1-Bombing on Loving Wives

[RocketGrunt]

As I see it, the top lists represent an internal ranking within one particular subset of readers. It may be the largest subset, but it is still just a subset.

The toplists are based on a group that is nothing like the largest subset of the Literotica. There are two important groups:

1. The rating audience. In order for a chapter to even potentially show up anywhere on the toplist, it must get more than 100 ratings, and at least five out of six of those ratings must be 5*.

2. The curation trolls. Anyone who wants to kick a story lower down or off the toplist altogether for any reason can easily do so because a 1* rating counts more for kicking a story down than dozens of 5* ratings count for raising a story up.

Now the first group is the group that the toplist is supposed to be for. They represent a fraction of the readers that is probably about 1%. Maybe less. You get people estimating it much higher sometimes because of attrition effects and fan effects, but it's probably less than 1% overall.

To see how that works, I've got a chapter that has a number of ratings that is over 6% of the number of views and another chapter with a number of ratings that is more than 8% of the number of views. This is because those are chapter 30 and chapter 27 of two serials. Readers who get to later chapters of a serial are MUCH more likely to be invested in the series and to leave ratings. The first chapters of those series have about a 2% rating rate, which is still higher than the system as a whole because those are series with dedicated fanbases. My more casual and popular story has a first chapter rating response of just 0.86%, which is much more typical for Literotica as a whole.

But of course, getting enough ratings at a high enough average response level is necessary but totally insufficient to stay on the toplist. You also have to have your rating randomly place you at a point that is low enough that no one decides to shove you down to protect the place of something that they want to keep on the toplist. Because the curation trolls have complete power over what STAYS on the toplist. At the moment I'm writing this, the top two stories on the SciFi board are chapters of serials that have ratings of 4.87 (which is a normal starting point for later series chapters, since obviously most of the readers of "Part 57" are already fans of the series), and less than 200 votes that came out in the last couple of days. They will be troll hammered within a few days, maybe a few hours. And given that a single 1* review would knock them down to 4.85, and falling to 4.84 would push them all the way off the top 250, they will probably be all the way out of the top 250 by the next time this argument comes up.

And these curation trolls? There's no evidence that there's more than like ten of them. Not per story or something, for the whole site. There could easily be a single digit of these people, no one voted for them, and they have the final say as to who is allowed to keep their medals. It's obscene.

 

[OddLove]

You should do this for two reasons
1-it is where those stories did, do, and always will belong, in the category for extra marital action as decried by the site itself
2-by not doing that you're letting the creeps over there tell you what to do and for what? Oh, no, I got a low score on a free site?

BTW, they're mostly a BTB category RAAC stories get abused too. Only way to win there is write a nasty BTB or have a boring vanilla story featuring an amazing incredible flawless man and his adoring virtuous 1950's wife.

Regardless of what people wish the Loving Wives category was, it's not that anymore.

And I don't feel compelled or obligated to push my stories in front of an audience who dont want those stories. Especially when the people rumning LIT clearly are allowing Loving Wives to become the BTB/RAAC category.

I'm here to share my stories and read other stories. If someone likes them, cool, if not, cool. But I'm not here to feed my stories to an audience who I Know doesn't want them just to cause rage and anger within the incel subculture that's using Loving Wives as their haven for abusive hateful stories. My stories are not written for the purpose of protesting against incels communities.

If other authors want to engage with them and try 'reclaiming' territory, have fun. But that don't sound fun to me.

 

[NoTalentHack]

I followed your link and started reading The Hidden Room. Something felt off right away. I can’t say exactly what, but the pacing and phrasing were odd enough that I ran it through GPTZero, and it came back as 100% AI.

Now, I’m not saying it is AI, but I also don’t believe it just slipped through their scanner. For whatever reason, the mods chose to look the other way, which makes one wonder how neutral that whole process really is.

AI detectors are notriously bad at, you know, detecting whether stories are AI or not. Even experts in the LLM field say to not use them for anything even vaguely important.

I did a bigger writeup of why AI detectors suck, along with an analysis of what how the top fen most favorite stories on the site shook out with Sapling, another AI "detector," a couple years back when someone accused me (and numerous other people) of using AI to write our stories, based mostly on Sapling's incredible false positive rate and his own bias:

https://forum.literotica.com/threads/ai-rejection.1597700/page-9#post-98023495

and

https://forum.literotica.com/threads/ai-allegations-thread.1599778/page-23#post-97991991

 

[NoTalentHack]

You should do this for two reasons
1-it is where those stories did, do, and always will belong, in the category for extra marital action as decried by the site itself
2-by not doing that you're letting the creeps over there tell you what to do and for what? Oh, no, I got a low score on a free site?

BTW, they're mostly a BTB category RAAC stories get abused too. Only way to win there is write a nasty BTB or have a boring vanilla story featuring an amazing incredible flawless man and his adoring virtuous 1950's wife.

*Citation required*

 

[consistentlyrepudiated]

AI detectors are notriously bad at, you know, detecting whether stories are AI or not. Even experts in the LLM field say to not use them for anything even vaguely important.

I did a bigger writeup of why AI detectors suck, along with an analysis of what how the top fen most favorite stories on the site shook out with Sapling, another AI "detector," a couple years back when someone accused me (and numerous other people) of using AI to write our stories, based mostly on Sapling's incredible false positive rate and his own bias:

https://forum.literotica.com/threads/ai-rejection.1597700/page-9#post-98023495

and

https://forum.literotica.com/threads/ai-allegations-thread.1599778/page-23#post-97991991

I didn’t say those detectors are reliable. I said that if a detector that’s usually mild didn’t return 20% or 40% but went straight to 100% AI, there’s no reason to think the detector they’re using here would have come back with a radically different result.

