. For whatever reason, people seem to like my stories. Now it could well be that some well-meaning fans of my work think that voting for my stories more than once is a good thing to do. I guess I should take it as some sort of compliment that 238 people thought they liked the chapter in question so much they voted twice. Even though that isn't supposed to be possible anymore.

Am I bleating? Yeah, probably, a bit. But another function of these forums is to come and share your successes and commiserate when things don't go so well. This is me, getting the loss of my votes off my chest. I'll probably still post the next chapter of my story when it's finished. Just for those 238 repeat voters, mind.

(P.S. There were originally 500 votes, Dark. I haz proof, LOL - I had to do a Google search and use cached pages - but I took a screen shot when I found it.)

I didn't post that the author was the one doing the cheating--or that the cheating votes were placed to favor the author. I don't for a minute believe that 200 swept votes from a story represents legitimate votes, though. That was some sort of computer bot at work to falsely manipulate the score--at least that's what I believe.

I would completely agree that readers like your stories.

 

[evanslily]

I didn't post that the author was the one doing the cheating--or that the cheating votes were placed to favor the author. I don't for a minute believe that 200 swept votes from a story represents legitimate votes, though. That was some sort of computer bot at work to falsely manipulate the score--at least that's what I believe.

I would completely agree that readers like your stories.

While you just made my day with that last sentence...

I'm intrigued by the 'computer bot'. What do you mean?

 

[sr71plt]

Although, I do believe he was disgusted with the lengthy posts that preceded his first one. I also read it that some one was getting a little pushy and he shoved back a little. That's human nature. I get it.

Yes, this was the posting that irritated me: "I don't know any reason why authors should just get used to this ridiculous system." And it's a sentence I singled out for response. I found it both naive and arrogant.

This is a privately owned and run free-use site. The authors of stories submitted here don't have a vote on the Web site system. They can make suggestions--and, although I was just ignored, I identified what the method was to make constructive suggestions to the Web site management in as effective manner as possible--which is not to do the "I won't take this anymore, and you can't make me" ineffectual dance of indignation on the forum to other authors who are equally powerless to do anything about it, a forum that the people who can do anything about the issue don't read.

What disgusted me was yet another round in the thrice weekly rant to the wrong people in the wrong place about something that hasn't changed no matter where or to whom it was posed--and naively thinking the wheel was being invented on the issue. This indeed Scouriesland territory.

 

[sr71plt]

While you just made my day with that last sentence...

I'm intrigued by the 'computer bot'. What do you mean?

Ask Scouries (or Dark probably knows the technicalities--I certainly don't). There are computer programs that will mass click on things (like voting) for you to prevent having to go all over your office building in search of computers and wearing a callous on your thumb.

 

[evanslily]

Ask Scouries (or Dark probably knows the technicalities--I certainly don't). There are computer programs that will mass click on things (like voting) for you to prevent having to go all over your office building in search of computers and wearing a callous on your thumb.

But why would anyone do that to vote on a story of mine? It doesn't make sense to me.

Is it really so unlikely that I had 500 legitimate votes? When 800 people have me as one of their 'favorite' authors, without even beginning to count the readers who might have voted for me anonymously?

(and before anyone asks, one of those 800 is an alter ego of mine, yes. But that still leaves 799...)

 

[sr71plt]

But why would anyone do that to vote on a story of mine? It doesn't make sense to me.

Is it really so unlikely that I had 500 legitimate votes? When 800 people have me as one of their 'favorite' authors, without even beginning to count the readers who might have voted for me anonymously?

(and before anyone asks, one of those 800 is an alter ego of mine, yes. But that still leaves 799...)

Beats me why this happens. When the story is in a contest (or if the author is a Scouries huckster type), I'd rack it up to miniscule-brained people taking Lit. contests entirely too seriously and doing whatever they can to maneuver a story up or down. (Which obviously is going on and is a main reason I've just stopped with the contests--they have little to do with the story itself.)

But when we're talking about chunks this big of delection when it's not happening proportionally across the story file? No, I don't believe the bulk of those are separate, legitimate voters.

 

[evanslily]

Beats me why this happens. When the story is in a contest (or if the author is a Scouries huckster type), I'd rack it up to miniscule-brained people taking Lit. contests entirely too seriously and doing whatever they can to maneuver a story up or down. (Which obviously is going on and is a main reason I've just stopped with the contests--they have little to do with the story itself.)

