What does targeted, sweep-evading, story vandalism look like?

[Kelliezgirl]

Its a guy with an account on his home pc/home internet and another on his mobile phone. Annoying but trivial to do and if Lit started to police it, he'd just do the same thing with the votes further apart.

Or the data itself isn't correct.

 

[designatedvictim]

And I’m not. I’m pointing out an obvious pattern that would be very unlikely to appear due to a stochastic process, but which does time and time again (and not just in the five - yes five - examples I provide). I’m entirely comfortable that this is a robust observation.

What do you think the probability is that these pairs of back to back one votes are entirely random. I’d say it’s infinitesimal, but please demonstrate otherwise, showing your workings.

I agreed with you that the points looked suspicious.

I will freely admit that I am not a statistician. I wanted a longer data trail.

I will also admit that I regret replying, in the first place.

 

[TheRedChamber]

Or the data itself isn't correct.

I've observed the same kind of thing, and I've no reason to believe people arent like that. My feeling is that it happens to a lot of people. The OP isnt particually special although they may attract more of this sort of person.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I've observed the same kind of thing, and I've no reason to believe people arent like that. My feeling is that it happens to a lot of people. The OP isnt particually special although they may attract more of this sort of person.

I'm simply pointing out that we don't have anyway to corroborate the data, and the accuracy of the numbers relies upon someone catching each individual vote.

 

[EmilyMiller]

I will also admit that I regret replying, in the first place.

It’s not a problem replying. But if you are going to question someone, a solid basis is a good idea. One of the things I get engaged in from time to time professionally is fraud detection. Let me assure you that a pattern like that would have all sorts of alarm bells ringing.

 

[RejectReality]

You've got a personal troll. Welcome to Lit. You don't always get your own in the welcome basket, but pretty much everyone gets one eventually.

They almost always eventually get bored, leave the site, or find someone they hate more than you to devote most of their energy to. Even people who have pissed off half the forum lose their trolling eventually. ( And no, I'm not going to link Freddy's active account, because I don't approve of tanking scores even when the person being tanked was acting like an unconscionable scumbag of the highest order. LOL He's been absent from the forum for a long time, and deserves to have his work stand on its own merits, untainted by any potential lingering enemies. )

I would say their feces flinging would get erased in time as well, but until reasonably regular, large sample-size sweeps are running again, that's not really true. The daily sweeps, requested sweeps of toplists and such, and themed contest sweeps simply don't pull in enough data to analyze for patterns to build the broad database of scumbaggery that used to keep it under control.

One thing I can guarantee is that as long as you're constantly bringing up how much it bothers you, refusing to post new work in protest, etc., it's going to keep happening. You're feeding that hungry, hungry troll the sweetest nectar ever. They're masturbating while they lick the metaphorical tears off your cheeks.

 

[SkyBubble]

Yeah - me too. On both counts

I'm with you on that. I do not like cold.

My late wife hated summer. I hate winter. With me, the cold starts in my feet and gets inside, then it moves up my body. I've been known to wear wool hunters' socks, sometimes with two pairs of socks under them.

A good place to find some is haband.com

 

[pink_silk_glove]

My point is that they seem to have moved on from me to other people, which is entirely predictable (I predicted it). Once this technology is in circulation, it will be used, and who can tell how?

Oh, as if you were the first and only one being trolled for a while. (eyeroll)

 

[lovecraft68]

To address all the people who think this thread is toxic and people are being mean?

The OP has done this multiple times, a long dog and pony woe is me show about the injustices of the site. Over and over again we hear this and this time with audacity that voting should be turned off for the entire site to suit them.

The OP has their own history of bullying and attacking people-usually because they're getting attention-and also repeatedly lying.

Months of "I talk to Laurel every day, I know the mod, I have intimate knowledge of this site..." and while doing this attacking anyone who claimed they had a problem here. Then they have problems and one of the previous 'this place is awful' threads lamented "No one here is answering me, they don't care, they don't help, they're ignoring me." Meaning um, no, you don't know Laurel or anything else here but when people tell stories and not the published kind, they often lose track of what they say, or just think people are stupid.

