HOT: Should it be 4.1?

[liliput1]

20 minutes after the implementation of any new system the criticism would start. 30 minutes later we'd get soliloquys about the good old days of the 4.5 H.

Human nature is undefeated.

You know they would announce the change ahead of time and they complaining would start instantly.

Complaining is not a barrier to action. Otherwise nothing would happen ever.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

You know they would announce the change ahead of time and they complaining would start instantly.

Complaining is not a barrier to action. Otherwise nothing would happen ever.

I don't mind the complaints, people should care, within reason. Some people are unfortunately rather obsessed with scores on this site to an unhealthy degree.
As long as you've been around I'm sure you've seen some of the people lose their minds about 1 bombs, smart bombs, dumb bombs and the rest of that nonsense. Writing histrionic open letters to the site about the scoring system and other unhealthy behavior.

That silliness aside, my point is simply that there is no system that will satisfy everyone. So there is little reason for the site to make any change.
Any change would result in one group being marginally happier, and other groups being marginally less happy. It's potentially a net negative as all the other groups would be more upset that you didn't change it to the system they advocate for.
I'd like to see a 10 point scale and use a Rotten Tomatoes style critic and audience score, but in our case it would be registered accounts and anons.
Laurel adopting that would make happy, and upset a bunch of people in this thread...so the complaining would continue.

 

[SmilingLez]

Complaining is not a barrier to action. Otherwise nothing would happen ever.

Unless it falls on deaf ears

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Unless it falls on deaf ears

One should be careful not to confuse deaf ears with ears that have heard but chosen not to act.
The AH is an insignificantly small part of Lit. If they shut down all the forums I doubt it would make much difference to the site.
So, why should the site undertake a massive project like reworking the score system based on the complaints of a tiny minority of authors?
They have much bigger fish to fry.

 

[SmilingLez]

One should be careful not to confuse deaf ears with ears that have heard but chosen not to act.
The AH is an insignificantly small part of Lit. If they shut down all the forums I doubt it would make much difference to the site.
So, why should the site undertake a massive project like reworking the score system based on the complaints of a tiny minority of authors?
They have much bigger fish to fry.

Interesting - I was speaking in general and you got all specific

Edit - but you are 100% right when it comes to the apathy of the powers that be

 

[liliput1]

One should be careful not to confuse deaf ears with ears that have heard but chosen not to act.
The AH is an insignificantly small part of Lit. If they shut down all the forums I doubt it would make much difference to the site.
So, why should the site undertake a massive project like reworking the score system based on the complaints of a tiny minority of authors?
They have much bigger fish to fry.

It is slightly more complex than that since the ads exist, and getting people to stay here means more ad revenue, so getting the recommendations to be more stick actually does make the site work better for the admins...

 

[Kelliezgirl]

It is slightly more complex than that since the ads exist, and getting people to stay here means more ad revenue, so getting the recommendations to be more stick actually does make the site work better for the admins...

But you have no way of knowing if any of these myriad suggested changes will be more effective at keeping readers around than the current system.

Everyone in the AH approaches the problem from an author's perspective. What we want and what the readers want are not necessarily aligned.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Interesting - I was speaking in general and you got all specific

Edit - but you are 100% right when it comes to the apathy of the powers that be

I don't think they are apathetic. It's more bounded rationality than apathy. Ultimately, the current system is good enough for their purposes (which are not closely aligned with the desires of the AH). Ergo, there is no incentive for them to change.

 

[SmilingLez]

I don't think they are apathetic. It's more bounded rationality than apathy. Ultimately, the current system is good enough for their purposes (which are not closely aligned with the desires of the AH). Ergo, there is no incentive for them to change.

Some say po-tay-to, some say po-tah-to;
some say toe-may-to, some say toe-mah-to.


Narcissism chases the spotlight like people chasing red-hot tags on Literotica. Hungry for the hit, swapping depth for clicks, settling for quick likes and cheap hollow fucks.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

20 minutes after the implementation of any new system the criticism would start. 30 minutes later we'd get soliloquys about the good old days of the 4.5 H.

Human nature is undefeated.

That long, you reckon?!

I have to admit I miss the days of early EbayUK, when getting a chocolate bar or a handmade bookmark or other freebie became normal, as sellers chased those elusive 5-star ratings.

Until buyers got fed up of the constant "What was wrong with your purchase?" messages and started giving 5 star ratings to stop them.