But when we're talking about chunks this big of delection when it's not happening proportionally across the story file? No, I don't believe the bulk of those are separate, legitimate voters.

Ah well. *shrugs* I'm never going to get on Scouries' 1000 votes list.

I'm beyond letting it get me down too much this time - I got my knickers in a twist about it last year and a fat lot of good that did me.

So I reckon I should just stop whinging and get writing. Thanks for all the insights, folks.

 

[driphoney]

Ah well. *shrugs* I'm never going to get on Scouries' 1000 votes list.

I'm beyond letting it get me down too much this time - I got my knickers in a twist about it last year and a fat lot of good that did me.

So I reckon I should just stop whinging and get writing. Thanks for all the insights, folks.

You have fans, darling. And some fans will do whatever it takes to "help" their favored writer. (That's what I'm guessing.)

Seeing you posting reminds me that you were on the top of my summer "To Read" list. I know that once I get started, I'll do nothing but read through an entire story.

Nice seeing you posting again.

 

[fridayam]

"Yes, this was the posting that irritated me: "I don't know any reason why authors should just get used to this ridiculous system." And it's a sentence I singled out for response. I found it both naive and arrogant."

As the writer who posted this, I would point out that it is you, sir, who are the arrogant one: you might be able to write but you certainly cannot read as my earlier post quite clearly says that I did this and received no answer--I even quoted it back to you. As you and several other posters seem not to have bothered reading it, I can only assume that you feel so high and mighty about your vast number of posts that it isn't necessary to actually read what us hoi polloi write--which is perhaps why we pay no attention to your constant drivel.

Oh and by the way, the mod of the Poetry Forum also wrote and received no reply on my question in that Forum. Don't insult people so: it only makes you look more foolish than you are.

 

[sr71plt]

"Yes, this was the posting that irritated me: "I don't know any reason why authors should just get used to this ridiculous system." And it's a sentence I singled out for response. I found it both naive and arrogant."

As the writer who posted this, I would point out that it is you, sir, who are the arrogant one: you might be able to write but you certainly cannot read as my earlier post quite clearly says that I did this and received no answer--I even quoted it back to you. As you and several other posters seem not to have bothered reading it, I can only assume that you feel so high and mighty about your vast number of posts that it isn't necessary to actually read what us hoi polloi write--which is perhaps why we pay no attention to your constant drivel.

Oh and by the way, the mod of the Poetry Forum also wrote and received no reply on my question in that Forum. Don't insult people so: it only makes you look more foolish than you are.

Yes, I agree that you can't read posts, in addition to demanding what you aren't paying for.

If you read any of my posts, you would know that I said the Web site owners are impervious to the suggestions. So whining to the rest of us gets you where--other than responses of you being irritating? (Which also was the point I made several times.)

They own the site. You don't like how they do it and can't get them to change, get on your little red scooter and go to another site--or set one up of your own. This one's done on their dime, not yours.

 

[fridayam]

Yes, I agree that you can't read posts, in addition to demanding what you aren't paying for.

If you read any of my posts, you would know that I said the Web site owners are impervious to the suggestions. So whining to the rest of us gets you where--other than responses of you being irritating? (Which also was the point I made several times.)

They own the site. You don't like how they do it and can't get them to change, get on your little red scooter and go to another site--or set one up of your own. This one's done on their dime, not yours.

Your problem is that you are the classic bore--the saloon bar bore who butts in everywhere and kills conversation by his lack of grace and know-it-all attitude. Sadly this site is overloaded with bores like you who condescend, patronise and insult at will, but you are the Clown Prince of Bores. I can't even be bothered to point out how self-contradictory your replies to this thread have been--because you bore me.

 

[sr71plt]

Your problem is that you are the classic bore--the saloon bar bore who butts in everywhere and kills conversation by his lack of grace and know-it-all attitude. Sadly this site is overloaded with bores like you who condescend, patronise and insult at will, but you are the Clown Prince of Bores. I can't even be bothered to point out how self-contradictory your replies to this thread have been--because you bore me.

Another great reason for you to get on your little red scooter and go associate with brilliant, unboring people like you at some other Web site that will set itself up just to please you.

 

[YoursSINSerely]

Aretha Franklin, where are you?

R E S P E C T​