In the places other than Lit thread they claimed they were getting treated unfairly somewhere else and a couple of people who were also on that site disputed that and called them out. They bash this place on their social media and try to turn people away from it.

Now we have the "I know how trolling works and the program and..." No, no you don't.

But everyone here is supposed to be sympathetic? Sorry, that gets worn out by thread three.

But I do understand how it works here, not in the technical sense but human nature. Behavior here can bring about a lot of this crap. Everything I said above is going to earn you more bullshit than the average author deals with and every time you do it, that will magnify. What comes around goes around and if you're going to attack people, attack the site, make ridiculous accusations both on the board and through PMs and on other sites and just be nails on a chalkboard to all but a handful of what remains of a dwindling clique, then its bombs away. Unfair and petty and immature as it is, it's what happens.

Nothing I said here is an attack or a lie, its the truth and facts don't care about feelings.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Look, there is no need for people to defend me. I’m very used to the usual suspects on this thread and I don’t read what they post, it has neither harm nor value for me. So I’m totally chill and fine.

It’s a simple rule - one I learned on BlueSky - don’t argue, ignore. It’s much better for the psyche. Some people are angry and get off on being angrier. I say, let them. If it helps them to self-regulate, then that’s a win as far as I’m concerned. I’d rather they took their anger out harmlessly on me than on someone in their real lives.

Except that you're not ignoring me. You're talking shit about me without actually naming me, even when I call you on it. You could not be acting more cowardly.

 

[SimonDoom]

But I do understand how it works here, not in the technical sense but human nature. Behavior here can bring about a lot of this crap. Everything I said above is going to earn you more bullshit than the average author deals with and every time you do it, that will magnify. What comes around goes around and if you're going to attack people, attack the site, make ridiculous accusations both on the board and through PMs and on other sites and just be nails on a chalkboard to all but a handful of what remains of a dwindling clique, then its bombs away. Unfair and petty and immature as it is, it's what happens.

I can't help but think that those who keep incessantly talking about this subject invite more attacks upon their stories. Trolls look for victims who squawk the loudest. I also worry that talking too much about this subject may educate people about how to indulge in this behavior and possibly how to evade sweeps, and the site has advised us not to do that.

 

[BobbyBrandt]

I won’t argue this, hence my claim is that established authors are aware and have a choice. But you must accept that there are authors who no longer submit stories here. And there are plenty of threads and discussion about alternative sites. And plenty of threads like this one. You cannot deny their existence.

Their existence is real, but the motivations for venturing to other sites varies.

Just look at all the posts with authors frustrated with AI rejections seeking alternative sites. The same with authors who can't get their kiddy porn published here. They all claim persecution and move on.

Literotica has plenty to drive the issue-focused writer away. If the issue is ratings, they have no higher standing than any other.

 

[EmilyMiller]

The same with authors who can't get their kiddy porn published here.

One of the core elements of the site is broken - it always has been as far as I can tell, but it’s now getting worse, and I predict will begin to affect more and more people as the knowledge of how to fuck with ratings spreads. And you equate flagging this with wanting to post kiddy porn? I just can’t…

 

[BobbyBrandt]

One of the core elements of the site is broken - it always has been as far as I can tell, but it’s now getting worse, and I predict will begin to affect more and more people as the knowledge of how to fuck with ratings spreads. And you equate flagging this with wanting to post kiddy porn? I just can’t…

I make no excuses for any of the issues that authors face here.

I was imply pointing out that there is more than one reason why they choose to seek alternative sites, beyond ratings being screwed up.

 

[EmilyMiller]

I make no excuses for any of the issues that authors face here.

I was imply pointing out that there is more than one reason why they choose to seek alternative sites, beyond ratings being screwed up.

It’s a non-neutral statement to mention kiddy porn in the same comment where you refer to people thinking ratings are broken and getting worse. Ratings and comps are two central functions of the site and both are compromised. Kiddy porn is an abomination. These two things are NOT the same:

The only reason for doing what you did is to erroneously equate the two things. It’s a debating technique and I think it’s inappropriate in the circumstances. Maybe it was unintentional, but it still wasn’t cool.

