Time to Tame the Trolls

[elfin_odalisque]

Just tripped over this thread and, being a nerd, what better have I got to do on a Saturday morning than read from start to finish.

I did the same as Belegon and read and voted for a while before signing up. I loved, still love the site, and will be forever grateful to have been privileged to share work by talents such as imp, lou, EL, Black S, neonlyte, davidwatts etc, etc. My world, my life, is a better place from enjoying what you've given me freely.

When I signed up, I had a fluffy piece of nonsense about a virgin. Two days after posting it was in the top ten. My boyfriend thought I'd found a new lover. Then it began to tumble. Now, ages later, it still holds an H, just, but is not one of the gladiators here.

I've learnt something in the process, though. A vote is hard to get, most people can't be bothered, and my piece of nonsense has made 180 people go to their keypads. I tend to judge stories here by the number of votes, not the score. If a hundred people have been stirred to vote, it's probably worth taking a look at. It's probably interesting or challenging - or just plain good!

Every comment here is written from a writer's point of view, which is quite understandable, that's what we are - bless our neurotic souls!

Imp, there is no perfect voting system. Everything in this world is flawed! You want hanging chads or Castro's 99% democratic victories.

My plea is this: IMHO, Lit is the most open, friendly, democratic site where EROTIC (often forgotten) authors can showcase their talent. L & M try very hard to balance the egos of us neurotic authors against the need to find enough funding to keep the site in existence.

If you carry out your threat to take all your work somewhere else, there area lot of people here who would be very, very sad. From my limited experience, Laurel and Manu are more my style than most sites I've seen.

I stay, and will always stay, because the people are great and supportive. If you leave, the trolls have won.

 

[Kassiana]

I've voted a few stories here a one because they deserved them. I dislike the current system of "remove one votes." I'd rather have my opinion count.

Granted, I've never voted stories a one because someone rated higher than me or because a story was in a top list. I didn't even think about doing so before regularly posting here. (Corrupters, you people are! Corrupters! ) But when a story so outrages me that I feel it deserves a one, I don't want that one removed. That author earned a one, and dagnab it, I want that one to stay!

 

[elfin_odalisque]

I've voted a few stories here a one because they deserved them. I dislike the current system of "remove one votes." I'd rather have my opinion count.

Granted, I've never voted stories a one because someone rated higher than me or because a story was in a top list. I didn't even think about doing so before regularly posting here. (Corrupters, you people are! Corrupters! ) But when a story so outrages me that I feel it deserves a one, I don't want that one removed. That author earned a one, and dagnab it, I want that one to stay!

Never voted a one, but I understand where you're coming from. We all hurt, we all bleed, but cutting down people's freedom isn't the way to a good future.

 

[mismused]

This is a cryptic post to me, mismused.

You seem to say "Yes" that it's all taken care of, and I know people with sufficient grievance have had votes removed when they were malicious. But you also seem to say the will to really fix things isn't there.

========================================================

Cant,

Sorry I missed your post. The question was something like "Can you say that the sweeps don't take care of . . ."

My answer was (supposed) to clearly say that yes, the sweeps don't take care of taking the 1 bombs away. I do have a way of not being clear. Sorry.

I have, in the past, watched my scores very, very closely, and known when I got a 1 bomb. I've also been able to just about know when they would come, catch them, report them, and have nothing done about it.

I've also seen quite a bit of time go by, and no sweep of any kind was done, or it was only done selectively, and missed removing them.

Now, for anyone that may think I'm an "I'm perfect" person, that just isn't so. Stories don't have to be perfect to get a 5, and I never give anything less than a 3. I've also rated a story a 5 even though I didn't particularly like the type of story, but just happened to get caught up in reading it, and found the plot and style well written to deserve it. I'll never go into something I don't like, and rate it low just because I don't like the category -- that's just dumb.

No story of mine deserved a 1, that I've found out from the readers, comments, and e mails, along with my subjective considerations. However, I can see that 4's can abound, and if that's all I got, I wouldn't mind a bit, unlikely though I might think it that "everyone" scored me a four. I can even abide an occasional three.

What I do mind is the "timeliness" of the 1 votes, and we've all seen that happen. Whether or not it can be resolved, who knows, but I don't worry on it now. Just adding to Imp's concerns, which are well-founded.

mismused

 

[cantdog]

So, Kass! It's been you all along!

