Forum: Author Hangout

The bar with the most votes has a number beside it giving that number. From that you can estimate how many votes you got of the other numbers by comparing them.

Keep in mind, in order to steal a 1-votes outsizes influence when your other scores are all in the 7 to 10 range, the top and bottom 5% are invisible and don't affect your overall score. That means, for each 1-vote that's erased, you'll potentially lose a full 10 vote. Thus you never see the total number of votes, and that's by design. However, it's a relatively recent change, so many of us know what frequently happened before, so we speak about 1-bombs as if we could still see what we no longer can.

Confusing I know, but ...

That means, for each 1-vote that's erased, you'll potentially lose a full 10 vote.

It also means for every 7-vote you get (assuming it's the lowest), you'll lose a 10-vote. I never considered that when I thought the dropping of the top and bottom 5% was a good idea. I was thinking 1s and 10s being dropped.

I believe it's a mistake to not show the author the scores that are dropped, but it's a result of people complaining. it's valuable information that we can no longer see.

you'll lose a 10-vote

He would lose 5% of the low and high ends.

In your example of 7 being the lowest vote and depending on the total number of votes and their distribution, 5% of the low end could be 7's and 8's and 5% of the high end could be 10's and 9's.

edited for clarity

He would lose 5% of the low and high ends.

Yeah, but I was always thinking 1s and 10s would drop off. Those are the ends. But when your low scores are 7s, you lose 10s along with the 7s. Those are high-end 10s lost by not-so-low 7s.

Assuming the story got 10's which is very likely if the lowest score is 7.

I believe it's a mistake to not show the author the scores that are dropped, but it's a result of people complaining. it's valuable information that we can no longer see.

As an ex-amateur statistician, I've always found meaning in the outlier points on a graph, rather than looking where 60% of the observable point sit. In my case, I'm more concerned with the two or three one votes, as they tell me more than the 60% who think my stories are wonderful. Instead, those few extraneous point help explain why certain people find your stories unreadable.

Though, truth be know, my 1-bombers weren't typical. Normally, someone sees a story topic they dislike, try to punish the author and never reads the story because they hate the subject matter so much. In my case, ALL of my one bombers were regular readers of each of my stories, as they'd respond to each chapter within one to two days of their posting. The only thing they objected to were a fairly minor political issue in the story, and they were trying to send me a message by 1-bombing every single one of my stories (of course, I completely ignored their message once I figured out what it was, but it was nice knowing where those votes came from).

In other cases, I've used those outliers to discover why a third of my readers despised a particular character, while a third loved her, while the rest didn't really worry about it so much. But knowing what was driving so many readers, I was able to acknowledge the issue, buying myself some time, and I was able to rectify the issue before the story concluded.

As an ex-amateur statistician, I've always found meaning in the outlier points on a graph

I agree. Unfortunately, a few complainers ruined it for the rest of us.

I agree. Unfortunately, a few complainers ruined it for the rest of us.

Going on the number of active authors bitching about 1 bombers way back then, it was a heck of a lot more than just a few. There was almost as many authors bitching about fanbois 10 bombing their favourite authors regardless of the quality of the story. So it made sense to make the change. At the time I had some very detailed stats available and worked out how they would affect the averages of my stories, and found it so negligible it was worth worrying about it. However, like all of the scoring system, you can please everyone. But the change did reduce the complaints about 1 bombs and fanbois, so it did what it was intended to do.

But the change did reduce the complaints about 1 bombs and fanbois, so it did what it was intended to do.

By simply hiding them from the authors. When you have to resort to such tactics, it's a pretty strong indication something much larger is wrong...just MHO,

Michael,

The system cuts the top and bottom 5% of votes and doesn't use them in calculating the score. By doing that it meant the fanbois and 1 bomber votes are eliminated from the score, which was the aim because that's what the people complaining were bitching about the most and the noisiest. It was all due to some people not lodging proper votes on stories and some authors bitching about that process, so Lazeez came up with a way that was a compromise to calm everyone down.

I didn't say it wasn't a solution to something, I simply said hiding data is a sign that something much larger is wrong (i.e. a topic which our esteemed webmaster will no longer discuss).

(i.e. a topic which our esteemed webmaster will no longer discuss).

For which I don't blame him because he got well and truly fed up with the bitching, as did many of us.

hiding data is a sign that something much larger is wrong

I think you are right. There is something much larger that is wrong, but it is not Lazeez's scoring system. Personally, I don't care for the scoring system but it is what it is and I live with it.