 

[BobbyBrandt]

It’s a non-neutral statement to mention kiddy porn in the same comment where you refer to people thinking ratings are broken and getting worse. Ratings and comps are two central functions of the site and both are compromised. Kiddy porn is an abomination. These two things are NOT the same:

The only reason for doing what you did is to erroneously equate the two things. It’s a debating technique and I think it’s inappropriate in the circumstances. Maybe it was unintentional, but it still wasn’t cool.

I find it interesting that you view the mention of one example of rejection being more of an abomination than another.

I wonder how many of those authors frustrated to the point of leaving over AI rejections would share your opinion?

Your issue is ratings. I get that.

 

[OddLove]

I can't help but think that those who keep incessantly talking about this subject invite more attacks upon their stories. Trolls look for victims who squawk the loudest. I also worry that talking too much about this subject may educate people about how to indulge in this behavior and possibly how to evade sweeps, and the site has advised us not to do that.

Ironically, every time Emily Miller (The AI Avatar) comes here to vent and complain about how horribly these 'Trolls' or 'Malicious Actors' are treating them, they're giving those (One, maybe two, actual trolls) the ultimate satisfaction of knowing that their 1-star rating is completely destroying Emily and sending them in a constant downward spiral of frustration and anger that they (are obviously) attempting to mask with insecure postures of maturity. It's like throwing gasoline on the fire that consumes them, and they're screaming at others demanding they put out the fire.

It's entertaining, but clinically insane.

 

[EmilyMiller]

I find it interesting that you view the mention of one example of rejection being more of an abomination than another.

I wonder how many of those authors frustrated to the point of leaving over AI rejections would share your opinion?

Your issue is ratings. I get that.

OK - this is willful ‘misunderstanding’ now. I said kiddy porn is an abomination. Maybe you disagree.

 

[SimonDoom]

Ironically, every time Emily Miller (The AI Avatar) comes here to vent and complain about how horribly these 'Trolls' or 'Malicious Actors' are treating them, they're giving those (One, maybe two, actual trolls) the ultimate satisfaction of knowing that their 1-star rating is completely destroying Emily and sending them in a constant downward spiral of frustration and anger that they (are obviously) attempting to mask with insecure postures of maturity. It's like throwing gasoline on the fire that consumes them, and they're screaming at others demanding they put out the fire.

It's entertaining, but clinically insane.

I think "clinically insane" is going too far. I'll stick with "obviously counterproductive and completely pointless."

There is no constructive purpose to this thread. That should be clear by now. Yet, here we are, 219 posts in.

 

[OddLove]

I think "clinically insane" is going too far. I'll stick with "obviously counterproductive and completely pointless."

There is no constructive purpose to this thread. That should be clear by now. Yet, here we are, 219 posts in.

Here we are, indeed.

I for one, got chuckles. And personally, I need those sometimes. It was nice.

 

[fuckmehardandsoft]

I'm not going to get into the personal drama here (take a breath, guys!) but I think to have any kind of useful conversation about this, we need to be honest with ourselves that ratings on this site are extremely generous in general.

When I made this account, I looked back on the one story I published here on an old account at 18. It is fairly terrible, because I was an 18-year old virgin studying creative writing. But it has ~4.3/5 (and over 4k views).

I posted the first chapter of the erotic novel I'm writing on here and it currently has 4.77/5. I'm really happy with how it turned out, but I also hadn't written prose for about 5 years when I wrote it, and I've made some improvements since I published to my overall working draft. It's not going to be the best story you've ever read, yet the rating is very high (ironically, please don't use this as an excuse to bomb if any haters are reading!).

I would also challenge the assumption that the site has a responsibility to effectively control all hate and bots. It's 2026, every site has both of those and the technology available to play the role of being a hater or a bot is varied and sophisticated. In the early days of the Internet, it was so much more complicated (and potentially pricy) to host your writing and bring in any readership. Literotica is providing us a service at the end of the day. Anything they do to control bad actors is appreciated, but compared to other sites, the impact is not massive.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I think "clinically insane" is going too far. I'll stick with "obviously counterproductive and completely pointless."

