StillStunned
Monsieur le Chat
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2023
- Posts
- 11,920
We're all virtual here!But for now, thank you for the kinds words from virtually everyone.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We're all virtual here!But for now, thank you for the kinds words from virtually everyone.
I won't argue your basic premise, but I think the point is the lack of support some people feel from a site which (presumably) has the ability to deal with some longstanding issues.The site doesn't owe us a damn thing. None of us are important in the grand scheme of things. Guess what, none of those other sites care about you either.
Again, you are quite correct, but that ignores the effort many authors have put in towards building, if you like, a brand. Yes, Stephen King could put out his next novel under a pen name, but that would deprive him of the attention of those readers wanting to read something by Stephen King. I personally don't think it right that authors should have to flourish only in anonymity.If someone really believes that they would be winning all the contests if it wasn't for those dastardly one bombers, there is an incredibly simple solution. Create another account, don't say a word in the AH, and be like the thousands of authors who post on Lit without ever setting foot in the AH. No target on your back, and your brilliant stories will cruise to victory every time.
I won't argue your basic premise, but I think the point is the lack of support some people feel from a site which (presumably) has the ability to deal with some longstanding issues.
Again, you are quite correct, but that ignores the effort many authors have put in towards building, if you like, a brand. Yes, Stephen King could put out his next novel under a pen name, but that would deprive him of the attention of those readers wanting to read something by Stephen King. I personally don't think it right that authors should have to flourish only in anonymity.
Nor is it a question of sour grapes ("I only lost because of the one-bombs!"). I think it more proper to say that some feel that they are being deprived of the chance of balanced recognition.
Nor is it likely that all such attacks are always due to unscrupulous writers trying to promote their own works. It might, of course, and old-timers on Lit will remember this very thing happening on a large scale. It might be due to irritation with the opinions expressed in the forums. It might be due to someone being upset at something in a writer's works - how many times have we heard that a story in Loving Wives has brought a flury of bombs on other stories by the same writer? It might simply be due to misanthropy - a bombing of any story doing well. The point is that it doesn't matter. People here are complaining of the lack of a level playing field and the lack of feedback from the site.
I've gone on the record before saying the occasional post from Laurel or Manu with an update would be nice, but they don't owe us that.
The original Round Table had a seat called the Siege Perilous that was reserved for the purest truest knight and usually remained empty. If a knight didn’t measure up to its standards, a magical compulsion made them get up if they sat in it. Only Galahad, who found the Grail, bastard son of Lancelot in some legends, could pass the test.It feels like at the Round Table, Lancelot seat is empty.![]()
The problem with voting abuse is a recurring topic, and all has already been said about it. For some, it's an issue; for some, it's not. Laurel used to take some action to curb the impact of such voting, but with everything that's been going on lately, that's not the case anymore.Presumably is carrying quite a bit of weight in that argument. None of us know what the site's capabilities are, and any system designed to catch these alleged one bombers would involve trying to track and identify anonymous users. That brings up some HUGE privacy issues for rank and file users. So sure, compromise the privacy of the readers because a hand full of authors have their feels hurt over alleged voting patterns. Does anyone really think that plays to Lit's long term interests? How many readers does Lit lose if word gets out they are working hard to track users?
Scores don't mean much as a measure of story quality, true. But they are important to attract readership and thus matter to us by necessity. But Laurel doesn't have a single reason to care about them. It's just us who care, and since this isn't a partnership or symbiosis, her lack of care about the misuse of the scoring system is understandable and expected.There have been countless discussions on this site with everyone agreeing that the scores don't mean anything, don't accurately reflect the quality of a story etc. So why should the site waste time and money trying to "fix" something that the AH contingent says doesn't matter anyway?
You're correct, once again. They don't owe us shit, for sure. They don't need to care about our needs and problems. The way they behave reflects such an attitude, and that's okay, as long as everyone understands that.At the end of the day Lit is a business, and the question is what is best for their business model. As I said before, it's absurd to expect that in a site with literally thousands of authors, Laurel and Manu should be at anyone's beck and call. None of us are all that important to the site. I've gone on the record before saying the occasional post from Laurel or Manu with an update would be nice, but they don't owe us that.
If I remember my Mallory, Galahad was essentially "Lancelot 2.0". Remember that Lancelot was supposed to be his nickname ("small lance", hur-hur!), and his real name was Galahad. So his "son" was a rebooted version, minus the juicy courtly love affair and so qualifying to find the Grail.Only Galahad, who found the Grail, bastard son of Lancelot in some legends, could pass the test.
There’s probably a story in this, but I don’t think I want to write it.
Totally off the thread topic but my favorite novel on Arthur is Rosemary Sutcliffe's "Sword at Sunset"If I remember my Mallory, Galahad was essentially "Lancelot 2.0". Remember that Lancelot was supposed to be his nickname ("small lance", hur-hur!), and his real name was Galahad. So his "son" was a rebooted version, minus the juicy courtly love affair and so qualifying to find the Grail.
