What is a good rating?

[CarolinaPeach]

I think the topic and category will have a huge effect on the scoring. Perhaps if there were a wider range of categories, you'd be able to compare one type of story to another in terms of score. As noted elsewhere, many people vote on a story based upon how it affected them. If the content did not turn them on, or worse, was a turnoff, then it is rated to be poor.

I think if you write enough stories in different categories, you begin to see the pattern and understand. I can recognize that a couple of my stories that are in the threes are there for the reasons noted above. I don't sweat it.

If you write in many categories and never get a score in the mid fours or higher, then perhaps you should take a closer look at your writing.

I think there is a certain validity to this... I just read a FANTASTIC story about a fairly obscure fetish. It scored 3.33. People show up wanting, say, a foot fetish and get a menstruation fetish, they give it a low rating. Makes no sense but people do it. It doesn't matter if it was a good story about menstruation, it wasn't feet so they get a "one." That happens in other categories as well.

I am very careful about my tags, so I can draw in the right audience. If someone is predisposed to your type of story, they are more likely to rate it high. It is also gratifying to get your product to the people who want it.

At the end of the day, though, how much does rating really matter? The consensus here in this thread seems to be: It can be a loose gauge of the over all quality of your writing, but is not the only, or even best gauge. I get more excited about comments. It means someone was moved by my story enough to take the time to write something. I feel like that means I did something right.

 

[Swilly]

Youre fulla shit.

I think that your own unique experience in viewing and rating stories may differ from what I've said, but I believe that I'm correct in my assessment for the vast majority of readers. It is quite well known that certain categories, such as loving wives, are filled with landmines. Often, opinions and reactions are diametrically opposed in this category, nearly guaranteeing a lower score.

In certain of my stories, and in looking at the writings of other authors, there is no other rational reason for a wide variance in ratings.

I am under no illusion that I'm a "real" writer. I have had no training at all, and it isn't what I do for a living. In the complete realm of literature as it exists in the world, I suck. Even among the "real" writers on this site, there is a significant difference between what they can do with a keyboard and what i can. A world of difference. That being said, this site really isn't about fine literature.

 

[Swilly]

I think there is a certain validity to this... I just read a FANTASTIC story about a fairly obscure fetish. It scored 3.33. People show up wanting, say, a foot fetish and get a menstruation fetish, they give it a low rating. Makes no sense but people do it. It doesn't matter if it was a good story about menstruation, it wasn't feet so they get a "one." That happens in other categories as well.

I am very careful about my tags, so I can draw in the right audience. If someone is predisposed to your type of story, they are more likely to rate it high. It is also gratifying to get your product to the people who want it.

At the end of the day, though, how much does rating really matter? The consensus here in this thread seems to be: It can be a loose gauge of the over all quality of your writing, but is not the only, or even best gauge. I get more excited about comments. It means someone was moved by my story enough to take the time to write something. I feel like that means I did something right.

I agree about the comments. The only nice thing about getting a higher rating is that it attracts more people to a story. Even if we write for the fun of it, having an audience is fun. It's no fun giving a speech in an empty room.

Also, remember that less rated stories, such as those in a lesser read categories or dealing with niche fetishes will be hammered by low ratings. It takes 7 five ratings to bring a single 1 rating up to a 4.5 average. (And it takes 5 five ratings to bring up a two.) In a story that gets less than 100 ratings, a couple 1 bombs can tank a story.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I think that your own unique experience in viewing and rating stories may differ from what I've said, but I believe that I'm correct in my assessment for the vast majority of readers. It is quite well known that certain categories, such as loving wives, are filled with landmines. Often, opinions and reactions are diametrically opposed in this category, nearly guaranteeing a lower score.

In certain of my stories, and in looking at the writings of other authors, there is no other rational reason for a wide variance in ratings.

I am under no illusion that I'm a "real" writer. I have had no training at all, and it isn't what I do for a living. In the complete realm of literature as it exists in the world, I suck. Even among the "real" writers on this site, there is a significant difference between what they can do with a keyboard and what i can. A world of difference. That being said, this site really isn't about fine literature.

If you write in many categories and never get a score in the mid fours or higher, then perhaps you should take a closer look at your writing.

This is what I'm referring to. LIT is awash in politics and clique bullshit. When I post stories as JAMESBJOHNSON my scores suffer, when I post with my alt I score significantly higher.