There is no constructive purpose to this thread. That should be clear by now. Yet, here we are, 219 posts in.

Well, since our little nut job wants to toss juvenile pop psychology diagnoses at anyone who disagrees with them, I'd say it's sauce for the gander.

Continuing to visit a site they claim to hate is evidence of high trait anger, envy, or certain Dark Triad elements especially psychopathy-linked enjoyment of outrage.

Probably a big side of narcissism thrown in for good measure.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

Hello, @SkyBubble. I'm not going to get myself involved in the mudfight that is going on here, but to answer some of your questions, based on my experience here.

Before I go further, there are, I firmly believe, legitimate low votes. I'm surprised anybody gives them; I myself won't bother finishing a bad story, but it's a strange world. The problem comes with low votes not based on a reader's perception of low literary value, shall we say.

There's no way for we writers to know who is doing the one-bombing. I'm not quite ready to accept Emily's claim that it's getting organized (although I've had a couple of old-timers tell me that indeed happened before), but the bombing certainly happens. At one time, when I had a new story published, just about the same time each time, the story would drop significantly. Others have said the same. I've been carpet-bombed (snicker), a time when somebody down-voted every last one of my stories, all of them. (That was pretty obvious and was quickly corrected.)

A story's score can vary wildly initially, of course. When you've got hundreds of votes, AH folk wisdom has always held that the score will stabilize. I've generally found that true, but have recently had a story with thousands of votes and a score which has been stable for months get hit with a sudden and significant drop, one which mathematically could only have happened with a series of One-votes. That, too, is to me evidence of trolling. Edit: Just for the record, the sweeps dealt with them.

But, to your questions...

Why? Well, I suspect there are many reasons. Perhaps somebody has been irritated by something you said in one of the fora and will bomb all of your stories just 'cause. (That, BTW, that answers another one of your questions. People who get into arguments in, for example, AH probably get more of this. Were I starting over, I'd do what some others have done and maintain two identities, one for stories and one for forum discussions.)

Some people, I suspect, are just misanthropes taking pleasure in it. I've often used the analogy of toddlers too young to build anything with blocks, so they their joy out of knocking down stacks of blocks others have built for them.

The most despicable bombing would be during a contest, bombing done in a deliberate attempt to sway the outcome.


Next question - why not go to bombed sites and 'five-bomb'? First off, please don't ever do that for my stories. It would be no less cheating than one-bombing. More pragmatically, if you think about it, do some basic figuring, a one-vote had a far greater impact on a score than a five-vote. The effects of Ones build up gradually before the score rises, Ones almost immediately drop it.


Next, how do sweeps work? One may guess and I could come up with a bunch of suggestions, but as noted, Laurel and Manu strongly push against discussing it, primarily because it may help trolls and would-be trolls.


My two kopeks, anyway.

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

I think "clinically insane" is going too far. I'll stick with "obviously counterproductive and completely pointless."

There is no constructive purpose to this thread. That should be clear by now. Yet, here we are, 219 posts in.

Popcorn futures are up 25%.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

It’s a non-neutral statement to mention kiddy porn in the same comment where you refer to people thinking ratings are broken and getting worse. Ratings and comps are two central functions of the site and both are compromised. Kiddy porn is an abomination. These two things are NOT the same:

Correct. They are not the same. Just as neither is the same as AI rejection as skybubble mentioned earlier. That is the point. You can't claim that all of the people leaving the site are laving over troll voting, because some are leaving for BS AI rejections and some are leaving over content restrictions, so that means that not so many as you claim are leaving over scores. That is the point that he (and others) are making.

The only reason for doing what you did is to erroneously equate the two things. It’s a debating technique and I think it’s inappropriate in the circumstances. Maybe it was unintentional, but it still wasn’t cool.

No, that is hardly the only reason.

OK - this is willful ‘misunderstanding’ now. I said kiddy porn is an abomination. Maybe you disagree.

Okay, now you are blatantly strawmanning a hot button. If you believe in your stance then why such an urgent need to deflect?