List of story lists aka The Literotica Index

[Omenainen]

I think there’s some general confusion because about the only not-random lists the site offers at the moment are “most highly rated” lists (7 days, 30 days, all time, etc). Curated lists don’t need to be “best of all X stories” lists. Ours aren’t, they’re lists of all stories we find that fit our criteria.

I think the lazy comment was referring to putting up lists and first adding one’s own stories to them, and not our review thread. I think that’s a perfectly sensible starting point for composing a list. AwkwardlySet’s approach of not including his own will backfire when the site puts up lists of lists and the readers don’t come through his profile to get there anymore, but as we all know, changes on the site might take so long that we’re all bored of hosting lists by then. Everyone gets to do as they wish, and I think trying different approaches will lead to a better end result than not trying anything at all.

 

[HordHolm]

Mmm-kay... so this thread kinda went just where I thought it might...

With apologies to AwkwardMD and Omenainen I thought it might be worth pointing out a couple of basics here:

1. Nobody is obliged to create or curate a list
2. Nobody is obliged to consult someone else's list
3. If somebody creates/curates a list, that's their list. Like making a mixtape they get to put what they want on it. Back in the day I would make mixtapes/friends would make mixtapes for me. I even had friends in bands who would add their own recordings from demos and the like to mixtapes. Some I would like, some I would hate, some I was ambivalent about, and I'm sure my friends felt the same. But I never felt the need to tell them (and they never felt the need to tell me) that making mixtapes was an inherently wasteful or pointless activity.
4. So, people can use their own criteria (or no criteria) to make a list, rather than the site's criteria. This means that some lists will be (subjectively) good, and some (subjectively) bad. But subjective is not, as some might want us to believe, objective.
5. People throwing a hissy about lists because, perhaps, their nappy is full or something need to take a deep breath. You don't like lists? That's ok. Really. I would just refer you back to points 1 & 2, and then you can get on with your life, and the people who do want to make lists can get on with their lives, and nobody needs to, IDK, have an 'author tantrum'.
6. Full disclosure: I haven't made or curated any lists, nor am I likely to. I just don't see the need to piss on someone's chips if they do want to, just to make the big splash. Seriously, there are literally thousands of better things to do than dump on a bunch of people who, in their own little corner, are doing their own thing, and not forcing you to join in.

And that's my rant over.

 

[TheLobster]

@AwkwardlySet is, of course, absolutely correct in his assessment, despite all the loud protestations to the contrary.

Public lists of works that are prepared by authors are necessarily self-serving to their interests. They can be used to organize their own works in a way that Literotica 's series feature doesn't allow for (e.g. "Stories set in $UNIVERSE"). Or they can be an attempt to improve on (circumvent?) the rather crude and limited recommendation system, which I suppose was the primary intention of introducing public lists in the first place.

Simply speaking, we the authors are not the intended audience for this feature. We can never be, because there is an obvious conflict of interest between being a content producer and a content curator. Perhaps people like THBGato can indeed wear many hats and be both, but that's definitely not the case for the average author here. The best public lists will always be made by dedicated readers who take it upon themselves to curate the myriad of stories that have been published on this site, without the vested interest in promoting their own. They'll necessarily be few and far between; the comparison to SOL which only has a small handful of such carefully curated lists in an apt one.

 

[THBGato]

Perhaps people like THBGato can indeed wear many hats

The best public lists will always be made by dedicated readers

Kind of you! Well, having read over 600 stories on this site so far this year, I would suggest that I fit into the dedicated readers category!

I do think of myself as a reader first, author second...


Edit: sorry, that sounds like bragging. My point was that one shouldn't diminish writers' lists because they are writers.

Writers can be readers too.

 

[Omenainen]

4. So, people can use their own criteria (or no criteria) to make a list, rather than the site's criteria. This means that some lists will be (subjectively) good, and some (subjectively) bad. But subjective is not, as some might want us to believe, objective.

No, and in our case, there might be people who don’t agree our assessment on if some representation is fetishizing or not. That’s all fine. They’re free to make their own lists with their own definitions.

To make an objective list one would have to go through all the stories on this site, and that’s hardly possible. In a way it could be argued that the only possible “objective” lists would be, say, “all stories published in the fetish category”, and those we have already. I still feel different types of lists are worth making and more informative than just looking at an author’s favorited stories and authors.

I believe that in the original post I said “are others keeping lists and if so, do you want to be included on this list”, and I did NOT say, “come tell me why you’d never make lists and why anyone else shouldn’t either”. Reading comprehension is something the fine folks around here often lack, and then there’s the certain type of old men who are just aghast that Their Opinion (which is always of course the Right Opinion) is not held by everyone. It goes with the territory, I didn’t expect anything less.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Well, I certainly brought some attention to this thread, eh? There were barely five posts when I started my rant and we are now on page four already. Success, yay!
I want to thank everyone who contributed to the discussion regardless of the "side". I think things are now much clearer to everyone and that's excellent. I can now say that I misunderstood the purpose of this initiative. The original post was quite short and I read some things in between the lines. I thought we were doing one thing but now I see that the OP intended something different. My bad. My mind is often out of sync with the AH.

