The now fully official Author’s Hangout Halloween 2025 competition support thread

[DEFCOM5]

View attachment 2574578

YEEEEEEEES! Thank you @EmilyMiller

 

[StrangeLife]

Congratulations to the three winners.

Well deserved - excellent stories

 

[Smuttyandfun]

Congrats to all the winners and to everyone who entered. There were so many good stories this year, it was one of the best contests ever.

 

[SouthernCrossfire]

Valentin's Day, ugh, a made-up holiday to sell cards and chocolate.

And don’t forget flowers!

This was a major theme of my Valentine contest story titled “Dreaded Days” from a few years ago.

 

[talemestories]

And since there’s no middle ground between 4 and 5, it would be outrageously unfair to give a story deserving 4.5 only a 4 instead of a 5.

Since the only way to truly savor quality writing is to read s l o w l y, I can only assume that those who prefer long, convoluted tales are fast readers. But fast reading is inevitably less critical reading, and if you add the sectoral factor to the mix...

Congratulations to the most deserving winners.

It's an interesting scale to use for ratings for sure. 1-10 is likely more better-er but at least it isn't 1-3.

There are many interesting factors on Literotica that I wasn't even aware of until I started writing and publishing here. It's what makes things VERY interesting especially if you are not fully within a category or decide to tempt the fates in the more controversial categories.

I still think it's one of the most interesting games in town.

 

[Voboy]

It's an interesting scale to use for ratings for sure. 1-10 is likely more better-er but at least it isn't 1-3.

There are many interesting factors on Literotica that I wasn't even aware of until I started writing and publishing here. It's what makes things VERY interesting especially if you are not fully within a category or decide to tempt the fates in the more controversial categories.

I still think it's one of the most interesting games in town.

Those of us who choose to stay here and keep contributing do make compromises to do so; we're keenly aware the site is not perfect, but we've made our peace with the parts that bother us.

The one single change I would suggest for the site would be to move the red H from 4.5 to 4.0, and not because it would benefit my stories at all; I'd suggest it because a 4* vote is probably intended by most readers to be a compliment, but the way the Red H works makes it a bit of a slight. Personally, I doubt most casual voters understand the impact a 4* vote might have on viewership.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Kinda fun that this has made it to page 50

 

[Aoife_from_Ulster]

Kinda fun that this has made it to page 50

Our target goal for next year

 

[WeShallUnclench]

Personally, I doubt most casual voters understand the impact a 4* vote might have on viewership.

Not to expand this thread into a whole different topic, but that's a general issue, right?

The problem with attitudes like "if you enjoy a story, you MUST give it the top vote, or else you are hurting it" just fuels the logic of inflation and makes for a bit of a spiral, doesn't it.

In combination with not everyone being on the same page, this leads to very messy results. Someone might even innocently vote 3 without thinking that they are "burrying" a story with this. Conversely readers might not touch a story below H. On the assumption everything below H must be REALLY bad, or simply because everyone can only read so many stories.
Finally, it discourages voting because if you don't love a story but also don't want to hurt it, the logical move is to abstain.

We've had plenty of discussions like this already. Fellow authors tend to say they don't look at ratings at all when picking stories to read, but obviously that ain't true for everyone.

The basic tragedy behind all this, from ratings to viewership to story selection, is how much attention is wanted vs how much attention can be given. If we were only 10 writers with 2 billion readers, then everyone was bound to get attention and feedback and maybe the rating system would be more satisfying.
But as most creative pursuits in life, this is and always will be a murky competition for that all-elusive audience of people who individually have only so much time to read stories, and collectively remain unpredictable. Some writers will hit homeruns under those conditions, most won't or at least not very often.

I don't think you can "educate" an audience towards a "correct" reading and voting behaviour that could remedy this.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Not to expand this thread into a whole different topic, but that's a general issue, right?

The problem with attitudes like "if you enjoy a story, you MUST give it the top vote, or else you are hurting it" just fuels the logic of inflation and makes for a bit of a spiral, doesn't it.

In combination with not everyone being on the same page, this leads to very messy results. Someone might even innocently vote 3 without thinking that they are "burrying" a story with this. Conversely readers might not touch a story below H. On the assumption everything below H must be REALLY bad, or simply because everyone can only read so many stories.
Finally, it discourages voting because if you don't love a story but also don't want to hurt it, the logical move is to abstain.

