What do do about content regulation at Literotica

[Bramblethorn]

If you, or someone who agrees with you, would draft a guidance sheet and post it for comment, I'm sure, after feedback and making any appropriate amendments, you'd have a document you could send to Laurel with your suggestion.

I'm pretty sure authors here have attempted to compile this kind of guidance more than once.

First problem is, none of us is sure exactly what the rules are. Some of them are only documented via rejection messages, and the only way to know about those ones is when somebody gets a story rejected and then happens to share that information. Some don't even get that much documentation - e.g. it appears to be Literotica policy to reject any tag containing "baby", going by the fact that no such tags exist, but I've never seen any kind of official pronouncement on it. So unless Laurel's willing to tell us what we've missed, we risk just muddying the waters further with yet another competing, incomplete document.

Second problem is, it's not at all clear that the site would welcome and use such a document if we did write it. As Simon's commented, this shouldn't actually be a very hard thing for the site's management to produce and update as necessary. The fact that this hasn't happened leaves me wondering if they want some degree of opacity/ambiguity about the rules.

If I knew it would be accurate and useful, I'd happily pitch in to write something like this. But I don't want to waste effort on something that's just going to go into the dustbin.

 

[oggbashan]

A couple of things about rules...

1. No matter how many you have there are those who will break them or try to break them.

2.

I guess there is only one thing about rules. There is always someone out there that doesn't think they need to follow those rules.

Next time your out driving, look around you. How many idiots in cars are there? How many are just following their own rules of the road?

The same goes here, idiots in front of a keyboard.

All true

But Drivers have to do Drivers' Ed and pass a test which includes Rules of the Road. In the UK, new Rules have just been issued in the last few days which are causing an uproar.

Cyclists, including children, must NOT cycle on pavements. That has been a rule since our First Highway code was issued in the 1830s but rarely enforced since the 1960s.


There is now a hierarchy of road users:

Pedestrians have precedence. Drivers (and cyclists) must give way to any pedestrian wanting to cross at a junction.

Cyclists come next. They do not have to use cycle lanes. (so why have them?) If on a road they should ride in the middle of a lane and can even be two abreast. Motorists must pass them slowly with at least 6 feet of space.

Next are horse riders.

Finally, drivers of cars and trucks. they must give way to the other three.

Many local drivers do not seem to have read the 1930s version and won't obey the 2022 version.

It is the same with Lit. If the rules were obviously visible, some would still ignore them.

 

[SimonDoom]

If you, or someone who agrees with you, would draft a guidance sheet and post it for comment, I'm sure, after feedback and making any appropriate amendments, you'd have a document you could send to Laurel with your suggestion.

It would be a waste of time, because only Laurel knows exactly what SHE wants the rules to say. I don't. Neither does anyone else, although those of us who've been around long enough have an idea about what, in practice, they are.

It wouldn't be a difficult task, I would think. Laurel could take the KillerMuffin post and revise it to provide updated guidelines and I can't imagine it would take more than an hour to do it.

The concerns people have expressed about flexibility and adaptability to changing legal and financial concerns are legitimate, but all of them could be addressed by including the appropriate language in the statement.

There's good reason to allow for flexibility and discretion on the part of Laurel. There's no good reason to hide the ball, which is what this Site does.

 

[XerXesXu]

[It would be a waste of time, because only Laurel knows exactly what SHE wants the rules to say. I don't. Neither does anyone else, although those of us who've been around long enough have an idea about what, in practice, they are.]

I’d be fairly sure she’d want to say, “This site is a commercial site and decisions about what submissions to publish and what not to publish are commercial decisions in the sole discretion of the Owners.”

[It wouldn't be a difficult task, I would think. Laurel could take the KillerMuffin post and revise it to provide updated guidelines and I can't imagine it would take more than an hour to do it.]

Go on then. I’m trying to be constructive. You’re a guy who’s always up for a challenge, see if you can do it in an hour. There appear to be two headings:

Guidelines.
1. Protection of the Owners from Civil or Criminal Proceedings.
2. Protection of Readers from stylistically unacceptable submissions. The site has a style guide, you’re enthusiastic about such things – sum it up.

[There's no good reason to hide the ball, which is what this Site does.]
3.
It’s hidden in plain sight. This has never been an intuitive site to navigate.

 

[XerXesXu]

I'm pretty sure authors here have attempted to compile this kind of guidance more than once.

First problem is, none of us is sure exactly what the rules are. Some of them are only documented via rejection messages, and the only way to know about those ones is when somebody gets a story rejected and then happens to share that information. Some don't even get that much documentation - e.g. it appears to be Literotica policy to reject any tag containing "baby", going by the fact that no such tags exist, but I've never seen any kind of official pronouncement on it. So unless Laurel's willing to tell us what we've missed, we risk just muddying the waters further with yet another competing, incomplete document.