 

[sr71plt]

t takes 7 five ratings to bring a single 1 rating up to a 4.5 average. (And it takes 5 five ratings to bring up a two.) In a story that gets less than 100 ratings, a couple 1 bombs can tank a story.

It takes 8 five ratings to offset a single 1 rating and maintain a 4.5 average. But point made.

 

[Swilly]

It takes 8 five ratings to offset a single 1 rating and maintain a 4.5 average. But point made.

Please allow me to be picky here. While not a writer by trade, I do work with numbers as my job.

7 ratings of 5 = 35. Add one rating of 1, and you have 36. Divide by eight (7 pus 1) and you get 4.5 as an average.

 

[Swilly]

If you write in many categories and never get a score in the mid fours or higher, then perhaps you should take a closer look at your writing.

This is what I'm referring to. LIT is awash in politics and clique bullshit. When I post stories as JAMESBJOHNSON my scores suffer, when I post with my alt I score significantly higher.

I think you've made my point to a degree. Your experience here is probably somewhat unique. To a new writer that may not have ruffled any feathers, they are less likely to be affected by the things that you have been. You receiving higher scores under a different name illustrates that. (I'm not implying that you've ruffled my feathers; only that it seems you may have done so to others).

I guess that there may be things underfoot when a contest is going on too, but I can't say for sure.

If someone writes enough stories in enough different categories, I think they start to understand where the trouble spots are. I have written virtually nothing compared to a lot of authors out here, and already I can see what is what. If the low rated stories were my only ones, I reckon it would bother me. Since they aren't, I recognize them for what they are. Of course, anyone can put a clunker out there, and I don't think I'm anywhere near infallible. But when you see the topic and category of low rated stories always being the same, then you get some insight.

 

[sr71plt]

Please allow me to be picky here. While not a writer by trade, I do work with numbers as my job.

7 ratings of 5 = 35. Add one rating of 1, and you have 36. Divide by eight (7 pus 1) and you get 4.5 as an average.

Well, golly, you're right. A lot of us here have been running on the other number for years.

 

[LargoKitt]

Who knew Lit had messaround fanboys?

While it would be great to get high fours on all my stories and art I realize that people have really different tastes and good and bad days. I notice that a lot of people fantasize about assholes and fucking their mothers. Others can't seem to get it up unless their fantasy partner is down and out.

But I won't give a low rating because I don't like some writer's kink. I give low ratings mostly when the writer goes for cheap clichés and lazy story lines. I am surprised that very boring sex scenes get high ratings. Now I understand that gaming the ratings is somepeople's kink. Yawn. Grow up, guys.

What I would love to see is more comments from women on the quality of the turnon. There will likely be some truth there. I also know, ahem, that my writing is better than lots of very popular stuff on Lit, but that dicks and vulvas may be dry or sore before the verbal money shot. Each to his own.

 

[rescatooor]

While it would be great to get high fours on all my stories and art I realize that people have really different tastes and good and bad days. I notice that a lot of people fantasize about assholes and fucking their mothers. Others can't seem to get it up unless their fantasy partner is down and out.

But I won't give a low rating because I don't like some writer's kink. I give low ratings mostly when the writer goes for cheap clichés and lazy story lines. I am surprised that very boring sex scenes get high ratings. Now I understand that gaming the ratings is somepeople's kink. Yawn. Grow up, guys.

What I would love to see is more comments from women on the quality of the turnon. There will likely be some truth there. I also know, ahem, that my writing is better than lots of very popular stuff on Lit, but that dicks and vulvas may be dry or sore before the verbal money shot. Each to his own.

People generally have different ways of rating stories. I think Literotica suggests a three star vote if you generally liked a story, but many authors think a three star rating is really a way of saying that the story was lacking in many ways.

Authors generally know that nobody likes receiving low ratings so they sometimes limit themselves to fours and fives. They simply won't vote on a story that they don't like: this is at least what people there them say in AH.

I find most sex scenes boring. I often just skim them. I would generally like to cut it out often, but many still insist on one, even if a detailed sex scenes does not really serve the plot in anyway.

If it matters, I am female.

EDIT: Oh, and some categories just don't really give high ratings. LW specifically. There a three star average is probably pretty good.

 

[Lifestyle66]

People generally have different ways of rating stories. I think Literotica suggests a three star vote if you generally liked a story, but many authors think a three star rating is really a way of saying that the story was lacking in many ways.