The larger problem is the readers. The rating system is supposed to be about the story, not the author, and not all stories deserve a 10. But we have readers that have posted comments to this Forum saying that they give all stories a 10 because the author put in a lot of time and effort into writing the story. Stop and think about that from a different perspective. If a car manufacturer put a lot of time and effort into designing a car and the result was an unsafe vehicle with a history of the occupants being severely injured or dying in accidents - would you buy it? I wouldn't.

Then we have the readers who always give their favorite authors a 10; even if the story doesn't deserve that high of a rating.

Lazeez's scoring system is an attempt at compensating for the ratings given to stories by the readers who follow these types of voting patterns.

As far as Lazeez not wanting to discuss the topic, I don't blame him. Not everyone is happy with the scoring systems he has put in place. No matter how he might modify the current system, there would be a group who would not be happy with the change. There is no scoring system that will satisfy everyone and he is tired of discussing the topic.

You can add to that the problem of readers not voting if they don't like a story.

To borrow from your example scenario, that's the equivalent of owners buying a car and hating it because it's always breaking down but not providing feedback to warn other potential customers.

AJ

90% percent of the readers don't vote. Do you think they all dislike the stories they read?

That's a hard assumption to validate. Most of my readers will reread my stories five or more times, so you can't base your assumptions by total reads vs. total readers who reply. (In general, your total download counts are meaningless nonsense anyway. They're only meaningful when comparing stories.)

Out of curiosity I took the number of votes on 3 of my stories and used the download count of the stories final chapter as the number of readers and then averaged the 3 percentages.

What I got was 15% of my readers voted. Not totally accurate but a good approximation and a larger sampling would produce a more accurate value.

What I got was 15% of my readers voted. Not totally accurate but a good approximation and a larger sampling would produce a more accurate value.

Now that's a more accurate figure, because it's based on the first posting of the final chapters (fewer 'read-ahead' false counts), and avoids the misleading story re-reads. Good job, REP. That's using you noggin'!

i don't understand what that means. How does it affect anything if I re-read a story?

It changes the 'ratio of feedback to total reads', since the total reads keep increasing, although the comments effectively halt once the entire story is done posting.

However, no matter whether the percentage of non-voters is 90%, 85%, or maybe even a mere 80%, it is the vast majority.

In my case, all of my counts over the years were based on the accumulated counts (I stopped remembering individual chapter counts after my first couple stories). But by my misguided calculations, I came to 97% non-participation. That show just how many times people reread our stories over time, as they rarely comment after their initial read.

How do you know that? I'm a reader, not an author, so you may have some actual evidence (as opposed to opinion) that shows you that. Care to share that with those of us who have fewer tools?

Two sources: readers consistently tell me so, and as I intimated earlier, the total count at completion/vs. feedback, compared to the total over time/vs. feedback. The last is hardly an exact measurement, but it at least tells you that the direct feedback isn't just a fluke.

It's not uncommon for someone to say 'I've already read xxx for the nth time, waiting for the newest work/sequel.

It simply reflects a story's appeal to the readers

There are many readers who rate stories on appeal. Unfortunately there are many who rate the story because of the author or some other reason other than story appeal and quality of the writing.

Unfortunately there are many who rate the story because of the author

I once took the time to give an author feedback. It wasn't nasty, but it pointed out some things he was doing wrong. The next day all my stories received a new 1 vote.

Vindictive people are everywhere. :(

I once took the time to give an author feedback. It wasn't nasty, but it pointed out some things he was doing wrong. The next day all my stories received a new 1 vote.

In that case, I wouldn't object, because it's apparent the reader doesn't want to hear the truth, either in story form, or in regards to their opinions. In which case, they'd HATE my stories, regardless of the story topic. 'D

I like listening to readers, as they have valuable information authors need to hear, but once they start dictating what I (or other authors) are allowed to write, I get my back up and double down, just to spite them.

Then we have the readers who always give their favorite authors a 10; even if the story doesn't deserve that high of a rating.

And again, SOL had a three point 10-point scoring system that readers couldn't process, but rather than making it an easier to grasp system, we simply reduced it to a single 10-point scoring system that readers still aren't qualified to judge. Voting a story up or down is preferable to forcing someone to judge between a 7 and an 8 on the basis of quality.

judge between a 7 and an 8 on the basis of quality

The rating is express using words not numbers. The words used evoke a gut feel that a reader can identify with based on the story's appeal. The reader doesn't have to know what a 7 and 8 stand for.

By doing that it meant the fanbois and 1 bomber votes are eliminated from the score,

But I have no 1-bombers on my latest story. So I keep losing a 10 every time someone scores it a 7. So the 10s should be higher than the 9s, but they're not because the 7s keep chopping them off.