Either way, I have good reason to believe the text was enhanced with an LLM, which I wouldn’t have a serious issue with if the criteria were applied consistently to everyone.

 

[OddLove]

I didn’t say those detectors are reliable. I said that if a detector that’s usually mild didn’t return 20% or 40% but went straight to 100% AI, there’s no reason to think the detector they’re using here would have come back with a radically different result.

Either way, I have good reason to believe the text was enhanced with an LLM, which I wouldn’t have a serious issue with if the criteria were applied consistently to everyone.

Do you have any reason to believe that other than unreliable free AI detection software and feelings? I'd be curious to know how you determine whether or not a writing was done with the assistance of AI.

 

[lovecraft68]

And it wouldn't be a "LW is a pit" thread without the self-appointed lord of the category defending it.
The same guy who had to rewrite another author's story-without permission-because the ending upset his feelings.
Good representation.

 

[NoTalentHack]

And it wouldn't be a "LW is a pit" thread without the self-appointed lord of the category defending it.
The same guy who had to rewrite another author's story-without permission-because the ending upset his feelings.
Good representation.

It's nice to know I continue to live rent-free in your head, LC. Tons of space, too,

 

[dirk2024]

It's amusing to me how this thread has become as caustic as the commentary on a typlical Loving Wives story.

 

[lovecraft68]

Blackrandl1958 went down the whole February Sucks history as she's good friends-and at one time editor-of the author and by the time he came back after a hiatus multiple authors ripped off his story without permission. he then granted a blanker permission, but many of the first copycat rewrites were done with no consent of the author.

 

[NoTalentHack]

Blackrandl1958 went down the whole February Sucks history as she's good friends-and at one time editor-of the author and by the time he came back after a hiatus multiple authors ripped off his story without permission. he then granted a blanker permission, but many of the first copycat rewrites were done with no consent of the author.

What, exactly, does this have to do with the topic at hand?

 

[lovecraft68]

On the note of the whole Feb Sucks phenomenon, for people who don't know about it. Someone writes a story where a wife cheats and the husband takes her back.

People over there were so incensed about a fictional woman cheating with a fictional man on a fictional husband and 'getting away with it' that these people had to turn around and rewrite this man's story to end 'as it should have' mostly with various levels of BTB style endings.

Imagine being so small, you feel compelled to make this fictional 'wrong' right according to your own insecurities and an unhinged anger over make believe cheating.

This is a perfect example of how warped some readers and authors can be over there.

 

[lovecraft68]

What, exactly, does this have to do with the topic at hand?

Its an example of the insanity of the category being discussed. Ripping off other people's work to make yourself feel better.

 

[NoTalentHack]

Its an example of the insanity of the category being discussed. Ripping off other people's work to make yourself feel better.

As opposed to the 2000th totally original time that a mom sat on a son’s lap in I/T.

Keep grasping at those straws, buddy. Eventually you might find an actual, logical reason for your continual foaming at the mouth about what other people write.

…

Huh.

You know, it’s funny: you do almost the exact same thing that you complain about angry commenters over there doing—you know, being unhinged and obsessed with other peoples’ behavior and going off on often off-topic rants about them—but you do it here instead. Looks like you do have something in common with those guys.

ETA: don’t bother replying. I’m just going to put you on ignore, like an increasing number of the other folks here have. At one time, you probably had some genuine insights to offer people, but that hasn’t been true in a long time. Good luck to you, though, and I hope you find a way to be less angry. I sincerely mean that.

 

[IWroteThis]

On the note of the whole Feb Sucks phenomenon, for people who don't know about it. Someone writes a story where a wife cheats and the husband takes her back.

People over there were so incensed about a fictional woman cheating with a fictional man on a fictional husband and 'getting away with it' that these people had to turn around and rewrite this man's story to end 'as it should have' mostly with various levels of BTB style endings.

Imagine being so small, you feel compelled to make this fictional 'wrong' right according to your own insecurities and an unhinged anger over make believe cheating.

This is a perfect example of how warped some readers and authors can be over there.

Sorry, but there is a lot more to why February Sucks has been revised so many times than the simpleton reason you just gave. If it was that simple, there would be a lot more stories being constantly rewritten. No, there's more to it.

First of all, the premise is great. It hooks you and drags you into the story. However, it goes to shit from there.

Linda returns, determined to keep Jim, despite making it clear that she doesn't love him or respect him. She just expects him to keep paying the bills and taking care of her kids. Sure, that sucks, but that's not where it gets stupid. No, that fits with the Linda that was revealed when she snuck out the back knowing it was wrong and not caring how much it hurt the man she "loved."

No, Jim calls L.W. who's supposedly a friend of his family. However, he is revealed to be just another sleeze-bag lawyer when he joins Linda in fucking Jim over yet again. And, it gets worse. Somehow, Jim almost leaving with some paid escort in a completely unbelievable setup is the same thing as Linda actually leaving and getting fucked all night like a cheap whore and bringing who knows what diseases back to her husband and kids.

Yeah, that's not the same thing to anybody with an IQ above 7.

So, the way I explain the February Sucks phenomena seems extra fitting on Super Sunday...

GeorgeAnderson's February Sucks took off with a great premise and strong emotions in the club, only for him to trip over his own feet and lose the ball with an open-field fumble.

If it was inspiring stories with how good it was, they would be closer to clones of it. The fact that everybody and their dog thinks they can write a better version to fix it says that the original is broken.

(Not) sorry to burst your delusion, but February Sucks sucks, and almost everybody recognizes that.