 

[lovecraft68]

Well... yes? What's the problem?

The way I see it, these list are a little like a Sunday supplement article, let's say an interview with Margaret Atwood. Afterwards there's a little text box with "Magaret's reading list" and she recommends 10 books or so. Sure, some might be by friends of hers, but most won't be.

Anyway, as a reader, I'm thrilled. I like and respect Atwood, so I check out some of her recommendations.

That's what list are: recommendations of an individual (or two in the case of awkwardapple). If people like my taste, hopefully they'll like the stories I select. If they don't, they can trust the algorithms throwing up the same suggestions over and again at the bottom, or search tags, which will not filter for quality.

My lists range in lengths from 3 to 200+ stories. Some of those are by writers whom I follow and who follow me and with whom I may have exchanged emails. Does that count as "friends"? More to the point, they are excellent stories.

By the way, whomever it was that called @AwkwardMD @Omenainen lazy is off their rocker. As @Bramblethorn said, their review thread is an incredible service yo writers. I've learned loads from reading it, and I'm immensely grateful for the time and effort they put into it. (Sadly, if they remember it at all, the story I submitted is my lowest scoring one ever. I'm mildly embarrassed that their opinion of me as a writer - if they have one at all - rests on it.)

Here's the thing, whether it should of shouldn't-and it shouldn't, but it will-people are going to take these lists the wrong way. You participate here on the forum and at some point someone will look at your list, and will think "Hey, so and so from the AH is on that list, what about me? They think that person is a better writer? They don't like me?" This extends to "I bet they five vote their contest entries and don't even read mine, maybe they even downvote mine!"

Then we get "What's that -insert insult here-know anyway? Etc etc...

Sound stupid? It is, but so are people. Those of us who have been here a long time have seen a lot of well meaning ideas turn into pettiness and jealous and bullshit from others. My long running mantra is regardless of how low of a bar you set, people slide under it.

You make a list, my feeling is these are your favorite stories and authors and that's pretty much what its for. Other people will read into it, especially here where people form cliques and fluff each other endlessly while ignoring those they don't get along with. Again, should anyone care? No, but this is middle school behavior, base human nature and so on.

It's also tacky to put one's own story on a list. Looks needy. That's my opinion, so I say it as such.

Discussing the lists here will magnify the negative feelings.

I don't know why you mentioned those two being lazy in your reply to me. I never mentioned them

 

[AlinaX]

This is why I always add LC to my lists. He gets so upset if I don't.

 

[THBGato]

"Hey, so and so from the AH is on that list, what about me? They think that person is a better writer? They don't like me?"

That's kind of already happened. I had a DM from an AH member asking me to include some of their stories on my lists. I read the ones they recommended and included one on my tearkjerkers list (and left a comment) and gave feedback on why I wasn't including the others. I don't think there are any hard feelings, at least I hope not. I actively invite people to contact me with recommendations of whom I should include.

I mean, if there are any AH writers who write Lesbian Sex stories that I haven't read I'd be surprised, but please let me know if any of you fall into that category.

Now, I get that you aren't talking about me specifically, but about lists in general. But if grown adults are going to get sulky about not being included in lists, then they will probably get sulky about not being followed by certain people, or other AH users not commenting on their stories. Some people will always find something to feel aggrieved about. There's nothing we can do about that, and there's no point living your life worrying about those kinds of people. You'd never do anything if you did.

I don't know why you mentioned those two being lazy in your reply to me. I never mentioned them

Yes, I know that wasn't you. Sorry, my comment made it seem like I was blaming you when I really wasn't. Lazy writing on my part.

 

[SimonDoom]

Seems like things got unnecessarily hot here. People should feel free to manage their lists the way they want to. I confess it didn't occur to me to put one of my own stories on one of my lists, but I see nothing wrong with that. There's nothing wrong with self-promotion, as long as it's not obnoxious.

Curated lists sound like a great idea to me. I would definitely use them to find stories. It's also an interesting window into the tastes of fellow authors.

 

[SimonDoom]

This is the kind of thing one should keep a cool head and a sense of humor about. Another person's opinion is just that person's opinion. I was reading Stacnash lists of authors by the number of stars she would give to each, and it's pretty damned amusing. I'm listed as a "three-star" author, based, I guess, on her reading of one of my stories, and it's one of my more far-fetched, outrageously plotted stories. A clue to the value of Stacnash's rankings lies in the fact that both NoTalentHack and Onehitwanda are in the "Two Star" category, which Stacnash describes as "A list of poor authors who can't be recommended. These writers demonstrated considerable structural problems with dialogue, story, technical errors and were profoundly boring."