Authors generally know that nobody likes receiving low ratings so they sometimes limit themselves to fours and fives. They simply won't vote on a story that they don't like: this is at least what people there them say in AH.

I find most sex scenes boring. I often just skim them. I would generally like to cut it out often, but many still insist on one, even if a detailed sex scenes does not really serve the plot in anyway.

If it matters, I am female.

EDIT: Oh, and some categories just don't really give high ratings. LW specifically. There a three star average is probably pretty good.

I looked at the averages of the top 25 rated stories in several categories (yes, I'm a numbers geek), and those top 25 in LW average 3.57. The EC and GS 25 stories averaged well over 4.3.

I enjoy reading a good sex scene, and so does my wife. But I'm a guy, and my wife is just horny.

 

[MajorRewrite]

I am starting to look at number of favorites as an indicator of quality.

Me too. Favorites are the meaningful rating system.

 

[SimonDoom]

I've come around to the view that the "red H" screws everything up. It's an arbitrary and empty indicator of story quality, but since the Site has instituted it, everybody obviously wants a red H. And that in turn affects how people vote, because there are voters, like me, who look at a story that's good but flawed, and they don't want to give the story a 4 because it will hurt the author's chances of getting a coveted red H. That's ridiculous, and it subverts the whole point of having a rating system, which is NOT to make authors feel good but to give readers useful information to decide what stories to read.

If the Site got rid of the red H, then readers would feel freer to give the story whatever rating they thought it genuinely deserved, and the ratings that resulted would be more truly reflective of what readers actually thought.

 

[KeithD]

If the Site got rid of the red H, then readers would feel freer to give the story whatever rating they thought it genuinely deserved, and the ratings that resulted would be more truly reflective of what readers actually thought.

And once the site had started giving the actual rating number on the author's list, the red H no longer was needed. Now the reader can decide what rating threshold they have with precision.

 

[lovecraft68]

I've come around to the view that the "red H" screws everything up. It's an arbitrary and empty indicator of story quality, but since the Site has instituted it, everybody obviously wants a red H. And that in turn affects how people vote, because there are voters, like me, who look at a story that's good but flawed, and they don't want to give the story a 4 because it will hurt the author's chances of getting a coveted red H. That's ridiculous, and it subverts the whole point of having a rating system, which is NOT to make authors feel good but to give readers useful information to decide what stories to read.

If the Site got rid of the red H, then readers would feel freer to give the story whatever rating they thought it genuinely deserved, and the ratings that resulted would be more truly reflective of what readers actually thought.

I understand the red H can affect what people choose to read...its got an H, must be great! Not true of course, but that's the impression.

But I'm not sure what you mean by how people vote. You're saying if I were to read a story with an H that when it came time to vote I'd take that into account, and even if I didn't like it, I'd think maybe its me, and give it a 5 so it keeps its H rather than a two or whatever else I might want to give it?

Keith's post to yours puts the score being visible in the same light so now conversely maybe the answer is....nothing? No H's or Green E's or W's for contest placing stories? No scores?

No top lists?

I understand as much if not more than others how H's/scores aren't true indicators of a story, but unfortunately that's the result of a flawed system that allows anonymous voting, and some cheats who somehow think if they inflate their story to a certain point they earned it?

Yes, it has issues

But my thought is those things are also rewards that set stories apart. An absolute trash story shouldn't get the same attention as a decently written story.

If there were no scores or indicators the site would be a free for all, and you'd have to pick through a minefield of stories, everything a coin flip, is this one good, does this one suck?

So I think as imperfect as it is, a scoring system or H's still have merit

Because to put it bluntly getting rid of them is just another extension of "success makes under achieving people feel bad" and we'll get the participation award society of every story is the same Yayyyyy to everyone who posted two pages of horrific errors, typos, non sensical writing and incoherent drivel, your story is now equal to the best stories and writers on here.

Maybe the new icon should be a safety pin for the professionally butthurt that hates to think that someone with a high score or an H may have actually written a better story than theirs.

 

[KeithD]

Keith's post to yours puts the score being visible in the same light so now conversely maybe the answer is....nothing? No H's or Green E's or W's for contest placing stories? No scores?