And Galahad wasn't the only knight who found the Grail in Mallory: Bors and Percival were there with him. I believe Bors returned to King Arthur's court, Percival stayed with the Grail and Galahad ascended into heaven.
(But it's all a load of bollocks anyway, and the Grail was just a Christian corruption of the pre-Christian idea of the king's health being tied to the land's health. And don't get me started on all that nonsense about the "sang real" that became popular with "The Da Vinci Code".)
So the knight that Indiana Jones met was Percival.If I remember my Mallory, Galahad was essentially "Lancelot 2.0". Remember that Lancelot was supposed to be his nickname ("small lance", hur-hur!), and his real name was Galahad. So his "son" was a rebooted version, minus the juicy courtly love affair and so qualifying to find the Grail.
And Galahad wasn't the only knight who found the Grail in Mallory: Bors and Percival were there with him. I believe Bors returned to King Arthur's court, Percival stayed with the Grail and Galahad ascended into heaven.
(But it's all a load of bollocks anyway, and the Grail was just a Christian corruption of the pre-Christian idea of the king's health being tied to the land's health. And don't get me started on all that nonsense about the "sang real" that became popular with "The Da Vinci Code".)
That would make sense, seeing as Percival is essentially a god of death and rebirth.So the knight that Indiana Jones met was Percival.
There have been countless discussions on this site with everyone agreeing that the scores don't mean anything,
But they are important to attract readership and thus matter to us by necessity.
@EmilyMiller,To reiterate, I’m not quitting AH. So if one objective of bombing my stories into oblivion was to silence me, try harder!
I hope that you will recognize that more people love you on this site than detest you.But for now, thank you for the kinds words from virtually everyone.
We've gotten into it once, due to a missunderstanding, but I don't hate her, and I wasn't one of the few that ran her off those few times. I wasn't even present to whatever led to it. I don't see her as problematic as others either. If folks can put up with the you-know-who's, then they can deal with her.Sorry. I, for one, have never agreed with that. To wit:
Yes. High scores attract readers. Low scores leave the uninitiated (and the initiated, too) with the impression that a given story may not be worth the time.
@SimonDoom summarized Emily's dilemma well. She has been subjected to an onslaught of hate from site regulars, which I do suspect include a couple of "name" authors. She is outspoken, yes. She jumps from kink to kink, yes. But this is from a position of deep knowledge and positive on-topic experiences, and a talent for expressing that very well. Her willingness to share this both publicly and privately should be celebrated. Her detractors who incessantly vandalize her scores and therefore depress prospective readership should be shown the door or at least have their damage mitigated, but there appears to be no "official" motivation to do so, or, conversely, making policy changes to that affect likely has other costs. Only @Laurel and @Manu know the magic sauce there.
The outpouring of support and concern in this thread is heartening, and speaks well of the community. @EmilyMiller, you have many, many friends who think highly of you, your knowledge, your skills as an author, and a few of us have the honor of having a better idea of the big picture here. You do what you need to do for you, and we will always be here for you.
I don't know who. This is the kind of statement that has me looking over my shoulder.If folks can put up with the you-know-who's, then they can deal with her.
which I do suspect include a couple of "name" authors
Congratulations!! It is an amazing milestone for sure!!The culmination of this literary journey is my first novel, The Story of Nix.
Yes. About a year ago, I did some research, undercover interviewing, and quasi-scientific testing and learned a LOT about how I think this site works and who the trolls are. At any rate, you need to do what you think is best for you!The trolls have totally free rein.
And neither have I. Readers can navigate an Internet search engine to find my work. Some of it is for sale, much of it is still free, all of it is still fun!!!I’m not going to stop writing
Good luck with whatever future you create for yourself!!!Thank you to those who have enjoyed my work and said so.
Like PSG, FIH, Lovecraft, the ones people go at it with for strong opinions.I don't know who. This is the kind of statement that has me looking over my shoulder.
I'm glad that all my opinions are as negotiable as my affections!Like PSG, FIH, Lovecraft, the ones people go at it with for strong opinions.
Percival wasn't a Templar, though.So the knight that Indiana Jones met was Percival.
Other people have hit it, but I'm going to add my redundant two cents here.There have been countless discussions on this site with everyone agreeing that the scores don't mean anything, don't accurately reflect the quality of a story etc. So why should the site waste time and money trying to "fix" something that the AH contingent says doesn't matter anyway?
I think the problem, for many people, is not the hard-nosed critics, nor even the abrasive named commentators. At least those have the courage to identify themselves, albeit with a pen name or avatar. For many, it is the anonymous, gutless sniping by those without the spine to stand by their criticism - and the age-old site failure to curb their backstabbing.If folks can put up with the you-know-who's, then they can deal with her.