Lovecraft is listed in the bottom, one-star category, as is ChloeTzang, and I imagine they're both staying up late at night fretting about that.

To each her own.

 

[Omenainen]

I can now say that I misunderstood the purpose of this initiative. The original post was quite short and I read some things in between the lines. I thought we were doing one thing but now I see that the OP intended something different. My bad. My mind is often out of sync with the AH.

You thought we’d have some sort of common criteria and all do the same thing? Are you new here? To get folks here agree on anything would be harder than herding cats.

It’s fine with me if this discussion goes nowhere if people aren’t into making lists or don’t want them included in this thread. It’s kind of a new feature and I think it will gain ground slowly, and maybe even wither away. Time will tell.

 

[AG31]

I meant that except for mine and THBGato's lists, I see lists that consist of mostly the author's own stories + the stories of their buddies. I know how big the mentality here is on self-promoting but I think that such an approach diminishes the effort of everyone here. I truly don't understand what's the point of adding so many of your own stories to the list when it's kinda obvious that whoever checks some story list and finds it interesting would also likely check out the stories of the author who created the list.
I mean, I am possibly the odd one here, but this approach goes against my mentality and upbringing. You can claim that it's because your own stories fit the theme of the list so well but it certainly looks like lazy work to me, to say the least. I wouldn't bother pointing all of this out if this wasn't a joined effort of a sort, so if a reader gets a certain impression from a number of these lists (that it's mostly authors linking their own work in these lists) they might think that all of the lists are like that.
Maybe this sounds like BS but I honestly want to put forward other people's stories rather than mine. There are authors out there whose work deserves more publicity. There is an author whose stories I added who wrote two very long and interesting series but for some odd reason, he has only a hundred followers or so. I enjoyed reading some of them and I feel like I should help his stories reach a wider audience. Maybe someone else will link some story of mine if they like it too. It's how this should work, in my mind at least.
Either way, it's pretty hard to believe that on a website with tens of thousands of stories, the only stories that fit a certain List theme are those of that same author.

Again, if this is just me who gets such an impression from this effort so far, carry on and ignore all that I said. But I would like you to take a look at your lists and tell me that it doesn't look like blatant self-promotion. It looks like that to me but I am ready to shut up if it all looks fine to everyone else. I apologize if I am coming on too aggressively here but this kind of thinking triggers me always. Again, I'll shut up and continue helping this effort if it's just me.

I'd put my own on my lists, the lists where they fit. Why not. But I wouldn't use buddiness as a criterion. I don't think I have many buddies. It's not that kind of a place for me. How can you tell that someone is just listing their buddies' (and their own) works?? Anyway, if I ever get myself organized enough to publicize my lists, you can be confident they're not based on buddy-hood.

 

[AG31]

and we're using our profiles to ask for contributions. Then we're reaching out to those authors and getting their favorites.

How does this work. Again, asking for click by click instructions. (Duh...)

 

[AG31]

You must realize that if you really don't read much on Lit, or at all, you are unlikely to ever get in a situation to find some new story that would fit into your list.

I have very narrow tastes, not shared by many. I'd like to share lists in hopes of finding like-minded authors so I could read their stuff. But it's just to laborious to "read more." For about a half year I religiously, every day, read any new stories from authors I'm following. (I'll continue to do that, of course), and then looked at the new offerings in four likely categories. I think in all that time I may have found only two or three stories that would go on one of my lists. It was tedious... boring. I've stopped. I'm back to finding new stories via serendipity.

If your list is to grow and become what it should be,

What's this "what it should be"??????? My lists are very short. They will always be short because my tastes are narrow and (I've come to understand) unusual. What are your criteria for list length??????

 

[AG31]

It's a lot more complex than here, with the ability to write short descriptions for the list itself as well as each story you place in that list, making them REALLY useful.

It looks like people can write descriptions for their lists here.

Not to mention that the whole exercise would be for naught if authors learned to use the tag system. And, apparently, most of them can't even be bothered with that if it's about their own stories.

There are hundreds of available tags. I don't know what "learn to use" means.

 

[AG31]

Yes, exactly. And now that you have a list, it’s possible for people to see “oh, he’s into this thing I’m into, I wonder if he’s heard of such-and-such great story.” Everybody wins. It’s also possible that it doesn’t catch on and the lists will just slowly sink into oblivion. That’s not very dangerous either.

Hear! Hear!!!

 

[AG31]

We got list police as well as morality police now, or what?

Indeed!

 

[AG31]

we the authors are not the intended audience for this feature. We can never be, because there is an obvious conflict of interest between being a content producer and a content curator.