I know what you mean, though. Some of the dreck here is so freakin bad I really do take the time to tell them so. I send a feedback with some basic story-crafting advice. It's not canned, either. I could save a lot of time with a canned one, I suppose, but I go from scratch. I spend even more time on someone who seems to have potential. People should learn how to look at a story, how to evaluate it as a piece of work.

Or I just vote and go, because they really do seem hopeless, and they have one story on the board. But generally, if it's a cripple, I want to let someone know that they need to rethink. I suppose I've done it a dozen times or more for people with clear potential, and maybe four times for really sophomore work. Not a lot. Even with good ones, I don't PM unless I have something good to say that I can really mean.

Everyone approaches it differently. A repeat vote is clearly something to remove, and a pattern of votes across a toplist is a legitimate target for removal. I do hope, though, that it doesn't devolve to a mere removal of ones. For what it's worth, I have had fives removed by the site, and I never send in a report about a vote of any kind.

cantdog

 

[dr_mabeuse]

My plea is this: IMHO, Lit is the most open, friendly, democratic site where EROTIC (often forgotten) authors can showcase their talent. L & M try very hard to balance the egos of us neurotic authors against the need to find enough funding to keep the site in existence.

If you carry out your threat to take all your work somewhere else, there area lot of people here who would be very, very sad. From my limited experience, Laurel and Manu are more my style than most sites I've seen.

I stay, and will always stay, because the people are great and supportive. If you leave, the trolls have won.

My feelings more or less exactly, although I don't think of it in terms of trolls winning. I don't think they're trying to drive anyone off Lit. I don't think there's anything more malicious behind one votes than an irritable or jealous reader, and why shouldn't they be allowed to vent their bad mood?

There seems to be a misconception here that votes reflect quality, which simply isn't true. More likely they might measure a ceratin kind of popularity, and if you're just trying to whore for the public, I guess that can be important. But like I've said before, if popularity was a measure of quality, then McDonald's would be haute cuisine. If you want to be popular, write incest stories invoving young girls with big tits and the hell with it. Enjoyu your H's if that's what you want.

So what do votes measure? They measure whatever the hell the voter was feeling when he voted. Maybe he did a close critical analysis of the story and admired the literary skill of the writer, or maybe he was just in a pissy mood or thought his story should get a shot at the top ten for a change.

As far as trolls go, I look at it it as part of the cost of doing business here. We all get them, and so it seems to me that it all evens out. It's not like some of us are immune.

I used to post on aother site where there was no voting. It was a drag, because there was no way to rate a story. Lit has this flawed voting system, but it's better than nothing. In my opinion, anyhow.

As for knocking stories out of the top 10 or whatever: why not? It seems the height of egotism to me to expect that your story should sit up there at the top of the heap just because you think it's such a gem. It's good that there's a lot of churning at the top; it gives everyone a chance.

I don't know about this registering to vote thing. I didn't know you had to register, or didn't have to, or do anything special to vote. But I wonder: if only registered users could vote, do you really think that would give a more accurate indication of a story's quality? Or would that just inflate the scores so that suddenly everyone was getting H's?

Anyhow, for me Lit is a place to throw stuff out for reading, to talk with people and exchange ideas, to get some really good analyses of writing experiements, and to screw around. You can get some really good critical analyses of stuff just by asking, which is a hell of a ot more relevent and meaningful than a numerical rating. If you really think the greatness of your stuff is being dissed by trolls, then take it on the open market and see if people are willing to pay for it. That's the ultimate test after all.

 

[elfin_odalisque]

My feelings more or less exactly, although I don't think of it in terms of trolls winning. I don't think they're trying to drive anyone off Lit. I don't think there's anything more malicious behind one votes than an irritable or jealous reader, and why shouldn't they be allowed to vent their bad mood?

There seems to be a misconception here that votes reflect quality, which simply isn't true. More likely they might measure a ceratin kind of popularity, and if you're just trying to whore for the public, I guess that can be important. But like I've said before, if popularity was a measure of quality, then McDonald's would be haute cuisine. If you want to be popular, write incest stories invoving young girls with big tits and the hell with it. Enjoyu your H's if that's what you want.

