Forum: Author Hangout

I don't pay attention to the calculated score. It's a contrived number to me. It's the raw score I'm interested in. I want to know when someone gave me a 10 or a 7 or a 3. So be careful that you don't cause another problem by trying to fix a problem.

From now on, you'll have to do that yourself, comparing the earlier score with the final score after you post each chapter, and comparing changing to the final score. It won't tell you as much, but you should notice whether people approve or disapprove of the most recent chapter.

What it won't tell you, if whether you pissed off a subset of your readers (like one sex, minorities or political parties), which will often affect how your stories are processed. That information will be sorely missed, as it's important for authors to know their weaknesses, as well as their strengths.

From now on, you'll have to do that yourself, comparing the earlier score with the final score after you post each chapter,

I'll never do that. Like Ernest, I rarely look at scores. But I sometimes do look at the raw scores in the histogram to see how a particular story was received. And when I do look at the stats page, I sort it by the "VA Scor" because that's the only score that has meaning to me. It's what the reader gave me, not the system.

Do other authors agree with that?

No, I'm quite happy to receive anonymous feedback and I find it can lead to greater honesty.

I like to see the raw scores too. A couple of my stories have a large number of 1s and I understand why: the stories are not enjoyable to many readers. (Unfortunately that seems to have resulted in a small fan club who 1-bomb my other stories, but that's actually rather amusing.)

As I've said elsewhere, I believe the excessive numbers of 10s given by fanbois present a greater issue for story comparisons than the 1-bombers.

AJ

I do believe in never pointing out any mistakes unless I can also point to an equal number of good things about a story.

If a story is well-written and the author shows signs of ambition, I'll sometimes send a brief e-mail pointing out typos. Usually I get a 'thank you'. I think that's of more use to an ambitious author than telling them what they did well.

I don't think either approach is necessarily better. I'm sure the authors appreciate the encouragement you give them.

AJ

If a story is well-written and the author shows signs of ambition, I'll sometimes send a brief e-mail pointing out typos. Usually I get a 'thank you'. I think that's of more use to an ambitious author than telling them what they did well.

Typically I'll do both. I'll start the email by telling them what I admire (as they may not be sure how effective it is, then I'll counter it by suggesting an item or two they might want to address. By offering the first, I'm encouraging them to take the later points more seriously. Doing nothing but criticizing makes it less likely authors will heed your advice.

Even with that approach, if they respond, I temper my criticism, offering only an item or two at a time until we (the author and I) establish an understanding of how much advice they desire.

Heck a 10 is saying something is so perfect it can not be improved in any way.

In that case there would never be a 10. A 10 is simply "Most Amazing Story" not "Perfect Story."

btw, Lazeez, "Most" is not needed. A 10 is an amazing story. Technically, there is only one most amazing story on the site.

Technically, there is only one most amazing story on the site.

That's one per reader, because they all have different views and values.

Heck a 10 is saying something is so perfect it can not be improved in any way. In my life I have never seen anything get to that point. There is always room for improvement.

Only because you're equating an Olympic rating system to literary events. Instead, readers are encouraged to vote how "how much [they] enjoyed the story". Thus if an author addresses a topic commonly avoided by most authors, or tackles an original topic, many readers will award a 10, regardless of minor flaws (like typos or European spellings). They're rewarding the effort, rather than the formal training they received as teenagers. Otherwise, the only authors we'd have on SOL would be retired journalists, and we'd all suffer then. Can you imagine the story's written by old CNN & FOX News reporters? They may be "Fair and Balanced", but they aren't likely to be enjoyable. (P.S. That criticism is not political, it's merely an observation that creative literature is a far cry from dry academic works.)

No one wants political screeds, but neither do we want dry details without emotional impact.

Unfortunately that seems to have resulted in a small fan club who 1-bomb my other stories, but that's actually rather amusing.

I've always taken the same approach. The actions of the few protestors, registering protests no one else heeds, are more amusing than threatening. I'm always willing to listen to any argument anyone wants to make. What I object to, is when they make unreasonable demands, seeking to dictate the types of story I write, rather than merely sticking to suggestions. Unfortunately (for them), that's when I double-down. If they press the issue, I simply include additional story elements just to piss 'em off, rather than conceding to their demands.

