Forum: Story Discussion and Feedback

Being discouraged by a multitude of readers saying "you suck" is not being thin-skinned. It's being human.

It's understandable, but authors have always needed thick skins to survive. Between the multiple rejections (by publishers), failure to appreciate technique (by editors), and nit-picking over minor flubs (by readers), few authors will survive unless they can dust themselves off after a flare up, shrug their shoulders and continue on to the next book.

Perseverance is the best revenge.

and you will fine help.

"I'm sorry, but that advice will cost you $15."

As far as Amazon's feedback is concerned, almost nothing will condemn a story faster than all glowing 5-star reviews, as readers typically interpret that as 'author generated' buzz, rather than honest opinions. Stories typically sell better if there are plenty of 5-star reviews, accompanied by a couple scathing 1-star slams (to prove that the work invokes varied opinions, instead of the authors friends and family all repeating what he told them to say).

If you put your work out there you must expect the trolls to respond.

The Trolls respond because this site's scoring system allows them to respond and encourages them to act out. I suggested in another thread that SOL & it's authors might be better served by a simple 'Like' button. No 'Dislike' or other scoring choice - readers either indicate they liked the story or they can ignore it and move on. A quick look at the total number of likes should tell a reader what he needs to know. I think the current scoring system over-complicates things. It confuses authors and readers.
Few really understand how it works. The comments section can still be enabled or disabled as the author wishes. Authors enabling comments should expect the occasional Troll.

expanded voting (check boxes from one through five) that might include plot, grammar, dialogue, POV, titillation, or whatever else the authors agree is desired.

Had that for a while, didn't work out, so it got dropped for a simplified voting system.

One other suggestion is that the story must be complete before it can reviewed.

I'll second that idea.

I thought authors were able to turn scoring for their stories on or off pretty much at will?

yes they can, but the idea was about not allowing a story to be reviewed until after it's completed. That's a very different proposition.

@OldNYer

One other suggestion is that the story must be complete before it can reviewed.

@Ernest

I'll second that idea.

Only, that relegates the serial novel (50+ chapters and still unfolding) to the nether regions of SOL, while unfairly rewarding short stories.

Many unfinished stories can be excellent, and shouldn't be ignored simply because the author hasn't yet finished putting in the last word.

Only, that relegates the serial novel (50+ chapters and still unfolding) to the nether regions of SOL, while unfairly rewarding short stories.

I disagree. It doesn't relegate anything to the nether regions. What it does mean is the story has to be finished before a review is done. Personally, I can't see how you can do a valid review of a story before it's completed. Simply because the author may go off the rails at a point after the review is written.

I've over 100 published works that cover everything from short stories to sagas of over 270,000 words. The majority of them are novels of over 40,000 words each, 5 are over 100,000 words, and 5 are between 70,000 and 100,000 words.

I don't post a story until it's completed. Thus I don't mind when someone wants to review it. Even when the reviewer has said something I totally disagree with, mainly because they missed something in the story, I let it stand because it's their opinion of the story - something I feel they're entitled to have without me interfering with it.

There are many stories at SoL that don't have reviews. So putting in place a rule not to review a story until it's finished won't hurt them at all.

Edit to add: I just realised you may be thinking about the ability to read the story, which should be allowed, but a review of the story should be kept until after it's finished.

Edit to add a gloat factor - when the story the editors are working on right now is published that'll bring my published count up to over 3 million words.

It doesn't relegate anything to the nether regions. What it does mean is the story has to be finished before a review is done. Personally, I can't see how you can do a valid review of a story before it's completed. Simply because the author may go off the rails at a point after the review is written.

Sorry, I was thinking "voting" for unfinished stories. Since few stories ever get reviewed, and even fewer readers ever read reviews before checking out stories, I doubt limiting reviews would have ANY impact.

Reviews can regenerate interest in earlier, overlooked stories, but they rarely draw initial readers to a story.

I doubt limiting reviews would have ANY impact.

I can think of a few situation, but the most obvious is a review of the first half of a story that's good until the author gets fed up and throws it into the rubbish bin by going complete crazy in the second half. Which has happened a few times.

Another is where the story is good right up to a major scene where a significant squick factor is involved and not coded for until that chapter is posted. A review before then would be talking about a totally different story to what it's like after the unexpected squick factor comes in.

