I have made the decision that the voting switch is going away at the end of 2022.
As of 2023-01-01 nobody will be able to turn off voting on the stories.
As of today, the voting switch is gone from the submission system, but it can be turned off from the Manage Stories functionality.
I take it that this would also apply to those that don't normally turn on voting until all the story chapters are posted?
Asking for a friend, obviously.
That's a shame.
Sometimes I like to switch voting off until readers have enough content to be confident what sort of story it is.
AJ
Thought/suggestion: what about an option that says "delay voting for X days / Y chapters" (either or both could be entered) with a max of, say, 30 / 10? Obviously the max is debatable. That would allow people who want to prioritize voting for steady readers, give readers enough content to vote on, etc. a chance to do so, while making every story eligible for voting in a defined period of time.
Once posted, those numbers could be reduced, but not increased, by the author.
Your choice of course.
Some writers turn voting off, and I don't necessarily understand why. I don't know how the news will affect them, especially if they don't read the forum.
especially if they don't read the forum
They will probably find out when they submit their next story and there is no switch to turn voting off.
HM.
@REP
especially if they don't read the forum
They will probably find out when they submit their next story and there is no switch to turn voting off.
I think the concern here is will they be pissed off enough to take their ball and go home.
How will this affect stories already in progress? If the author had already turned off voting.
If you let the old setting for those stories you may – five or more years later – still have stories with voting off, assuming it's one of those endless stories with hundreds of chapters.
HM.
At the end of 2022 I will remove the code that checks whether voting is turned on or off from the whole site. So the the saved settings will have no effect anymore.
I'm sure some will be pissed and they will leave. Can't be helped. They're free to do what suits them.
When I introduced the current voting system some got pissed and left. When I allowed turning voting off, some got pissed and left, when I removed the 3 value votes some got pissed and left.
Anything that I change in the site, somebody gets pissed. One time an author got pissed because I changed one word in one of the help articles 'curly braces' to 'curly brackets' and he left. Yes —as strange as that sounds— it's a true story.
No matter what you do, you can't make everybody happy.
As the AI said of nuclear war in the movie War Games, the only way to win is not to play.
No matter what you do, you can't make everybody happy.
No matter what Snow White does, six of the seven dwarves are not Happy...
One time an author got pissed because I changed one word in one of the help articles 'curly braces' to 'curly brackets' and he left. Yes —as strange as that sounds— it's a true story.
Is *that* why Curly_Braces left the site? I knew there had to be a logical explanation.
"You can please some of the people some of the time...." As a reader, I applaud your decision. It helps me eliminate the dross before I invest my time in it. While I appreciate the reasons why an author would delay voting, there actually isn't a benefit from it other than running up the downloads before people figure out that it's not worth reading. Look at the list of the All-Time Long Classics. In all of them, Chapter One deserved a 9.0 as did all the other chapters. When a story blurb contains the line "Starts out slow", I skip it. A good story starts by capturing your imagination and making you beg for more. A good story starts with a high score that remains high until the last word.
Out of pure curiosity, why the change?
I imagine the site looks less professional and less attractive to readers if some stories have voting switched off.
AJ
As a reader, may I offer my humble opinion? As an avid reader on SOL (including the forum), I have noted countless times authors whining or complaining about the unfairness of readers flaming them with unfavorable ratings. It is often pointed out by the author that the offensive rating was provoked by a single event or act portrayed in their story that 'offended' the sensitivities of the reader. IMO, this seems to mirror the absurd political correctness that prevails in present times; a small minority of gasbags dictating to the majority? I have chosen to avoid the shitstorm, thus I never rate a story regardless of my feelings. In select instances when I appreciate an exceptional story, I will make a direct comment to the author. All of you put a huge effort into writing whether it is a masterpiece or a piece of crap, and post it free of charge. Everyone deserves respect, even if they do not deserve accolades.
I have chosen to avoid the shitstorm, thus I never rate a story regardless of my feelings.
Which makes the troll votes stand out more. You should give a story your honest vote. More votes diminishes the influence of troll votes.
a small minority of gasbags dictating to the majority?
That's because the majority are like you. They sit aside and let the gasbags have all the say. The 'silent majority' is everywhere and it gets led by the nose without any protestations.