If they have a specific agenda, they'd do better encouraging authors who agree with them, rather than belittling those who don't. Basically, no one likes a bully, and any author who quits the site because of a few stray bullies does nothing but encourage them to continue their abuse, rather than restrict their abusive behavior. :(

Trouble is the assholes (bullies/destroyers) actually hurt everyone. Not just the writers. They have made Laz's work load even larger trying to fix the damage they cause. Pity we can't get rid of those users but I guess its the burden we all must bare in order to have the type of site with so many potential genres of stories available for as many tastes in literature as possible.

Again, though trolls are an issue across a wide variety of sites, I'm not sure how much of an issue it is here, where users have to log-in using a specific address. True, a few cast a bad pall on the site (especially those who trash new, minority or alternative voices), but if the problem isn't extensive (i.e. no more than 5% of any authors' votes), then it's hardly worth the effort trying to eliminate them.

If we ever need to restrict trolls on the site, then we're ahead of most sites, which allow anonymous log-ins (i.e. we can eventually ban anyone causing specific problems). However, until it becomes an issues, I'd urge caution than assuming the worst.

With freedom comes criticism, which is worthwhile. If you're willing to try something new, you've got to expect pushback. Change is never easy. If you can't stand the heat in the kitchen, then write basic hetero stroke stories. Otherwise, quit whining and get back to writing better stories! ;D

I would like to take this opportunity to add my thanks for making this site happen

Second that.

bb

What was considered abusive and a final straw by one author was judged reasonable comment by me nonetheless, let alone other readers.

A truer set of words has never been typed on a forum.

I had one reader (also an author with a reasonable output) send me some very abusive emails about one aspect of my style of writing, but get very upset when I suggested they fix a spelling mistake in one of their stories. It was clear they have a much lower tolerance mark than I do. While I responded calmly about my style they blew up about an obvious spelling error. I've had other readers email me about not liking the same aspect of my writing, but the others are never as abusive as that one person.

the usual typo edit

I'd probably give the author's an adjustable threshold that they could set personally.

That's what Lazeez has already said he'll do. The system would, I gather, work at two levels.

Level 1: - I, the author, get an abusive email, I can choose to just ignore it or block the writer of the email. I'd probably try to reason with the person, but after a certain number of abusive emails from the one person I can choose to block all emails from that person sent through SoL via the process Lazeez is going to put in place.

Level 2: - 20 different authors block emails from Mr Brainless Bully, an alert is triggered within the SoL system. Lazeez reviews the situation, and then acts, with the likely result being no email sent through SoL by Mr Brainless Bully ever reaches an author due to it being dumped by SoL.

Level 1: - I, the author, get an abusive email, I can choose to just ignore it or block the writer of the email. I'd probably try to reason with the person, but after a certain number of abusive emails from the one person I can choose to block all emails from that person sent through SoL via the process Lazeez is going to put in place.

Again, I've never encountered that on SOL. Instead, someone will write, suggesting I change something about my stories. I'll seriously consider it, no matter what the suggestion is, and then respond with what changes I'll make, or why I'm unable to modify the story (i.e. it affects the rest of the story). I won't make blanket changes, but I'm willing to listen to reasoned complaints, and my readers respect that by offering sensible suggestions.

The only issue is, in a few cases, that's NOT enough for the reader, at which point they'll make some idle threats (I'll NEVER read another of your stories again!), and then will then skulk off, only to begin a 1-bombing campaign, bringing in a couple friends.

In NO case have they EVER continued to harass me, and if few cases have they EVER quit reading my stories. Instead, they vote with their fingers, registering their disapproval of how I approach my stories: which is a valid opinion.

I expect that the problem with 'abusive' emails will be mostly solved with the blocking of anonymous feedback.
I don't allow anonymous feedback, and I cannot recall ever having abusive mails. There was one instance where a reader sent me an angry email because I had not yet implemented a correction he had suggested. There were a number of instances where readers let me know that they hated the direction of the story plot. Never something personally insulting though.