We've had plenty of discussions like this already. Fellow authors tend to say they don't look at ratings at all when picking stories to read, but obviously that ain't true for everyone.

The basic tragedy behind all this, from ratings to viewership to story selection, is how much attention is wanted vs how much attention can be given. If we were only 10 writers with 2 billion readers, then everyone was bound to get attention and feedback and maybe the rating system would be more satisfying.
But as most creative pursuits in life, this is and always will be a murky competition for that all-elusive audience of people who individually have only so much time to read stories, and collectively remain unpredictable. Some writers will hit homeruns under those conditions, most won't or at least not very often.

I don't think you can "educate" an audience towards a "correct" reading and voting behaviour that could remedy this.

The rating system is broken (for readers as well as writers). But the site has zero interest in doing anything about it.

 

[old_prof]

The rating system is broken (for readers as well as writers). But the site has zero interest in doing anything about it.

I'm not sure that I think it is completely broken, especially not for readers. It provides imperfect information, but the information is on the whole much better than its absence. Could it be better? Absolutely, although I do not see an easy system (for all involved) that is significantly better. And certainly not one for which an easy migration path exists.

I understand the frustration with all the things that could be improved, especially from the author's perspective. But, right now, I would rather the site gets its act in order to make the day to day operations actually work. Then adding some opacity to the system for the authors. When all that's done, we can talk about reworking the rating system.

 

[EmilyMiller]

I'm not sure that I think it is completely broken, especially not for readers. It provides imperfect information, but the information is on the whole much better than its absence.

Readers are fed stories whose ratings have been artificially boosted.

Readers are discouraged from reading stories whose ratings have been artificially suppressed.

I fail to see how that serves the interests of readers.

 

[old_prof]

Readers are fed stories whose ratings have been artificially boosted.

Readers are discouraged from reading stories whose ratings have been artificially suppressed.

I fail to see how that serves the interests of readers.

Some stories are mis-rated. Across a wide range of stories, the ratings are mostly meaningful. I read a lot of stories on here before I ever wrote. I used the ratings mostly. used them because it let me find better written stories. I'm sure I missed some excellent stories because they were under-rated by the scores. And I read a few that I said why is this one well rated? But, if I picked random stories, ignoring the ratings, I got a much worse mix. So I used the ratings. I don't read very much anymore (still need to get to Nix), but I don;t have any reason to believe that's changed.

A rating system that's 80% correct is very useful for readers.

One that is 20% significantly wrong is really painful for authors.

 

[EmilyMiller]

A rating system that's 80% correct is very useful for readers.

I agree. I just question whether that percentage applies to Literotica, particularly in low traffic categories where the Law of Large Numbers holds less sway.

 

[old_prof]

I agree. I just question whether that percentage applies to Literotica, particularly in low traffic categories where the Law of Large Numbers holds less sway.

Fair enough. I read mostly in E&V when I was reading originally. Really small number of votes are problematic. And categories that aren't huge views and don't engender substantial engagement make things worse. Fortunately, almost be definition, we are talking about small numbers of readers getting burned by these categories -- if the readers were there, there wouldn't be a problem. Bias in the voting would be the real dance with the number of votes most stories get.

As far as readers are concerned, I don't think there is a major bias involved (ignoring LW and certain kinks that go against the grain of a category). But there are definite biases against authors, as you will aver frequently.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Fair enough. I read mostly in E&V when I was reading originally. Really small number of votes are problematic. And categories that aren't huge views and don't engender substantial engagement make things worse. Fortunately, almost be definition, we are talking about small numbers of readers getting burned by these categories -- if the readers were there, there wouldn't be a problem. Bias in the voting would be the real dance with the number of votes most stories get.

As far as readers are concerned, I don't think there is a major bias involved (ignoring LW and certain kinks that go against the grain of a category). But there are definite biases against authors, as you will aver frequently.

That’s a fair point. EV is relatively high traffic without being mega traffic and has a chilled audience. Malicious votes are likely to be overwhelmed. But in low traffic categories, trolls totally distort the rating system.

 

[DEFCOM5]

May be you should take getting 1-bombed as a sign of success?

Some authors are so scared of how well you write that they will go out of their way to destroy the ratings of your stories. They are acting out of fear because they know their own stuff cannot compare to what you write.
So enjoy the fact that you now permanently live in their head and they obsess about 1-bombing you.
It is a very powerful feeling. You are controlling their thoughts.