On that issue, I think major squick factors have

I can think of a few situation, but the most obvious is a review of the first half of a story that's good until the author gets fed up and throws it into the rubbish bin by going complete crazy in the second half. Which has happened a few times.

I also doubt many reviewers would review an incomplete story. After all, they'd almost be required to re-review it periodically after the first review. For those reviewers who refuse to review the same author twice, that's an unreasonable request.

I also doubt many reviewers would review an incomplete story. After all, they'd almost be required to re-review it periodically after the first review.

True, but here's some Yellow Line and Current Posting stories with reviews

Dman 3
Stone Inc.
Doc - has 2
Twice Lucky 3
Conductor
Jokes and Giggles
Mayhem in a Pill
Runaway Train
BJ Jones the Story of my Life
The Future of Miss Powers
Arlene and Jeff
Convergence
Flight of the Code Monkey
Hard Times
The Farmer's Daughter

With a review lodged before it was finished posting - just a few authors - not a comprehensive list. Ignoring those with a review posted on the same day or the day before the last chapter - could be a date stamp issue.
Defenceman
Tom's Adventures
Audition Notice
Hey Mon, I'm Home
faceoff, Book 2
Indian Fighters - White Death
A Well Lived Life Book 2 Stephie

I found all those in about ten minutes of a down and dirty quick search. Took longer to type them up than to find them.

Only premium members can send email to authors and only from their logged in account.

I'm strongly against this idea, I get a heck of a lot of emails from people on fixed low incomes who can't afford a membership, but see the stories as the high point of their day. Heck, one now does editing for me to get a sneak preview at the next story.

I agree with Ernest here. I am one of the users on a very low income from Social Security. Why should we be penalized because we have to count pennies to survive.

Some of my best (most productive feedback) is from pensioners. (Thanks, all!)

One possible motivation is to indicate to the author how he is doing.

For many authors they'd never know, because they don't track the votes that close, or even track them at all.

It did not make me change my score.

Nobody could blame you if you changed your score. It represents how much you enjoyed your story. Distress isn't my idea of enjoyability.

AJ

"This is my ten for May. Its not finished yet, hopefully its less than half done. I try to wake up early on Fridays so I can read the next chapter ASAP. Normally I only review complete stories but this one is so good I don't want anyone who checks out reviews to miss it."

Excellent. You do a wonderful job of explaining that it's not completed, and isn't likely to be any time soon, but aim to attract interest to the ongoing story. Since these make up such a large part of SOL, they deserve the recognition, as many of these 'ongoing serial' authors never write anything else (or rather, never quite finish off their first work).

The flaming is usually done by those without one iota of talent or a creative bone in their bodies. I have enjoyed JRyter's stories as I have many others.

As many have mentioned, these folks are writing stories for OUR enjoyment and to perhaps fulfill an itch they might have to express themselves. Since this IS a sex site, I will say that the trolls can go fuck themselves.

In general, most of these 1-bombers have a very specific objection: usually moral or political. However, the largest criticism most authors encounter isn't from trolls, rather it's from other overly pedantic authors (the type who worry about present vs. past tense, 1st, 3rd or limited point of views, or passive language).

Since authors spend SO MUCH time looking for minor nits, they're often unable to turn off the editing reflex, and will mark up whatever they read, whether desired or not. Most of us won't press send, but it's an ongoing concern.

"please sir can I have some more?"

Kenneth or Roger?

Kenneth or Roger?

Roger Dickens?

@richard Shagrin

How about the requests for making stories longer? I don't often say anything about it, but I think it, when a good story ends.

It's hard to add chapters to an existing story without screwing it up, but I especially like when you end the story with the death of the main character, and readers STILL write and request a sequel!

In my recent posting, Singularity, the deceased is still available, just transformed into an alien species only 10-light-years away, but still, it's hard to write an entire novel based on occasional messages send across a distance that far.

Still, it's a vote of confidence when readers want more. Would you rather have those requests, or one's that say "Could you remove, say, ten or twelve chapters?" :)

@REP

I frequently find myself pointing out typos on my menu to my waitress.

Yeah, as if she gives a damn!

Roger Dickens?

He wanted More, so i asked if he wanted Kenneth More or Roger More - both good UK actors in many films and shows.

What, you don't know how to have a new set of characters pick up where the old ones left off?

Did the original MC have kids? Or was the MC a Darwin award candidate?