I expect that the problem with 'abusive' emails will be mostly solved with the blocking of anonymous feedback.

I suspect you're right. however, I never blocked anonymous emails, and I've been lucky in not getting any anonymous abusive emails, just anonymous emails with questions and thank yous. The only abusive emails I've received have all been from people with identified email addresses, thus I send them a reasoned reply.

I've been lucky in not getting any anonymous abusive emails

I've had some that people might consider abusive. I find them a mixture of funny and sad. But that's the way I am.

AJ

Thank you for caring.

I agree with your turning Anonymous feedback off, and personally, I hope you never turn it back on. Readers should be held accountable for what they say to authors. Hiding behind Anonymous is nothing more than avoiding responsibility for what you say.

I noticed something the other day that I found odd. I understand why the download count of the first chapter is inflated. From that point on one would expect the download count to decrease with each succeeding chapter as readers drop out. I extracted the following chapter download count from my Opening Earth story:

4 – 19357
5 – 16751
6 – 18105
7 – 15802
8 – 16003
9 – 14732
10 – 14282
11 – 12630
12 – 14195
13 – 12385

Do you have any idea why the download count of Chapters 6, 8, and 12 are higher than that of the preceding chapters? Especially the significant difference for Chapters 6 and 12.

Thanks again.

Do you have any idea why the download count of Chapters 6, 8, and 12 are higher than that of the preceding chapters? Especially the significant difference for Chapters 6 and 12.

Chances are, readers are choosing to read on specific days, reading multiple chapters at a time rather than a single chapter at a time. Thus, you'll get larger numbers for the one chapter they start with, and lower numbers for any additional chapters they finish at the same time.

I don't know your current posting schedule, but you may want to review it. You're either rushing chapters, not giving readers enough time to appreciate each chapter, or the stories aren't compelling enough (i.e. not enough cliffhangers). Spacing them out with longer single chapters might produce more consistent numbers, but that's just a guess.

(i.e. not enough cliffhangers).

The second cliffhanger in a story results in me leaving the story at that point. I may come back after it's finished, but I may not. If you need to use a lot of cliffhangers to keep people interested in the story, then something is very wrong and weak in the story or your writing, in my opinion.

typo edit.

The second cliffhanger in a story results in me leaving the story at that point. I may come back after it's finished, but I may not. If you need to use a lot of cliffhangers to keep people interested in the story, then something is very wrong and weak in the story or your writing, in my opninion.

I didn't mean the traditional cliffhanger of a beautiful girl tied to the railroad track as the train approaches, but rather a build up to a conflict, so readers are more eager to dive immediately into the sequel, rather than putting off reading the next chapter.

I list ingredients, not how to apply the seasonings. :)

Otherwise, Ernest's review of download count variables is spot-on.

I don't know your current posting schedule

One chapter per week.

Some chapters are long, so the reader may be reloading it multiple times to finish the chapter. Plus going back to check something, or some other reason.

Now that I think about it, I almost always reload the last chapter I read and read the last part to refresh my memory of what has happened before going to the next chapter.

Some chapters are long, so the reader may be reloading it multiple times to finish the chapter. Plus going back to check something, or some other reason.

In that case, it's probably rereading of previous chapters (as you surmised), though it's more likely to check details, rather than to review the story (i.e. they're going back to refresh their memories of specific events, rather than merely backing up to the previous chapter, which would be harder to notice).

Do you have any idea why the download count of Chapters 6, 8, and 12 are higher than that of the preceding chapters? Especially the significant difference for Chapters 6 and 12.

Many things affect the chapter download count. The more obvious ones are the chapter size, how long since the last chapter was posted, the time of the posting relative to the readers reading times, and what devices the readers are using. Two basic situations that occur with me.

Long chapter is split into two pages. I read one page on the desktop, then get in the bath and read the second page on the tablet.

I read late into the night and finish a chapter, I load the next chapter, feel too tired, close the browser, and go to bed. The next day I open the browser, it reloads the chapter, and I read it.

Another I know of from a reader. They start the chapter on their computer, leave it, get on the bus to work, then switch to the train. While waiting at the station they access wi-fi with the tablet and get the chapter to finish reading it on the way to work.