So what do votes measure? They measure whatever the hell the voter was feeling when he voted. Maybe he did a close critical analysis of the story and admired the literary skill of the writer, or maybe he was just in a pissy mood or thought his story should get a shot at the top ten for a change.

As far as trolls go, I look at it it as part of the cost of doing business here. We all get them, and so it seems to me that it all evens out. It's not like some of us are immune.

I used to post on aother site where there was no voting. It was a drag, because there was no way to rate a story. Lit has this flawed voting system, but it's better than nothing. In my opinion, anyhow.

As for knocking stories out of the top 10 or whatever: why not? It seems the height of egotism to me to expect that your story should sit up there at the top of the heap just because you think it's such a gem. It's good that there's a lot of churning at the top; it gives everyone a chance.

I don't know about this registering to vote thing. I didn't know you had to register, or didn't have to, or do anything special to vote. But I wonder: if only registered users could vote, do you really think that would give a more accurate indication of a story's quality? Or would that just inflate the scores so that suddenly everyone was getting H's?

Anyhow, for me Lit is a place to throw stuff out for reading, to talk with people and exchange ideas, to get some really good analyses of writing experiements, and to screw around. You can get some really good critical analyses of stuff just by asking, which is a hell of a ot more relevent and meaningful than a numerical rating. If you really think the greatness of your stuff is being dissed by trolls, then take it on the open market and see if people are willing to pay for it. That's the ultimate test after all.

Way to go Dr M!

 

[BlackShanglan]

Dr. M. Fan Club : starting here.

 

[elfin_odalisque]

Count me in!!!!

 

[cantdog]

========================================================
I have, in the past, watched my scores very, very closely, and known when I got a 1 bomb. I've also been able to just about know when they would come, catch them, report them, and have nothing done about it.

I've also seen quite a bit of time go by, and no sweep of any kind was done, or it was only done selectively, and missed removing them.
<snip>

What I do mind is the "timeliness" of the 1 votes, and we've all seen that happen. Whether or not it can be resolved, who knows, but I don't worry on it now. Just adding to Imp's concerns, which are well-founded.

I getcha. Sorry to be so obtuse.

We have indeed seen that happen, those of us who look. I have to go by witnesses, but it certainly does happen. With a report of a pattern of votes, I would have expected action. I had imagined that if there were none, the site needed to streamline. Because votes do vanish, even with no complaint, sometimes.

I'm heartened by the implications of Laurel's reply. Sorry you were one for whom it didn't work.

 

[English Lady]

My feelings more or less exactly, although I don't think of it in terms of trolls winning. I don't think they're trying to drive anyone off Lit. I don't think there's anything more malicious behind one votes than an irritable or jealous reader, and why shouldn't they be allowed to vent their bad mood?

There seems to be a misconception here that votes reflect quality, which simply isn't true. More likely they might measure a ceratin kind of popularity, and if you're just trying to whore for the public, I guess that can be important. But like I've said before, if popularity was a measure of quality, then McDonald's would be haute cuisine. If you want to be popular, write incest stories invoving young girls with big tits and the hell with it. Enjoyu your H's if that's what you want.

So what do votes measure? They measure whatever the hell the voter was feeling when he voted. Maybe he did a close critical analysis of the story and admired the literary skill of the writer, or maybe he was just in a pissy mood or thought his story should get a shot at the top ten for a change.

As far as trolls go, I look at it it as part of the cost of doing business here. We all get them, and so it seems to me that it all evens out. It's not like some of us are immune.

I used to post on aother site where there was no voting. It was a drag, because there was no way to rate a story. Lit has this flawed voting system, but it's better than nothing. In my opinion, anyhow.

As for knocking stories out of the top 10 or whatever: why not? It seems the height of egotism to me to expect that your story should sit up there at the top of the heap just because you think it's such a gem. It's good that there's a lot of churning at the top; it gives everyone a chance.

I don't know about this registering to vote thing. I didn't know you had to register, or didn't have to, or do anything special to vote. But I wonder: if only registered users could vote, do you really think that would give a more accurate indication of a story's quality? Or would that just inflate the scores so that suddenly everyone was getting H's?

