I think the most inconsistent thing on SOL is the "sex contents" the author chooses.
Boy, do different people have different definitions.
I think the most inconsistent thing on SOL is the "sex contents" the author chooses.
Boy, do different people have different definitions.
Alas, both the story coding and the descriptions issues are basically the newbie authors simply not caring about standards. The fact the average scoring for many is in the low 6's is no accident. They just don't give a damn what anyone likes. So now it's mostly old-school and who-gives-a-sh*t clans.
You has mistaken us (the readers) for a personage of discriminating tastes.
Mexican bandit voice: We don't need standards. I don't have to show you any stinkin standards...
Obi wan voice: Abuse The Written Force, Buck. Abuse the standards.
Yoda voice: Fucking useless, Buck is.
My vote would go to the contents of the story descriptions.
What do you mean?
I just finished a long story that was listed as "some sex." There was no sex. No sex described, anyway. Even the off-camera sex was minimal. The description was about body swapping. Even if the story would have had some sex, the description probably wouldn't be changed. Why define the sex in the description unless you're writing a sex story (vs a story that has sex)?
"No Sex" stories are not eligible for Clitoride nominations.
I wondered if you were "talking" about Once More With Feelings - long, body swapping, not that much sex - but that one is not described as "some sex". It's also a classic!
I wondered if you were "talking" about Once More With Feelings -
It is "Swap" by Ms. Friday. A really good story, by the way.
It's a 3-part story where the first part is a strong 10. Unfortunately, the other 2 parts weren't as good.
What do you mean?
Some of the story descriptions are irrelevant to the story contents (author bio, witty comments), some of them are direct quotes from the story but giving no clue as to the characters or plot, and some summarise the story so completely that there's no point in reading it. Those are some off the top of my head; I'm sure there are plenty more candidates. I even contributed to them because I'm rubbish at story descriptions.
Perhaps the author of your body-swapping story intended to include sex but took fright when the German exerted extra-territorial pressure over story contents and forgot to downgrade the sex contents afterwards. Have you queried the sex contents rating with the author?
AJ
but took fright when the German exerted extra-territorial pressure over story contents and forgot to downgrade the sex contents
Nope. The story was completed in 2011.
I stopped messaging authors for things like sex content. I never got a response for those.
So your comment that I didn't understand had to do with the inconsistency of story descriptions. That you think they're the most inconsistent thing on SOL.
So your comment that I didn't understand had to do with the inconsistency of story descriptions. That you think they're the most inconsistent thing on SOL.
That was my first thought. If I were to reconsider, there are other possibilities. Like the AI tag, which some authors refuse to use/admit.
AJ
Since I mostly tend to read stories over 100kb.
Much sex is graphic sex in every chapter.
Some sex is every few chapters.
Min. sex is not very graphic sex only a few times.
No sex are some of the best out there.
Some sex is every few chapters.
Min. sex is not very graphic sex only a few times.
Interesting. One of my stories is currently set to Min sex. But my chapters are longer than my usual length so there ends up being sex every few chapters and it is fairly graphic, Tab A into Slot B etc.
I'm never quite sure about those in-between levels.
AJ
I think the most inconsistent thing is "sex contents" relative to "Tags" I've seen Minimal Sex followed by four lines of tags. I've also seen Much Sex followed by only one tag: Heterosexual.
I think the most inconsistent thing is "sex contents" relative to "Tags"
Hmm. I guess it boils down to how the author defines sex in the story. The story that triggered this thread was defined as "some sex" and included the "masturbation" tag. But there was no masturbation in the story. There were references to characters who had masturbated, but none did it on camera. So this author considered referencing the masturbation to be sex in the story.
Not just authors; also readers.
I've mentioned this before, but will mention it again: fairly early (~20 or so chapters) into publishing my first story (Variation on a Theme, Book 1) I had messages from readers saying both "'Some sex?!' There's no sex at all!" and "'Some sex?!' It's all sex! There's nothing but sex!"
At that point in publishing, there was no actual sex, per se. A bit of 'showing off' and a certain amount of fondling, but no 'actual sex'.
The first commenter was right. There was, by that definition, no sex.
The second commenter was also right. Much of the story was focused on relationships, dating, and the pursuit of hopefully-soon-to-come sex. Not all of it, to be fair, but that was the focus.
They approached it from such different perspectives, there was nothing to do but reply and assure the first commenter that there would indeed be sex, and the codes applied to the book, not the already-published chapters, while assuring the second commenter that a lot more was going to happen than simply trying to get into each other's pants.
It's inconsistent all the way down.