Time between chapters often has people going back to read part of the previous chapter when the new one comes out, if it's been a longer than usual interval.

Just some of the things that happen.

As an author and a reader I'd rather there be no further changes to the scoring system, it's taken to long to get used to and understand the current one.

After 18 years of running SOL (and personally writing every single line of its underlying ~450,000 lines of code), I would hope that authors would trust that I know what I'm doing to a certain extent.

We do trust you, though I dare say, we're all nervous what might happen if you keel over from a heart attack due to the stresses involved in managing the site. Having a couple other developers, familiar with the site, provides a future succession, in case you're ever unable to continue maintaining the site.

I can understand removing a display of raw scores entirely

Those are the only scores important to me. Take them away and I have nothing.

I assume it already exists there, but if not you should change the terms of use for the site so readers have agreed you may do that without telling them.

Though discussing it online is warning everyone what's likely to occur. The other object not being discussed, can you imagine what the original poster is feeling, watching all this unfold? Either he's cackling with glee in his little cave, or more likely he's wondering what the hell he did to set off this firestorm.

As abusive as some people can be, especially when something sets them off, I suggest we dial it back and stop calling people names. Lazeez has already declared he didn't consider the initial letter than offensive, so I suggest we give the guy--whoever he is--a break.

Hopefully he's learned his lesson and will be walking on tenterhooks for some time. It's time for everyone to play nice and deescalate the situation. If he doesn't relent, and continues over-the-top behaviors, then Lazeez already knows what to do.

I think now is the time to dial the rhetoric down.

My modest efforts tend to score in the low 7's, so when some kind reader votes a story 'very good' they actually, and inadvertently I suspect, vote it down, making me sad instead of glad.

Why do you think that?

Well I make an effort to be pleased and grateful for the extra vote, but at the same time "the score" for the story has gone down, a fraction, because the reader liked it.

So it'a a bit counter-intuitive in that way, even though obviously it is still a valid average. And sometimes, joy of joys, it gets voted up :)

Well I make an effort to be pleased and grateful for the extra vote, but at the same time "the score" for the story has gone down, a fraction, because the reader liked it.

So it'a a bit counter-intuitive in that way, even though obviously it is still a valid average. And sometimes, joy of joys, it gets voted up :)

As many have observed over the years, you can't get too wrapped up in the scores. If you focus on the numbers, you'll always be disappointed, no matter how good they are.

I know what you mean, but I am a total addict! And as I say I do find the scores for my stories respond to improvements, so they are useful as Lazeez intends.

I'm not a natural talent and so storytelling is something I have to work at, and the scores are feedback, however imperfect as we know. Not that I would write a story for a score, but they do help me find where, for example, a story wanders off and loses momentum or (my main weakness) credibility.

I know what you mean, but I am a total addict! And as I say I do find the scores for my stories respond to improvements, so they are useful as Lazeez intends.

I'm not a natural talent and so storytelling is something I have to work at, and the scores are feedback, however imperfect as we know. Not that I would write a story for a score, but they do help me find where, for example, a story wanders off and loses momentum or (my main weakness) credibility.

Trust me, we're all learning how to tell stories, and I understand your position. I feel the same way, but rather than focusing on the score itself, I instead look at the change in score from chapter to chapter. That will alert you to unexpected negative (or positive) reactions, though you also have to qualify it because it's also affected by what other stories are posting at the same time (i.e. it's hardly a clear-cut evaluation of what readers feel about your work).

I instead look at the change in score from chapter to chapter.

The period while I'm posting a story is relatively short I suppose, also I'm drifting towards finishing a story before I post any of it, to try and make it a bit more coherent. Anyway in that phase I seem to get a mix: of low scores from readers who inhabit the front page and vote low on everything that doesn't suit them, and my regular readers who vote high because they share my dubious proclivities. I am just guessing, but it seems very noisy.

Once that dust has settled I have a sample of 15 stories with a range of votes, and so I can look at them and wonder why that one is only a 7.0, kind of thing. So I read it again with that in mind and fix it up, and more often than not the score creeps up thereafter.

the extra vote, but at the same time "the score" for the story has gone down, a fraction, because the reader liked it.