No. Just either no red Hs (because in recent years the actual number was added to what a reader could see on the author's list) or two tiers, 4.0-4.49 some color for "hot" and 4.45 and above some other color for "smokin'." This comes closer to what the Web site's own characterization of the numbers mean.

I haven't posting anything on any other aspect of the system and have no issues with what is current there.

Just talk, though. I don't anticipate any change being made.

 

[SimonDoom]

But I'm not sure what you mean by how people vote. You're saying if I were to read a story with an H that when it came time to vote I'd take that into account, and even if I didn't like it, I'd think maybe its me, and give it a 5 so it keeps its H rather than a two or whatever else I might want to give it?

Keith's post to yours puts the score being visible in the same light so now conversely maybe the answer is....nothing? No H's or Green E's or W's for contest placing stories? No scores?

No top lists?

.

Let me clarify. I think having scores and toplists is a good idea, because both help readers select stories.

But the red H adds nothing that the score 4.5 doesn't. And I'm pretty sure it DOES influence voting behavior.

If I see a story written by an author I sometimes engage with on this forum, and it has a score of 4.5, I'm going to be reluctant to give it a 4, even if I think it doesn't deserve a 5, because I don't want to be responsible for the author losing his/her red H.

But if there's no red H, it doesn't matter if the author has a 4.5 or a 4.49. Who cares? The reader can then decide, as Keith suggests, what these numbers mean to them. I think voters would feel freer to vote more in accordance with how they really feel. It's crystal clear from the comments I see in this forum that many of us are reluctant to give votes under 5, and when you think about it, that's kind of silly.

 

[windar]

I understand the red H can affect what people choose to read...its got an H, must be great! Not true of course, but that's the impression.

But I'm not sure what you mean by how people vote. You're saying if I were to read a story with an H that when it came time to vote I'd take that into account, and even if I didn't like it, I'd think maybe its me, and give it a 5 so it keeps its H rather than a two or whatever else I might want to give it?

Keith's post to yours puts the score being visible in the same light so now conversely maybe the answer is....nothing? No H's or Green E's or W's for contest placing stories? No scores?

No top lists?

I understand as much if not more than others how H's/scores aren't true indicators of a story, but unfortunately that's the result of a flawed system that allows anonymous voting, and some cheats who somehow think if they inflate their story to a certain point they earned it?

Yes, it has issues

But my thought is those things are also rewards that set stories apart. An absolute trash story shouldn't get the same attention as a decently written story.

If there were no scores or indicators the site would be a free for all, and you'd have to pick through a minefield of stories, everything a coin flip, is this one good, does this one suck?

So I think as imperfect as it is, a scoring system or H's still have merit

Because to put it bluntly getting rid of them is just another extension of "success makes under achieving people feel bad" and we'll get the participation award society of every story is the same Yayyyyy to everyone who posted two pages of horrific errors, typos, non sensical writing and incoherent drivel, your story is now equal to the best stories and writers on here.

Maybe the new icon should be a safety pin for the professionally butthurt that hates to think that someone with a high score or an H may have actually written a better story than theirs.

A lot of free sites just use likes. Obviously some stories/authors get more likes, but almost anything gets a few, so people can feel OK and try to improve.

For me, a blurb tells me what I need to know. A good story will almost always have a well-written blurb and it tells you if it fits your personal interests, which a score doesn't do. It's universally agreed on pay sites that people ignore ratings. The cover and blurb sell...

 

[Lifestyle66]

Let me clarify. I think having scores and toplists is a good idea, because both help readers select stories.

But the red H adds nothing that the score 4.5 doesn't. And I'm pretty sure it DOES influence voting behavior.

If I see a story written by an author I sometimes engage with on this forum, and it has a score of 4.5, I'm going to be reluctant to give it a 4, even if I think it doesn't deserve a 5, because I don't want to be responsible for the author losing his/her red H.

But if there's no red H, it doesn't matter if the author has a 4.5 or a 4.49. Who cares? The reader can then decide, as Keith suggests, what these numbers mean to them. I think voters would feel freer to vote more in accordance with how they really feel. It's crystal clear from the comments I see in this forum that many of us are reluctant to give votes under 5, and when you think about it, that's kind of silly.

As I understand it, the red H means the story had a 4.5 or above rating with the first ten raters.

If I really wanted a red H, I would watch the morning my story posts, and use anonymous logins to rate it a 5 via eight to ten browsers on various computers/cellphones/tablets.