 

[EmilyMiller]

May be you should take getting 1-bombed as a sign of success?

Some authors are so scared of how well you write that they will go out of their way to destroy the ratings of your stories. They are acting out of fear because they know their own stuff cannot compare to what you write.
So enjoy the fact that you now permanently live in their head and they obsess about 1-bombing you.
It is a very powerful feeling. You are controlling their thoughts.

Assuming that was addressed to me. The religiosity of how at least one person acts is clearly to do with unrequited love, and a desperate cry to be noticed and seen as relevant. It’s a deeply romantic gesture from a person who struggles to interact normally. One bombs are clearly their little Valentine’s gifts.

But… while I may be the subject of their psychosis, I’m not responsible for it. Their little fantasy world is all on them. While I appreciate their tributes of love, I do worry about their happiness and mental health. I hope they can find a way to gain some peace in their lives.

 

[DEFCOM5]

Assuming that was addressed to me. The religiosity of how at least one person acts is clearly to do with unrequited love, and a desperate cry to be noticed and seen as relevant. It’s a deeply romantic gesture from a person who struggles to interact normally. One bombs are clearly their little Valentine’s gifts.

But… while I may be the subject of their psychosis, I’m not responsible for it. Their little fantasy world is all on them. While I appreciate their tributes of love, I do worry about their happiness and mental health. I hope they can find a way to gain some peace in their lives.

Yes, @EmilyMiller , my comment was addressed to you. Sorry for not making it clearer.

This person or people are clearly obsessed with you. They probably go crazy when you do not publish things for a while. Where else can they send their V-Day gifts as you put it?

It speaks volume of how good of a person you are that you worry about their mental health and happiness. Anyone spending energy to one bomb a specific author is most likely a miserable person!

Try not to let them not anger or sadden you. They are a lot of people here who love and adore what you write!

 

[EmilyMiller]

Anyone spending energy to one bomb a specific author is most likely a miserable person!

Let’s agree troubled and unhappy. And I really do hope they find a way to be happier in their lives and to engage in more healthy pursuits.

 

[DEFCOM5]

Let’s agree troubled and unhappy. And I really do hope they find a way to be happier in their lives and to engage in more healthy pursuits.

One might only hope!

 

[Voboy]

Not to expand this thread into a whole different topic, but that's a general issue, right?

It is, which is why I so seldom complain about the rating system. I think it works, though crudely, and the kicker is that I don't see how any replacement system could work any better. They've all got their flaws. My own "fix" of moving the red H to a 4 is a minor one, designed so that I could recognize an inferior but still decent work and differentiate it from the best of the best, as a reader.

Which might not matter; see below.

I don't think you can "educate" an audience towards a "correct" reading and voting behaviour that could remedy this.

Perhaps not, but the site could try.

When I was "only" a reader for over a decade, I had no idea what a red H really meant, even though I used them as filters.
Meaning, I understood on some level that it meant a 4.5 average, but I failed to grasp just what a dive a story could take with 1-3* votes. I was not an informed reader, and though I voted seldom, I cringe now when I realize the damage some of those votes did. I don't think the readers think much about it, but I know for sure that there is a benefit to having a red H and I seriously doubt a 4* vote is generally intended as a "punishment." I suspect most casual readers don't see that connection.

To be clear, I never would vote a story at one or two stars; I'm much more inclined to just nope out of it and find a story more to my liking. So my own personal scale ranges from 3-5, with the red H being in the middle of that range. Which is a cool and useful way to conceptualize it... except that I can't rate a story at 4.5.

 

[MillieDynamite]

All votes count equally, but some numbers are more equal than others. For lasting damage to a great story, a few 3s or 4s take a greater toll than a solitary one vote.

 

[EmilyMiller]

All votes count equally, but some numbers are more equal than others. For lasting damage to a great story, a few 3s or 4s take a greater toll than a solitary one vote.

2 x 3️ = 1 x 1️

4 x 4️ = 1 x 1️

 

[MillieDynamite]

I'm not sure if that supports my contention or undermines it. What I was trying to say is, 3s and 4s don't get swept. I'm stupidest when I try to be clever.

2 x 3️ = 1 x 1️

4 x 4️ = 1 x 1️