Oh, that's what you mean.

Every time a new vote is cast, SOL recalculates the story's score. There's a factor in the score calculation algorithm that's a variable, meaning it's not the same each time your story's score is calculated. It's related to the other stories' scores given during some time period.

So if your story gets a higher vote than your score, BUT other stories' scores are higher during that period than when your story was calculated last, your score can actually go down. I once received a 10 that caused my story's score to go down.

Every time a new vote is cast, SOL recalculates the story's score

Yes okay I understand. My point is that the kind reader is giving me a positive vote, but the system means that the score can get worse. This is because the number of votes is a separate figure from the rating. Anyway I meant that as an aside really.

On the 1-votes that we all hate, the problem is that they exist, it seems to me. A story that actually deserved a 1- or 2-vote wouldn't get past the moderation, I assume. So rather than eliminated them later, why not just not register them in the first place? They are troll votes.

The second problem of troll comments can be reduced by using the troll votes to identify trolls and ban them.

Inline comments would help too, and encourage discussion.

Just my thoughts anyway. I appreciate it's a tricky area. Publishing one's writing IS exposing, and a lot of us aren't that experienced or that great at it, and don't have the confidence to brush things off even knowing we ought to.

A story that actually deserved a 1- or 2-vote wouldn't get past the moderation,

Moderators only check for violations of the posting rules, not the story quality or content within the rules.

I've only given one vote of 1 in all the years here, and the author earned it because in about chapter 20 they included a significant squick item they never included in the codes or any warnings and it had no lead up. The result was an instantaneous shift from I like the story to I hate this crap - the 1 votes level is very good for handling that as it shows how much the story didn't appeal to me now.

the 1 votes level is very good for handling that as it shows how much the story didn't appeal to me now

Fair enough but under the current system your vote would become a 4 or 5 or whatever the 5.1% level is. Also the writer wouldn't know why, unless you messaged them too. And if Lazeez goes ahead and hides raw votes they'd have even less idea.

So for that circumstance, which could be seriously unwanted as you say, I'd suggest a flag report.

I'm only guessing about whether a genuine 1-quality story would make it onto the site. I've never seen one, and the posting rules say stories can be rejected for any reason. You'll know better than me of course, but my instinct is that 1 and 2 are pretty much redundant for readers with any respect.

I'm only guessing about whether a genuine 1-quality story would make it onto the site.

Well, the score is supposed to be about appeal, not just how well it is or isn't written. Setting aside how much the quality of the writing adds to or removes from the appeal, people usually only read stories they think will appeal to them. However, there are times when the author misleads people as to what is or isn't in the story, and thus people end up reading a story that doesn't appeal to them, and they vote it down because of the unappealing story they were tricked into reading.

I see the authors who add codes as they go as tricking the reader, because the decision to read is based on the information when you start the story, and if the author doesn't reveal the full codes at the start they give the impression they're trying to trick the readers.

Well, the score is supposed to be about appeal, not just how well it is or isn't written.
I see the authors who add codes as they go as tricking the reader,

The labels for the scores are a bit each way on the appeal/quality front aren't they. They go
"Call this a story" (Quality)
"Hated it" (Appeal)
"Pretty bad" (Quality)
then good/bad up to "Amazing" which is Appeal again.

But by 'quality' I mean the storytelling as much as the prose. I'll navigate tricky prose if the story itself is appealing.

I get you on the codes, but it has to be quite severe to merit a 1 or 2 doncha think? I find sometimes a code would be counterproductive, for example if the tension in the story depends on NOT knowing in advance that Daddy finally gets seduced [tho having coded everybody else in the family:) ] I guess you're thinking snuff or something, in which case I 100% agree, but that needs a flag I'd say.

But by 'quality' I mean the storytelling as much as the prose. I'll navigate tricky prose if the story itself is appealing.

You sort of contradicted yourself.

Or do you mean a story that would be rated (in your scale) a 1 or 3 because of quality would all of a sudden move up because of appeal?

You sort of contradicted yourself.