You want the gasbags to have less influence? Then side with the good guys and have your voice be heard against the gasbags. The gasbags are heard because they're the only one speaking most of the time.
That's not only for here, but every facet of life. A tiny, but very fucking loud, minority is ruining the whole western civilization unopposed.
the whole western civilization unopposed.
They're not unopposed, but since they control social media, it keeps banning us.
the whole western civilization unopposed.
They're not unopposed, but since they control social media, it keeps banning us.
That's because the 'Silent Majority' doesn't make a peep when centrists/conservative/rightwing are banned by the radical leftists.
The whole point is that the Majority should be the one with the say, but they're 'Silent', so no say, no opposition.
Meanwhile, the radical leftists are occupying every open position in the tech giants' moderation centres, HR departments, and mid-level management, and running amok of western democracies.
Meanwhile, the radical leftists are occupying every open position in the tech giants' moderation centres, HR departments, and mid-level management
And most of the media.
Out of pure curiosity, why the change?
Fixing old mistakes and getting ready for features that require all stories to have scores.
and getting ready for features that require all stories to have scores.
Tease!
When I first started posting my stories, I was a bit concerned because I did not understand how the voting system worked. Now, I still don't understand but I don't give a shit either, so it has balanced itself.
As I was telling someone else in a PM, anytime two plus two does not equal four, it ain't square and you can't win.
If you say two plus two is less than four you are lying down. If you say it is more than four you are lying up. And may be playing basketball where lieups are not unusual. Or maybe layups. If you lie down you may be lying down or maybe laying down. Nobody ever promised English would make sense.
I think that when a person votes less than a 4 or 5, they need to select from a 2nd selection of reasons. Such as poor writing, no sex, too much sex, could not happen, or whatever. That way the writer "Might" have a better idea of how to improve. It would be better than just looking at a low score and wondering why in the hell they read it if they didn't like it.
It would be better than just looking at a low score and wondering why in the hell they read it if they didn't like it.
You are presuming that they read it in full before voting.
Some voters just don't vote that way.
Chapter 1 of a story from their favourite author = 10
A new story with a certain tag they hate = 1
If you give people a vote you shouldn't be surprised if they vote their mind, however deranged you might think their mind is...
Oh. And Lazeez has indicated that the scoring system is set in stone with zero chance of any changes. Basically it is a PITA and he'd rather referee beach volleyball on the shores of the Sargasso Sea that even think about the scoring system.
Oh. And Lazeez has indicated that the scoring system is set in stone with zero chance of any changes. Basically it is a PITA and he'd rather referee beach volleyball on the shores of the Sargasso Sea that even think about the scoring system.
There's absolutely nothing he can do to the scoring system that will make everyone happy. It's a game he can't win and he quite rightly decided to stop playing.
I'm not presuming anything. I am making a suggestion. In the past I have made a suggestion and Lazeez made the change.
You may be correct in how some people vote, and you could be just as wrong as shit in a fruit pie. I don't know and as I said, it was a suggestion.
You may be correct in how some people vote, and you could be just as wrong as shit in a fruit pie. I don't know and as I said, it was a suggestion.
The problem is that Lazeez has said repeatedly that there will be no more changes to the scoring system, no matter what.
I think you are right that Lazeez will never make everyone happy. BUT, I do think I would be happier knowing why someone gave me a low score, wouldn't you?
I do think I would be happier knowing why someone gave me a low score, wouldn't you?
No, because I don't give the south end of a north bound rodent about the scores.
And in any case, Lazeez has declared that no more changes to the scoring system will be considered, so it's pointless to discuss anything you might think would improve the scoring system.
You are presuming that they read it in full before voting.
Some voters just don't vote that way.
Chapter 1 of a story from their favourite author = 10
A new story with a certain tag they hate = 1
There are ways to prevent that but it requires some creative coding, for example:
- only allow voting after x% or x chapters are read
- only allow voting if x time is spend on a story (relative to the length of the story?)