Anyhow, for me Lit is a place to throw stuff out for reading, to talk with people and exchange ideas, to get some really good analyses of writing experiements, and to screw around. You can get some really good critical analyses of stuff just by asking, which is a hell of a ot more relevent and meaningful than a numerical rating. If you really think the greatness of your stuff is being dissed by trolls, then take it on the open market and see if people are willing to pay for it. That's the ultimate test after all.

I adore you

 

[cantdog]

elfin_odalisque, I went through my stories for number of votes. There is less correspondence to time posted than I imagined there would be, and the ones with the biggest vote totals were the ones with the flashiest titles.

 

[elfin_odalisque]

I adore you

Get back in line EL, i was here first!!

 

[sophia jane]

elfin_odalisque, I went through my stories for number of votes. There is less correspondence to time posted than I imagined there would be, and the ones with the biggest vote totals were the ones with the flashiest titles.

For mine, the number of votes seem to be tied pretty closely to story description; the story with "threesome" in its description has almost as many votes as my other three stories combined.


SJ

 

[impressive]

There seems to be a misconception here that votes reflect quality, which simply isn't true.

I guess the root of my discontent is that I want them to! I want the system to work. Call me crazy.

 

[cantdog]

For mine, the number of votes seem to be tied pretty closely to story description; the story with "threesome" in its description has almost as many votes as my other three stories combined.


SJ

I got one called "Camel Toe Incest-- tight thong outlined her perfectly"-- 572 votes, dude. But that's out of 140,000 reads, and it's in Incest.

And "Undiamonded Queen," while not a big ratings story, has as many votes as my first story from almost a year ago, and in the same category. I see that as an exceptional title.

The chain story is trapped into having a formula title, but chain stories don't get read much, and it's getting votes fast, considering. The description is flashy: "It's how you hold your mouth."

I think flashy is good for that. Your description has pizzazz, too. If that's the rule, then it supports Zoot. Votes are an indicator of attention, not quality. But what the hey, attention is good, right?

 

[sophia jane]

I think flashy is good for that. Your description has pizzazz, too. If that's the rule, then it supports Zoot. Votes are an indicator of attention, not quality. But what the hey, attention is good, right?

I'm an attention whore, so I'm not complaining.
I'm trying to change the description of my other group story so it includes "threesome"- we'll see if my theory pans out then.

SJ

 

[cantdog]

Flash on, I say. Write as well as you can, and make the title a doozy.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Note to self: desist from strapping target to own haunches through open declaration that one does not report suspected trolling. 2's are annoying.


Eh. I can take it. The people who counted liked it.

 

[cantdog]

You do rock, you know.

 

[impressive]

Note to self: desist from strapping target to own haunches through open declaration that one does not report suspected trolling. 2's are annoying.

(and cantdog is, as usual, correct -- you do rock)

 

[cantdog]

I like the "as usual"-- has a great ring to it.

 

[BlackShanglan]

I love you both.

Thanks, truly.

 

[Maria2394]

If you really think the greatness of your stuff is being dissed by trolls, then take it on the open market and see if people are willing to pay for it. That's the ultimate test after all.

AMEN!!! and you said it without insulting anyone, wish I had that talent!!! but the real problem is that those who believe they are being trashed by trolls are actually afraid to find out if they are truly any good or not, or they would indeed try it on the open market and not in a closed environment where their friends can boost their ego.



maria

 

[impressive]

AMEN!!! and you said it without insulting anyone, wish I had that talent!!! but the real problem is that those who believe they are being trashed by trolls are actually afraid to find out if they are truly any good or not, or they would indeed try it on the open market and not in a closed environment where their friends can boost their ego.



maria

In some instances, I've no doubt you are correct. In others, perhaps there is no desire to be formally published. That does not mean there is no desire to be constructively reviewed. A hobbyist, for example, should be able to reasonably expect such here without tackling the publishing market.

The "open market" ain't all it's cracked up to be (reference Zoot's McDonald's analogy).

And, as Zoot has found quite recently, even when your work is accepted for publication, it doesn't mean it's actually gonna get printed and subjected to that open market scrutiny.

Rather than ascribe shallow motives to everyone, perhaps it'd just be simpler to work for a more effective system that benefits everyone.