I thnk you're taking the term "curated" a little too seriously. Unless the creator claims it in the description of their list, the list should not be seen as "objective." Why? It's a list of stories a person thinks should be grouped together for some reason that they specify. If the grouping is based on a theme that they like and write about, why wouldn't they put their own stories in it? It would be misleading not to.

You can't have a conflict of interest unless you claim total objectivity. And no one should assume that claim unless the list keeper makes that claim.

 

[SimonDoom]

@AwkwardlySet is, of course, absolutely correct in his assessment, despite all the loud protestations to the contrary.

Public lists of works that are prepared by authors are necessarily self-serving to their interests. They can be used to organize their own works in a way that Literotica 's series feature doesn't allow for (e.g. "Stories set in $UNIVERSE"). Or they can be an attempt to improve on (circumvent?) the rather crude and limited recommendation system, which I suppose was the primary intention of introducing public lists in the first place.

Simply speaking, we the authors are not the intended audience for this feature. We can never be, because there is an obvious conflict of interest between being a content producer and a content curator. Perhaps people like THBGato can indeed wear many hats and be both, but that's definitely not the case for the average author here. The best public lists will always be made by dedicated readers who take it upon themselves to curate the myriad of stories that have been published on this site, without the vested interest in promoting their own. They'll necessarily be few and far between; the comparison to SOL which only has a small handful of such carefully curated lists in an apt one.

To me, this argument is an example of allowing the perfect to be the enemy of the good. I suppose there's an element of conflict of interest, but so what? What's the real harm? None, as far as I can tell. There is no downside.

Readers have no incentive to create lists. Authors do. That those incentives might contain self-serving interests isn't a reason not to welcome the creation of the lists. They won't be perfect, but they don't need to be.

 

[AwkwardMD]

How does this work. Again, asking for click by click instructions. (Duh...)

My signature contains the link to my stories on the story side. Feel free to check out what we're doing.

 

[AG31]

My signature contains the link to my stories on the story side. Feel free to check out what we're doing.

I wish I knew how to insert a screen shot. When I click on your Word Piles, this is what I see. I don't see "Lists" (although I've seen it elsewhere in the place of "Favorites", I think.) I don't see where you "use our profiles to ask for contributions." I'm not sure if "profile" and "about" and "author's" page are the same, but I went to three URLs and didn't see a request for contributions.
Sorry. I think when I post this all the spacing goes away. But you'll get the idea.

AwkwardMD Follow <pic of a letter>

109 1400 15
Works Followers Following

About Works Favorites

102 1 6
Stories Poems Artworks

A list of stories.

 

[AG31]

Readers have no incentive to create lists.

Neither here nor there for the purposes of this thread, but I sure would have an incentive to create a list if I had never written anything. It's very hard to find stories to my tastes, and if other people saw my lists, they might contact me to say, "Oh, here's another one." It would be a way to look for like-minded people.

 

[AwkwardMD]

I wish I knew how to insert a screen shot. When I click on your Word Piles, this is what I see. I don't see "Lists" (although I've seen it elsewhere in the place of "Favorites", I think.) I don't see where you "use our profiles to ask for contributions." I'm not sure if "profile" and "about" and "author's" page are the same, but I went to three URLs and didn't see a request for contributions.
Sorry. I think when I post this all the spacing goes away. But you'll get the idea.

AwkwardMD Follow <pic of a letter>

109 1400 15
Works Followers Following

About Works Favorites

102 1 6
Stories Poems Artworks

A list of stories.

The "About" section is what people usually refer to as their Profile. Mine is about halfway through a rambling description.

The list is not on my profile, it's on the account I share with Omenainen (linked in the OP). My profile only refers to the link and asks for suggestions.

 

[yowser]

I certainly understand the appeal of lists, and our expanded capacity for exploiting them here. I'm a little surprised at the controversy, everyone is free to handle them (or not) however they wish.

In real life, I like hearing from friends who recommend readings. If Laura at work is a fussy reader, and I know her standards, if she says 'read X!', then I have a pretty good idea of what I'm in for. Same here. It's an expanded index to 'good stuff' which is often hard to find amidst the bustle and volume of output.

Lists can be work, extra work, but no reason they can't be useful, and there are multiple ways to handle them.

I have a more or less 'All time favorite' list at Unrivaled
Then a genre one, since there is no 'Bisexual' category. Bi-ways (which doesn't seem to be live yet, maybe takes time to be posted).
A 'hidden gems' list Buried Treasure for the off-beat quirky tales buried in the underbrush.

And my own list of what I regard as my 'best' work. I wouldn't mind seeing this on other authors' pages. For the highly prolific folks, if I haven't read anything they've done, I wouldn't mind having a shortlist of what THEY consider their best output (regardless of scores or other metrics.)

Thus, self-serving but perhaps useful to potential readers: My own Best Efforts