 

[TheLobster]

They have much bigger fish to fry.

I believe a significant part of the complaints is that they aren’t really frying much these days, the oil has gotten stale, and the whole fish joint is looking more and more abandoned.

Though at least the tables in the center has been wiped recently and you can sit there once again.

 

[RoperTrace]

Like I said, rent seeking. But at the time that data was published they had an open contest to try to improve recommendation accuracy 10%. Three teams that had achieved about 4% each combined into a single team to exceed 10%. And that was my recollection of the summary of their effort.

Some consultant(s) told companies they should seek public opinion, conduct reg. surveys, and/or hold a contest. HR dept's have done that in the past, and most suggestions go directly into the trash basket. An anon. employee placed a trash basket under a wall-mounted suggestion box, and cut a hole into the bottom of the box. HR was highly offended.

 

[TheIntrepidBoyager]

Some say po-tay-to, some say po-tah-to;
some say toe-may-to, some say toe-mah-to.


Narcissism chases the spotlight like people chasing red-hot tags on Literotica. Hungry for the hit, swapping depth for clicks, settling for quick likes and cheap hollow fucks.

I don't think that's entirely fair. Sure, if one's motivation is just the score then yes, that's unfortunate. But I don't think there's anything wrong with writers, especially new ones, using the received scores as a barometer of audience appreciation. You don't have to sacrifice quality nor does it mean that high scores indicate pandering stories.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I believe a significant part of the complaints is that they aren’t really frying much these days, the oil has gotten stale, and the whole fish joint is looking more and more abandoned.

Though at least the tables in the center has been wiped recently and you can sit there once again.

I wasn't here for the "good old days", so I'm not really sure what people expect.
Other than the recent unpleasantness regarding long wait times, the site has seemed to run fine. We've got some folks who seem to think they should get some sort of concierge service from the site and want to go full Karen and try to whip up a mob when they feel slighted. That's not really a site problem.

I can appreciate the frustration of the people caught up in the AI issues we are experiencing, but as a practical matter what do you do? The AH is virulently anti-AI use, and also seems to near unanimously agree that AI detection software sucks. We've seen contests in much more highbrow sites than this, which were judged by supposed experts get fooled by AI. How much AI written stuff should Laurel let through so that no one wrongly gets an AI rejection? And how many of those outraged by their AI rejection really used AI? To borrow from Churchill it's ariddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma, and no one has a good answer for it.

 

[liliput1]

I wasn't here for the "good old days", so I'm not really sure what people expect.
Other than the recent unpleasantness regarding long wait times, the site has seemed to run fine. We've got some folks who seem to think they should get some sort of concierge service from the site and want to go full Karen and try to whip up a mob when they feel slighted. That's not really a site problem.

I can appreciate the frustration of the people caught up in the AI issues we are experiencing, but as a practical matter what do you do? The AH is virulently anti-AI use, and also seems to near unanimously agree that AI detection software sucks. We've seen contests in much more highbrow sites than this, which were judged by supposed experts get fooled by AI. How much AI written stuff should Laurel let through so that no one wrongly gets an AI rejection? And how many of those outraged by their AI rejection really used AI? To borrow from Churchill it's ariddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma, and no one has a good answer for it.

It’s the Turing Test.

Creatively we want things that were made by people. But at the end of the day, a song written by AI that resonates with people is still a song that resonates with people and the people have spoken.

Almost nobody is actually trying to prevent AI content. They’re trying to prevent being flooded with AI content.

Contest runners are trying to celebrate peak human effort, so they get upset by cheating. Teachers assign human effort to make sure the students internalize the material, so they do too. But YouTube has AI advertisements that are obvious and creepy af and they don’t care because those advertisers pay.

 

[SmilingLez]

Other than the recent unpleasantness regarding long wait times, the site has seemed to run fine. We've got some folks who seem to think they should get some sort of concierge service from the site and want to go full Karen and try to whip up a mob when they feel slighted. That's not really a site problem.

Unless you've experienced Pending Purgatory, you cannot excuse it away; you cannot dumb it down and minimize it! Unpleasantness my arse!!

Jones - for your reading pleasure

And you are incorrect when you say it's recent. Pending Purgatory has been around since 2003 that is 23 years. Don't believe me, do a search, I did!!

It makes me wonder if the people who are defending this system do so because they are afraid that their work will also end up in Pending Purgatory or be rejected by the powers that be

As always my opinion and YMMV