Lol yes I did. I meant the quality of the storytelling, separately from the quality of the prose. So yes I wouldn't vote a 2 if the story was fair, more or less whatever state the grammar was in.

So my view is that pretty much the only effect of registering those 1 & 2 votes is upsetting us delicate flowers the writers, and feeding trolls, so why not let them be merely ghost votes and troll-trackers?

That would be better than hiding them IMO, when we won't know if a story has dropped because of a genuine reader or someone we can safely ignore.

I get you on the codes, but it has to be quite severe to merit a 1 or 2 doncha think?

I figure extreme torture and BDSM in the middle of a story without any of those codes, prior warning, or indications of any sort to be a very severe and justifies a 1. If he'd coded for it at the start I've of not bothered with it at all. I know some people are claim it's OK to code as you go, but when you start reading a story and you use bookmarks or your the SoL Library features to go to the new update you don't get to see the page with the codes again, thus there is no warning at all.

typo edit

The active serials page would send you to the index page for a multi-chapter story,

Except most people either book mark the page or put the author in their favourites, in which case the link by pass the display with the blurb and codes while taking you to the story's current chapter in a single click from either page. So why waste time and download (which I pay for every MB) by going through another page to check something that should need to be checked again?

typo edit

I figure extreme torture and BDSM in the middle of a story without any of those codes, prior warning, or indications of any sort to be a very severe and justifies a 1.

Ah, yes I agree that's severe, totally. I don't see a vote as the solution, is all I'm saying. A 1-vote disappears, by design. Or mutates into a 4 or 5, more accurately. A flag to get the story tagged appropriately would be better.

So my original thought remains: are there any valid 1- or 2- scores, for stories that get published?

I find sometimes a code would be counterproductive

I agree 100%. I love stories with twists. I guess that's because I'm a short story writer at heart.

I have a story that makes the reader believe the guy picks up a girl hitchhiker. She seduces him and it's not until they stop to fuck in a cornfield and she wants it in the ass that he finds out she's a guy when he goes to finger her. A MM code would totally ruin the surprise. That's why it's not on SOL.

I honestly don't understand some SOL readers. If I did my job right, they would be aroused the whole story. Then at the end there might be an "ewwww," but also a "Wow! I didn't see that coming."

So for 99.9% of the story, in the reader's mind it's a MF story.

And that's exactly why they find unexpected plot twists like that so upsetting.

Which is what I don't understand. They got to enjoy the fantasy (and that's what fiction is) for almost the entire story. And then they get a surprise ending which I think the best short stories have.

Why do you think that?

Speaking for myself, I've seen a new vote, and the score go down on a story with relatively small numbers of votes, and looked at the raw scores, and seen that someone voted very good and reduced the score.
Honestly, this is one case where the raw scores help me have a positive reaction. Someone thinks my story is "very good." That's great!
Someone voted and the score went down... I wonder what they didn't like.
Human emotions are hard:-)
I'm not complaining about anything, just confirming I've experienced the same effect.

I may be a cranky old bastard, (ok, that's a given) but I am of the opinion that if I want to have my story scored and compared to other writers, I'll enter a fucking competition! I would prefer my scores reflect how my readers like my stories all on their own, not skewed by some hidden comparison to other stories.

We're forgetting a very important point: scores weren't designed for the authors benefit! They don't provide an objection standard of one's work. Instead, it's a service for the reader, and allow readers to vote on stories however they wish, while automatically comparing the works to every other story posted at the same time. Trying to attribute meaning to such scores inevitably leads to disappointment. A better measure of writing success is your author feedback, and that's best served by reminding readers that you take their letters seriously, and are open to suggestions and criticisms (though not blindly controlled by it).

We're forgetting a very important point: scores weren't designed for the authors benefit! They don't provide an objection standard of one's work. Instead, it's a service for the reader, and allow readers to vote on stories however they wish, while automatically comparing the works to every other story posted at the same time.

I really do not see how this benefits the readers either. I read a hell of a lot more than I write on SOL. As a reader, scores that tell me how other readers liked that particular story is the only thing that is important to me. How it compares to other stories is irrelevant. I've passed over plenty of high-scoring stories on SOL because the subject matter did not interest me and a lower scoring story was right up my alley. I would not score Jim Butcher's latest Dresden novel compared to Jacques Pepin's latest cookbook because they were released at the same time.