- by default only allow voting after x chapters for EVERY story (if multi chapter)
There are problems with each option such as allowing readers to vote who only download zips/epubs (like me). After a time the parameters are known and the real trolls will find a way around it. The best way I can think of is to have a blind 'credibility score' for every SOL member which indicates how heavy their vote will weigh, if at all. Nobody would have to know there is such a score. 1's and 10's are suspect but the ability to see all votes a reader has given is needed to determine how 'serious' his voting is. I wouldn't know how to automate that so it probably takes people time, which is the last you would want.
There are ways to prevent that
No. There isn't.
Yes you could add code, but that isn't a cure, it just moves the issue.
The 'cure' would be to have each reader vote strictly in accordance with the voting guidelines you'd also need to promulgate.
That would absolutely solve the issue. Except you've also removed the readers ability to express themselves freely.
You are presuming that they read it in full before voting.
I just realized the trolls can vote for a story without fully download the story, you can vote without clicking twice to get the full text released.
They only have to click 'Bottom' and the browser will jump to the bottom of the page with the message "there is more to this text..." and have access to the voting below it.
If the voting would be hidden as well, they would have to click twice to release the rest of the story and then scroll not jump to the end to vote. I'm aware this would probably change nothing in the outcome, just inconvenience the trolls. A regular reader would not be affected by this change.
HM.
To Dominions Son, and JoyR. I did not say anything about changing the scoring method. I said I would like to know WHY a person gave a low score. Ain't got shit to do with the score just the why. The reason need not be displayed for view, just somewhere that you could look at it and maybe make improvements based on it. Maybe the idea is not a good one but that is no reason to jump all over my ass. I thought I had a good idea and posted it. So, let's hear your ideas and I'll tell you that Lazeez won't change the scoring system system even if it is not what you suggested.
I did not say anything about changing the scoring method. I said I would like to know WHY a person gave a low score.
IIRC: Lazeez has expressed that he considers the voting controls part of the scoring system and equally dead. There was a suggestion a while back to change the wording on the voting pull down that he very quickly nixed.
It's almost time.
For the last snail mail posting date for a chrimbo delivery? :P
I as an avid reader of this site I only read stories that score above 7.5. There are so many great stories here to waste time reading low scoring stories, I normailly wait until a story has posted a significant number of chapters before I will start to read it. Normally I wait until the story is finished unless it is part of a series. I almost always will give a 10 to a story I enjoy, primarly to show my appreciation and also to balance against the trolls. I know that on story reviews a reviewer is required to allocate a score for the Plot, Technical Quality and appeal to reviewer. Could this system not be included into the voting score?. Perhaps this would discourage those of an evil bent. Then again what do I know?.
This is my first and probably only ever post here, so, Merry Christmas and a Healthy Happy New Year
allocate a score for the Plot, Technical Quality and appeal to reviewer. Could this system not be included into the voting score?
It was in years past. It was called the TPA (Technical, Plot, Appeal).
It was removed because it wasn't used properly.
Oh No, not another change to the scoring system.
The scoring system stays unchanged.
Just the ability to block the reader from using it gets removed.
HM.
As of 2023-01-01 nobody will be able to turn off voting on the stories.
It's done.
:insert evil malicious cackle here:
It's an opportunity for vindictive 1-bombers to target authors whose stories have content they disagree with but for which voting had previously been switched off.
Luckily there's been no site announcement on the subject, so hopefully the vindictive 1-bombers will be blissfully ignorant in yet another way ;-)
AJ
IIRC the lowest 5% and highest 5% of scores are excluded. This gets rid of 1 bombers and stans to a certain extent.
Anyway, Pharaoh has spoken, so the scribes scribbling on papyrus will have to live with it.
A little payback could be added to stories if authors wish to vent.
Joe Buckley was an opinionated poster on the Baen Books forums. So the authors made a point of killing him in interesting ways in their books. He died enough times that Baen put out a compilation book of his death scenes. Perhaps an informal contest to kill off anonymous troll side characters in the most interesting way? Or leave them impotent and cuckholded as that seems to be a common obsession?
In the voice of Pharaoh: "So Let It Be WRITTEN. So Let It Be DONE!"
Do I understand this correctly?
• first write the report about the deed
• second try to do what's already reported as done.
(if you fail, no big problem, success is already reported)
HM.