Technically, although the main character dies at the end, he's still around (in another life form, but only accessible 10 light years away). The issue isn't that I couldn't continue the story, but that it would be difficult to write an entire book on the subject. Mostly what the readers were requesting were more chapters explaining what happened to those who followed in his footsteps (i.e. who followed him on the following NASA missions who may follow him).

While interesting, I didn't think I could build an entire book on that limited issue. :(

Yeah, as if she gives a damn

Yeah, I know but I can't help myself. Its an overwhelming impulse to get the typo corrected. :)

they're often unable to turn off the editing reflex

Isn't that the truth. I frequently find myself pointing out typos on my menu to my waitress.

People usually by a larger quantity to get the price break. At one of the grocery stores I go to, a 1-lb block of medium cheddar was $2.85. A 2-lb block was $5.99 ($3.00 a lb).

I suspect the concept came in long before psychologists etc. came to the fore.

It's known marketing ploy that's over a century old. People associate $4.99 with $4.00 more readily than the do $5.00 because the first number is a 4, not a 5. When you add in the modern marketing ploy of everything should end in $x.x9 then what should be $2.50 becomes $2.49, regardless of what else is in it.

BTW The business of using odd values has nothing to do with the change aspect because it was a common practice when only the shop owner worked the till - that's how old it is.

It's exactly the same reasoning behind $4.99 instead of $5.00, but when it started with gas, gas cost less then $0.25 and states were adding gas taxes in tenths of a cent. The gas stations then had the choice between raising prices a whole cent when that would be a significant % increase or eating the taxes.

It's worse when the fuel is priced by the litre in tenths of a cent at 4.5 litres to the gallon.

It's worse when the fuel is

I don't see why it would be worse. It is exactly the same thing with the only difference being the unit of measure and price per unit.

It is exactly the same thing with the only difference being the unit of measure and price per unit.

because the unit is less than a quarter, the part cent fraction is four times as bad. It becomes close to a half a cent per gallon worse

because the unit is less than a quarter, the part cent fraction is four times as bad. It becomes close to a half a cent per gallon worse

Poor logic EB. What you are defining is perception of the pricing impact. For example, if we here in the US were to change our pricing to cost per quart and the current price was $4.00 and 8/10ths the new unit price would be $1.00 and 2/10ths.

So why does the 2/10ths make the price per quart any worse than the price per gallon?

So why does the 2/10ths make the price per quart any worse than the price per gallon?

Quite simple, whatever the price is per gallon when split into the lower quantity is going to end up with the lower quantity price being rounded up at the last digit, which will mean a higher total price. I saw it happen here when we went from price per gallon to price per litre. When the change happened the last place digits for the litre price all got rounded up such that if you bought a gallon it cost more than than the gallon price was half an hour earlier before they made the change. The smaller the unit size the more fractions they can have in the final equation.

In the US, because gas is priced down to 9/10ths of a cent, standard practice is that only the final total is rounded up.

In general, the practice is the same here, however, when they repriced after changing to litres the price was showing to the tenth of a gallon then the tenth of a litre, and the per litre price had the hundredths of a cent rounded up to the next tenth of a cent, thus the price went up a little, because 4.5 times the per litre price came out as a few cents higher than the gallon price it started at.

Cut the slices thinner and round the price up means more money, always has, and always will.

Cut the slices thinner and round the price up means more money, always has, and always will.

It's the total price that gets rounded, not the unit price here in the US. If the unit price being charge is rounded up and the fractional price is advertised, that is consumer fraud.

It's the total price that gets rounded, not the unit price here in the US.

both get rounded. The total price of the purchase gets rounded for the purchase, but when they calculate the per unit price it gets rounded to the nearest tenth of a cent (usually up) and that's what's set to be charged. If the calculations give the per unit price should be $1.29.51 it will be put in the system ad $1.29.6 so over charged 9 hundredths of a cent per unit. Not much on 10 gallons, but is a lot more on 45 litres.

Millions and millions of American drivers are psychologically "conditioned" to believe that $2.67[9/10] is actually $2.67.

That's not unique to the US. But that's the whole concept behind the .09 cents. It's one reason I habitually round to the nearest 10 cents or dollar, depending on the pricing level.

Years ago the Aussie government did away with one and two cent coins, thus all purchases had to be rounded down or up, the amount of prices the suddenly ended in 9 cents greatly increased. One advantage I found was if you bought 3 such products you saved because they had to round down. However, if you paid by plastic they charged the exact amount.

Laz has a post about this in the Author section.

Changes to SOL