 

[windar]

As I understand it, the red H means the story had a 4.5 or above rating with the first ten raters.

If I really wanted a red H, I would watch the morning my story posts, and use anonymous logins to rate it a 5 via eight to ten browsers on various computers/cellphones/tablets.

No, it means it's 4.5 or over with 10 or more votes at a particular point in time. Most of the chapters of my story are just above or just below 4.5 and the H comes and goes. Obviously my story runs hot and cold. I bet if you asked 100 random readers (not the people here), 90 would say the H means the story is "sexy".

 

[SimonDoom]

As I understand it, the red H means the story had a 4.5 or above rating with the first ten raters.

If I really wanted a red H, I would watch the morning my story posts, and use anonymous logins to rate it a 5 via eight to ten browsers on various computers/cellphones/tablets.

Windar is correct. A story can lose its red H if it dips below 4.5, and then regain it if it climbs back over 4.5. I've had many stories do exactly this.

I believe 8Letters initiated a thread about two years ago in which he posted data regarding the percentage of stories in different categories that reached 4.5 or above. If I recall, for most categories, 4.5 is roughly somewhere around the 75 percentile. For Loving Wives it's much, much higher than that, because so few stories in that category reach the 4.5 level.

 

[8letters]

I believe 8Letters initiated a thread about two years ago in which he posted data regarding the percentage of stories in different categories that reached 4.5 or above. If I recall, for most categories, 4.5 is roughly somewhere around the 75 percentile. For Loving Wives it's much, much higher than that, because so few stories in that category reach the 4.5 level.

The thread is here. In the sample I took, 3% of the LW stories got a red H. But LW got far, far more comments that any other category.

In the first four weeks, there's not a big difference in the number of views between stories with a red H and stories without one.

If your goal is a red H, write a longer story. The average rating rises quickly based on page length, plateauing around six pages.

 

[OldBrummie]

The thread is here. In the sample I took, 3% of the LW stories got a red H. But LW got far, far more comments that any other category.

In the first four weeks, there's not a big difference in the number of views between stories with a red H and stories without one.

If your goal is a red H, write a longer story. The average rating rises quickly based on page length, plateauing around six pages.

Wonder if those stories that are shorter attract people who just skim a story even though it is not in a category they particularly like and then give it a lower rating just because it is a category they are not really interested in? Longer stories will usually get rated by those who are interested enough to read to the end. Seems logical. So if you want a higher score do not write multiple short chapters. If you want a lot of views split the story up.

 

[SimonDoom]

Wonder if those stories that are shorter attract people who just skim a story even though it is not in a category they particularly like and then give it a lower rating just because it is a category they are not really interested in? Longer stories will usually get rated by those who are interested enough to read to the end. Seems logical. So if you want a higher score do not write multiple short chapters. If you want a lot of views split the story up.

Not necessarily. What the data show is that stories with "Ch. 01" after them will tend to get fewer views than stories without a chapter number. Some readers are looking for a one-off and have no interest in starting a chaptered story. The open question is whether the effect of publishing multiple chapters and getting new views with each chapter offsets the preference for non-chaptered stories. I don't know the answer to that.

There are plenty of authors who write very long stories AND get high scores AND get lots of views. Burntredstone is an example.

I personally think if your story is under 40,000 words, and it's done, and you have a choice, most of the time you should publish it as a single complete story rather than in chapters, if your goal is to achieve maximum success with readers.

 

[windar]

Not necessarily. What the data show is that stories with "Ch. 01" after them will tend to get fewer views than stories without a chapter number. Some readers are looking for a one-off and have no interest in starting a chaptered story. The open question is whether the effect of publishing multiple chapters and getting new views with each chapter offsets the preference for non-chaptered stories. I don't know the answer to that.

There are plenty of authors who write very long stories AND get high scores AND get lots of views. Burntredstone is an example.

I personally think if your story is under 40,000 words, and it's done, and you have a choice, most of the time you should publish it as a single complete story rather than in chapters, if your goal is to achieve maximum success with readers.

I just finished a 70k word story in 16 chapters, posting a chapter every 2 days. That's what I've always done on free sites and I think it worked out well here. That way it appears 16 times in the New section where I think many readers look first. If someone missed 1-5 and finds 6 they are likely to go back to the beginning.

Now on a pay site, publishing by chapter would be abusing the reader. There it appeared as two stories, which was how it was written.