I really do not see how this benefits the readers either.

the Theory as used by many readers and applied at most sites, is you can be looking at two stories of the same genre with similar blurbs and by authors you don't know - how do you decide which to read? You look at the scores to see past readers have voted on as 7.5 and the other as 3.2, so you go with the higher score first. This assumes there are no other factors to sway your decision like known author, better blurb etc.

You can't have it both ways. (Ok, you can if it's marked "stroke".)

No, you can have it both ways if you code it "Bi".

If they "don't provide an objective standard" then how exactly are they of any real use to a reader in acurately choosing a story to read

There's plenty of past discussion and even SoL Blog posts on the scores. They were never intended to be anything except an indicator to readers about how appealing other readers found the story.

Now there is a mention of the scores being adjusted for a mean of 6 for a period. The thing to keep in mind is the length of the period involved. I'm not sure of the exact number, but each time there was a change in how the scoring was calculated that was set as a period, thus each period is years long. The current period is since a few years ago when the last significant change to the scoring system was made. The mean process was introduced to make scores on stories from ten years ago relevant to scores on stories from last year.

The key aspects of the scoring system is to remember it affects every author in the same way, and the scores stay relative to each other. So who gives a damn about them, I don't, although I've got to be one of the top ten to have study how it's worked over the years - as part of discussions on them.

Another point is the biggest thing to alter a score is the casting of a vote that eliminates the 'hang over values.' By that I mean the scores are calculated to two decimal places, but are truncated instead of being rounded. Add in the 5% cut from top and bottom, and a single vote can affect two important aspect of the voting. The truncation means 7.2201 shows as 7.22, so does 7.2299. Cut 5% of votes at each end means 10% aren't used in the calculation, thus 80 votes means 8 votes are cut with 4 from each end. But 99 votes still only has 4 votes off each end so 91 votes are used in the calculation, while the 100th vote means 5 votes are cut from each end and only 90 votes get used in the calculation. It's when these two factors change you see any real movement in the scores.

I must say, over time, I've become more inured to scores than I used to be.

The scores are meaningless to me. That's why I don't check them. Your examples reflect that (e.g., the same story on SOL and FS).

The raw scores tell me something, but even that is losing its worth with the changes. And the something it tells me isn't about the quality of the story.

I think you're wrong to adjust your writing based on scores. And you may even be coming up with invalid assumptions.

I think you're wrong to adjust your writing based on scores. And you may even be coming up with invalid assumptions.

I don't make changes based on scores. I mostly focus on what my feedback, and 'authorized reviews' tell me. However, I also use the change in scores to alert me to things I didn't anticipate about my stories. Often, there will be some minor issue which will really set readers off, and it makes sense to identify those as soon as possible, so you can adapt to them. Aside to my infamous Fox News reference, there's also the case where a major characters ends up dragging the entire story down because they're seen as 'unsympathetic'. If you recognize and acknowledge those issues, you can often recover the story before it finishes.

What are the hypothetical views about having dual scores:

I score the story, not a chapter. Now I don't read unfinished stories and don't post a chapter until I've completed the story so I may be different than the normal SOL reader/author.

I think it's unfair for the reader to score a chapter to influence what the next chapter will be like. Unless the author is writing by the seat of his pants, there's a reason for the chapter even if the reader doesn't see it yet.

I think it's unfair for the reader to score a chapter to influence what the next chapter will be like. Unless the author is writing by the seat of his pants, there's a reason for the chapter even if the reader doesn't see it yet.

The point of reviewing scores by chapter isn't because readers 'don't see the point' to a chapter, it's because that's often the ONLY way the author will know there's an unanticipated problem with a story. Readers will often react badly to changes in a character, so something the author sees as 'developing the character' may put the readers off. If that occurs, the reader should rewrite the entire story, but at least acknowledging the issue and addressing it is often enough to buy them enough time to win the readers back (by making the problematic character more sympathetic).

