My most recent story (http://storiesonline.net/library/author.php?name=Sterling&sf=story_time_cre&so=desc) has gotten a strongly bimodal distribution of scores. As of this writing, here is the count on scores from 1 to 10: 12 2 0 1 2 3 10 3 0 3
Around 14 people hated it, and 16 thought it was decent, and there are a few outliers. First, I'd like to thank Laz for the change that lets authors see this raw data rather than just averages.
It's an interesting case study on score-assigning philosophy too. My opinion of the ideal way to score a story is to say, "Given that based on the description and codes you thought this was a story I might like, how did it compare?" I take the 14 "no" votes" as people following a different philosophy, which isn't surprising for a story titled "Men Strike Back: The Right to Rape": "Writing a story like this is bad, bad, BAD!" That's OK with me. All is fair in love and culture wars. But I thought it was interesting.