Second problem is, it's not at all clear that the site would welcome and use such a document if we did write it. As Simon's commented, this shouldn't actually be a very hard thing for the site's management to produce and update as necessary. The fact that this hasn't happened leaves me wondering if they want some degree of opacity/ambiguity about the rules.

If I knew it would be accurate and useful, I'd happily pitch in to write something like this. But I don't want to waste effort on something that's just going to go into the dustbin.

Have you attempted to use 'baby' as a tag? I can see why it mightn't be permitted.

I've had 'White Supremacist' refused as a tag. Maybe because it could be used to promote hate speech.

I've recently had a picture rejected, a collage of Style Gan's. I'm not sure whether this is because the owners do not understand what a Style Gan is, or, like the Mafia, their view is 'Why take a chance?' The boilerplate on pictures appears to predate recent developments in AI.

If anyone is interested in making a list of examples and miscellaneous, that's my contribution.

 

[windar]

This isn't that complicated. When someone comes here wishing to publish a story, they would naturally go to "Submission Guidelines" https://www.literotica.com/subguide.shtml

That should tell them everything they need to know. Any rules should be there, not in a forum post by someone called KillerMuffin. This is so obvious that it shouldn't need stating. One only sees the link to KillerMuffin under an FAQ well down the page regarding "My story has been rejected". But a new writer isn't looking at that, I promise you.

The goal should be that writers know BEFORE they get rejected and have to decide whether to protest, modify or bag the whole thing and post elsewhere. Again, that seems so obvious as to not need stating. And the advice in the Submission Guidelines is that if you have questions to email Laurel, but apparently she doesn't read those.

As for enforcement of the rules, there is no way that one person reading 100 stories/day could possibly do an adequate job of enforcing the rules. And there will always be the need for discretion-nothing wrong with that, At least if the rules are stated clearly in an obvious place, that should make that person's job a bit easier, one would think.

To be honest, if I'd seen the rules clearly stated, I might not have posted my story only to find out 15 chapters in that it broke some rule (which several previous chapters may have for all I know). I might well have just left quietly, which I know would have made many of you happy. But now that I am here, even though I won't post any more stories on this site, you have me on this board. Now if that isn't a reason to do something about this problem, what would be?

 

[SimonDoom]

If anyone is interested in making a list of examples and miscellaneous, that's my contribution.

The problem is there's no good reason for authors to do Laurel's work for her. We could spend hundreds of hours, collectively, tracking down the forbidden tags, and then pontificating about the results. Or, Laurel could take under one hour to draft a new and updated statement about the content regulations. Laurel, and nobody else, knows all she needs to know to do this task.

Regarding tags, all she needs to say is: "We reserve the right to reject any tags that we believe may violate our content regulations."

I think at this point the authors already have done enough to assist Laurel to revise the content regulation statement, and the ball is in her court.

 

[KeithD]

This isn't that complicated. When someone comes here wishing to publish a story, they would naturally go to "Submission Guidelines" https://www.literotica.com/subguide.shtml

The reality, of course, is that almost no one looks for rules before trying to run the engine--and won't if they are written up more comprehensively and posted somewhere prominently (which isn't a reason not to do so, of course).

 

[KeithD]

The problem is there's no good reason for authors to do Laurel's work for her.

The real problem is that the authors are already and have forever done Laurel's work for her on providing submissions guidance. Web authority presence on the discussion board, where users come for help/explanation, runs from scarce to nonexistent, and it's left for users to help other users on the same questions, five times a day.

I think what would be best would to have an authorized, active Mod or two designated to keep up with current policy and be recognized as those who will take the burden of authoritatively responding to these questions for the Web site.

That would free authors to write (which is what I'm not going to flit away to do) not to feel like if they don't try to help no one is going to respond--even on such basic questions of how the hell a user is going to get an electronic message response from the Web site.

 

[SimonDoom]

The real problem is that the authors are already and have forever done Laurel's work for her on providing submissions guidance. Web authority presence on the discussion board, where users come for help/explanation, runs from scarce to nonexistent, and it's left for users to help other users on the same questions, five times a day.

I think what would be best would to have an authorized, active Mod or two designated to keep up with current policy and be recognized as those who will take the burden of authoritatively responding to these questions for the Web site.

That would free authors to write (which is what I'm not going to flit away to do) not to feel like if they don't try to help no one is going to respond--even on such basic questions of how the hell a user is going to get an electronic message response from the Web site.

This is an excellent idea, and it would greatly assist authors while not imposing any additional work burdens on the owners of the Site.