The key here, is to identify problem issues from minor chapter fluctuations. The answer to that, is either feedback, or if demanded, polling readers over what's impacting them (a problematic approach in itself). However, a better response is to turn to beta-readers.

To totally change the subject, as I have written before a chapter can deserve a 10 and the next chapter a 5 simply because of the way a story progresses.
What are the hypothetical views about having dual scores:
1 The story to date as a whole kicking in after say 8 chapters or at the end if the story is shorter
2 a score for the individual chapter which would not affect the story to date score.
That way an author can judge whether the story is becoming boring or badly written or perhaps that deliberately there was nothing of great interest in that particular chapter.

The problem with that proposal, is your arbitrary cut-off. What happens to 3 or 5 chapter stories? And if someone votes the entire story a 5 in chapter 7, based on the quality of writing, you're then simply throwing his one vote away, in favor of the people who can't make up their mind and vote frequently.

Also, what happens to the author if his story 'becomes boring' after chapter 8? He'd never know he's potentially losing readers.

Just as an aside, I've discovered that it's often those 'boring' chapters that really allow your character's to shine, and which truly flesh out stories as the characters reflect on life and their conditions. Don't be so terrified of 'becoming boring' that your story never becomes what it might otherwise.

There's a time for action, but it loses it's impact if every chapter is ALL Action. Likewise, a story loses capital if it's pace NEVER changes. Slow chapters are generally more reflective, and are necessary even though they'll reflect lower per-chapter votes. The key is to anticipate those votes, and to NOT overreact when you see them.

Is he going to vote at the end of chapter 7 and never vote again? Remember that this vote is on the entire story to date with all its ups and downs

My suggestion was, someone starts the story, thinks it's poorly executed, votes once and never returns. If you maintain two ones, one temporary and one permanent (but only entered at the end of the story), then that persons vote essentially gets erased. Thus, the only people who get ANY vote are those who slog through the entire story, and if the story ends up being abandoned, you're left with another open question as to which vote to 'keep'.

With the current system, you can vote either once or 532 times, with only the last vote counting (ever other vote was subsequently changed). Thus the last vote is always the final count. That sounds like the current system already incorporates what you're suggesting. Whereas adding separate votes adds a level of complexity no one needs and Lazeez who have trouble implementing.

What are the hypothetical views about having dual scores:

Too much hard work and too expensive to do - would need a lot of server space.

People couldn't deal with voting for Plot, Technical quality & Appeal to reader; I can't see them doing any better with votes per chapter & one for the overall story.

Some people did fine with the 3 separate votes, some just voted one score for all three. It was Lazeez who finally decided the 3-separate votes was a mistake. Likewise, I suspect there's only a small cadre of people who vote for each chapter, but many (several?) authors here pay attention to those votes, as they provide information we can't get from anywhere else. That's not a 'bug', it's a feature. ;-D

The upshot of it all is the scoring situation has been significantly simplified (for me, at least):

Don't bother voting at the end of any chapter in a serial story; maybe vote at the end of the story... or not. Simple.

The scoring system was never designed for per-chapter voting. It was designed so readers could change their scores. What started as readers taking advantage of a bug (when it was based on cookies which expired, allowing multiple votes), ended up as a common practice.

The voting box is at the end of the currently posted story

Yes, and that voting box allows the reader to change their overall vote for the story.

Then perhaps you can explain why there is a voting box at the end of each chapter? And if one votes that chapter, the next chapter will present another scoring box at the end of that chapter?

Readers have the option to vote at the end of the story (wherever that happens to be at the time), but it's hardly a 'suggestion' they vote each time they see the box. Readers, over time, decided to start voting each chapter--probably because they wanted to reward authors for 'exciting action', while voting down 'boring developmental stuff'. But that doesn't change that the 'vote per chapter' was something that developed on it's own, rather than being a system design feature.

I maintain an ongoing star rating for serials I'm following. Particularly good or particularly poor chapters can result in my rating being bumped up or down.

After a reader has voted for a story, perhaps the site should remind the reader of that score each time they pay the story another visit.

AJ

Or were you recommending a reminder on the title page?

I think that would be more likely to prompt a reader to change a score they were no longer happy with.

AJ