 

[windar]

The reality, of course, is that almost no one looks for rules before trying to run the engine--and won't if they are written up more comprehensively and posted somewhere prominently (which isn't a reason not to do so, of course).

I read the "Submission Guidelines" carefully. I do that on any site where I plan to post for the first time. My story followed everything in them to the letter. To get 15 chapters in and be told' "Oh, by the way, you violated some message board post by KillerMuffin from 20 years ago" is shady.

 

[KeithD]

I read the "Submission Guidelines" carefully. I do that on any site where I plan to post for the first time. My story followed everything in them to the letter. To get 15 chapters in and be told' "Oh, by the way, you violated some message board post by KillerMuffin from 20 years ago" is shady.

Sorry, I don't think most people do that. I certainly didn't. Not looking for directions and just jumping in is, I think, pretty much the human condition.

 

[SimonDoom]

Sorry, I don't think most people do that. I certainly didn't. Not looking for directions and just jumping in is, I think, pretty much the human condition.

Two things, though.

1. More people would check out the content regulations if they were easy to find and prominently posted. If the Site made it very clear "Here's what you can publish and what you can't" I think many more authors would take the time to read it to avoid wasting their time.

And

2. Even if most don't do that, some do, and the cost in terms of time and effort for the Site is so minimal it still makes sense for them to update a content regulation statement that is now 19-years old and out of date.

 

[KeithD]

2. Even if most don't do that, some do, and the cost in terms of time and effort for the Site is so minimal it still makes sense for them to update a content regulation statement that is now 19-years old and out of date.

I did post that it would be a good thing to do anyway.

And now I move on, because this is just wheels spinning on Literotica.

 

[windar]

2. Even if most don't do that, some do, and the cost in terms of time and effort for the Site is so minimal it still makes sense for them to update a content regulation statement that is now 19-years old and out of date.

I know we're discussing where the rules are posted, not what they are, but they need to take a serious look at the policy on non-consent. IMO, you either allow it or you don't. This "It's OK if the victim decides to enjoy it at the end" is simply and unelegantly put, BULLSHIT. It's frankly offensive. A woman kicking and screaming and fighting her assailant off and then loving it and orgasming? Come, on!

I don't have a problem with non-consent, since it's fiction, not a guidebook to real life. Murder mysteries have murders and the victim generally didn't consent. The same goes for incest stories, which are verboten most places, but beloved here. Just be honest about it...

 

[Winter_Fare]

I don't have a problem with non-consent, since it's fiction, not a guidebook to real life. Murder mysteries have murders and the victim generally didn't consent. The same goes for incest stories, which are verboten most places, but beloved here. Just be honest about it...

A thousand times this.

 

[SimonDoom]

I know we're discussing where the rules are posted, not what they are, but they need to take a serious look at the policy on non-consent. IMO, you either allow it or you don't. This "It's OK if the victim decides to enjoy it at the end" is simply and unelegantly put, BULLSHIT. It's frankly offensive. A woman kicking and screaming and fighting her assailant off and then loving it and orgasming? Come, on!

I don't have a problem with non-consent, since it's fiction, not a guidebook to real life. Murder mysteries have murders and the victim generally didn't consent. The same goes for incest stories, which are verboten most places, but beloved here. Just be honest about it...

This is a very big, messy, complicated, and completely legitimate issue for discussion, but I think it's best left for another thread. My point is that regardless of what the rules are, they should be more clearly and completely stated, and they should be MUCH easier to find.

 

[windar]

A thousand times this.

1 down, 999 to go...

This is a very big, messy, complicated, and completely legitimate issue for discussion, but I think it's best left for another thread.

Agreed. Maybe I will start one. Even though I don't really want to post more stories here regardless, I think the site looks ridiculous with the current rules as stated and maybe someone actually cares about that...

 

[SimonDoom]

1 down, 999 to go...



Agreed. Maybe I will start one. Even though I don't really want to post more stories here regardless, I think the site looks ridiculous with the current rules as stated and maybe someone actually cares about that...

I think you should. I think it's too bad you feel that way, but if you are not going to post more stories because of the way the Site does things, let the Site know and keep the discussion going.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Have you attempted to use 'baby' as a tag? I can see why it mightn't be permitted.

I've never had occasion to do so myself, and given Literotica's position on under-age, it's possible that many of the stories that would use that specific tag are getting rejected for their content.

But it's not just "baby". There are no stories here tagged "babysitter" or "sugar baby", or any other plausible tag I can think of that contains the string "baby". It's not about those being banned topics - there are plenty of stories about babysitters and sugar babies, often with those words in the title. It's only in the tags that there's a "baby"-shaped black hole.

I don't know whether attempts to submit with those tags get a rejection or just a quiet modification on their way through, but clearly it's site policy not to allow any tag containing "baby".

I'm not arguing with that policy. I can see why one might want to discourage tags about actual babies, and why things like "babysitter"/"sugar daddy" might end up as collateral damage. I don't have strong opinions about the choice to keep that policy undocumented; if they published a list of exactly what tags are banned, that might assist posters in circumventing them.

I'm just holding it up as an example of why it's not possible for any of us authors to write comprehensive documentation on what is/isn't allowed here, and of why the site might not welcome such documentation even if we did.

I've had 'White Supremacist' refused as a tag. Maybe because it could be used to promote hate speech.

...which is bleakly hilarious, given some of the stories that have been published here. But Literotica's position on political content in stories has not been consistent over the years.

I've recently had a picture rejected, a collage of Style Gan's. I'm not sure whether this is because the owners do not understand what a Style Gan is, or, like the Mafia, their view is 'Why take a chance?' The boilerplate on pictures appears to predate recent developments in AI.

Yeah, I've heard of others getting rejections for GAN-generated art. It's a shame, because I find it fascinating, but I'm not sure what the copyright status of such art is. IIRC at least one of the common GAN-generating sites asserts copyright ownership over any art generated through their site as part of the terms of use, so I could understand being cautious about that.

 

[windar]

I think you should. I think it's too bad you feel that way, but if you are not going to post more stories because of the way the Site does things, let the Site know and keep the discussion going.

I have done so, here and here https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=1560123

Honestly, what benefit would I get from posting more stories? The pay sucks, it takes 2 days or more for a chapter to be posted and almost 24 hours for comments, there are endless hassles vs free sites where I hit "post" and it appears instantly and I have comments within 30 min (all favorable) or pay sites where I get paid. And as many views as I get here on free sites, plus hilarious banter which you don't get here. So what's the upside of Lit again?

Look, I tried it. It was Ok, but it wasn't nearly as great as the boosters say...

 

[PennameWombat]

This discussion breaks down to incentives, and who is or can be incentivized to do what.

In sum, there is only one person whose incentives are of any interest here - Laurel's, the sole site submission editor, it's been repeatedly stated here that only she decides if a story is posted or not.

That said, IMHO she has zero, none, nil, less than that even, incentive to change a thing.

I pulled the current New Stories list. On 30 January 2022, 191 stories went live, over the last seven days over a thousand. In other words, around 150 stories per day, every day. As to the 30th, 175 authors submitted those 191 stories (mypenname3000 had six go live that day... busy beaver). And, maybe 10-15% of those stories already have the H.

I've zero data on how many, if any, of those stories were initially rejected. I also don't know for how many authors it's their first ever posting. Going through the list, I offhand see zero names that are regular or even occasional AH posters.

Now, it's clear that some number of stories get sent back. Every so often, someone comes to AH in either a state of confusion or high dudgeon. There are four things to do with a rejection:

1. Ask in AH how to fix.
2. Read the rejection and work it out yourself and resubmit.
3. Put that story aside, and work on a new one.
4. Tell the site to GFY and quit.

But. Back to point one. Laurel is posting 150 or more stories a day. She has... plenty of material.

175 authors somehow navigated the murky, unmarked paths to get stories posted. One hundred and seventy five. Every day for the last week (month, year, decade.)

Does Laurel want or need more material? Unless she 'shared out' the posting duties, it might be impossible to handle more submissions.

The site has clear rules on Under-18s, the rest is all spread around.

But I argue Laurel has no incentives to do anything here. No matter how clear the rules are, many won't ever read them, others will deliberately try to violate or at least bend them into funky shapes, others won't understand them and violate them accidentally.

And if anyone argues the occasional author stalks away because of the murky, unmarked paths that regulate content, she posted 191 stories from 175 authors in one bloody day.

 

[leeanna19]

Yes, I agree the do's/don't's could stand to be a little clearer.

I uploaded a story a while back that closed with dialog referencing a particular form of sexual violence that could be construed as consensual under the circumstances (and the dialog), and Laurel rejected the story.

Since the act itself was canceled/avoided I thought I was in the clear, but evidently not. I took it down since the point of the story was the avoided act itself and editing for acceptance would make the plot pointless.

I don't understand the non-consensual part. I just searched "Rape" and come up with 603 pages of stories on here?

The whole idea of Rape is surely non-consensual?

While some may be consensual, I bet most of these stories aren't.

I thought the only taboo on here was under 18's

 

[NotWise]

I thought the only taboo on here was under 18's

Nope.

Bestiality
Under 18
Excessive violence or abuse
offsite links
Anything that might become a legal liability for Lit.

 

[KeithD]

There'd be less heartburn swirling around here if folks focused on what they were managing to get done rather than what others apparently were getting away with.