Oh wait! How do I know I don't have any 1-bombers?
I don't.

My understanding, and I may b wrong, is that the author gets to see all the votes he gets.

I believe you have to promise not to complain about the scoring system in order to see all the votes.

I have a story with 24 votes. The sum of the bar totals (since the small number makes it easy to work them out) is 22. So the bar chart doesn't show the least and most favourable votes.

AJ

My understanding, and I may b wrong, is that the author gets to see all the votes he gets.

Not anymore. You don't see the top and bottom 5%.

Going on the number of active authors bitching about 1 bombers way back then, it was a heck of a lot more than just a few.

I agree with you. Sure, it's taken away our ability to whine about our scores, but more importantly, it's taken away all the 1-bombers ability to make a point by tanking someone's score. If no one knows your protesting, what's the point? A protest is only effective, if the people you're protesting eventually do something about it. Silent protests are an oxymoron.

it's taken away all the 1-bombers ability to make a point

Not at all. They know their 1-bomb will take away the top score. That's all they care about.

Not at all. They know their 1-bomb will take away the top score. That's all they care about.

No, they're either protesting a particular story, or they're trying to punish the authors. But, if the authors don't even know that they exist, what's the friggin' point?

I assume my regular 1-bombers are still there, because they always read every one of my stories, despite the 1s they left each time, but they won't reach out after the last time I tried to compromise and they started issuing demands on what I had to say in my stories. If they want a given story to say something specific, then write your own damn story!

Looks like I stirred up a real hornets nest here!

This topic has always been a hornet's nest. Personally, my biggest complaint about the scoring isn't that I lost 5% of my highest votes, it's that a ten-point system gives an unfair advantage to a simple vote of 1, because there's so much discrepancy (value difference) between 1 and a medium vote of 6. Besides, most readers aren't knowledgeable to differentiate the difference between a 3 and a 4, so the distinctions are negligible anyway.

I hate to say it, but Amazon's 4 star system is more equitable, as a simple 1 vote has an effect, since producers can readily see it, but it doesn't really affect the overall score nearly as much as it does on a ten-point score. What's more, no one has to worry about what the difference between a 6 and a 7 score is. You either Love it (4), Hate it (1), mildly dislike (2) or kinda like it (3). That's easy for casual readers to grasp. SOL is about the only internet site using a full ten-point scoring system, and there's really no reason for it.

SOL is about the only internet site using a full ten-point scoring system, and there's really no reason for it.

A reader doesn't give a story a 1 or 10. They choose the description that best describes the story's appeal to them. The 10-choice scale works for that.

ETA: It's authors who are hung up on the numbers.

They choose the description that best describes the story's appeal to them.

If they did that, there wouldn't be a problem.

I was replying to the comment that the 10-scale system is too many because a reader can't differentiate between a 3 and 4.

They don't have to. They choose "pretty bad" or "not good" which gets converted to a 3 or 4, respectively.

I was replying to the comment that the 10-scale system is too many because a reader can't differentiate between a 3 and 4.

Except, the 1-bombers aren't scoring on how much they like a story, instead they each have their own agenda. They either want you to only echo what they want to hear, or they'll seek out stories they'll never read—based entirely on the story description—and punish the author by 1-bombing their every story to drive them away from the site.

@Ernest

What's important to remember is the system affects every story in the same way and to the same extent. The system does also keep the story scores in the same relationship to each other.

Except, it doesn't. Instead, it treats every older white male author the same, unless they write about the wrong topic. The problem with ANY scoring system, is that it promotes bullying and bigotry, rather than promoting quality writing.

The scoring system we have now is likely the best we can ever hope for, but it's still far from perfect because we have nearly zero minority authors on the site. Everyone writes from the exact same cultural perspective, so all the stories ultimately sound alike. Some fresh blood just might shake us all up and open new avenues in story telling. Just read some of the many stories being written by the up-and-coming Indian authors (most of whom are writing in English).

The scoring system we have now is likely the best we can ever hope for

My comment (complaint?) had nothing to do with the scoring system. It had to do with not being able to see all the raw numbers. They're meaningful. If an author can't stand to see a 1, don't look. Why punish the rest of us?

My comment (complaint?) had nothing to do with the scoring system. It had to do with not being able to see all the raw numbers. They're meaningful. If an author can't stand to see a 1, don't look. Why punish the rest of us?

I agree, but because I know I'm incapable of biting my tongue, I refused to ever sign the pledge that I'd never complain about the scoring system in order to gain access the a few more of the numbers. But then, I tend to obsess about the details that no one else is bothered by (most people obsess about their own scores, while I enjoyed my 1-bombing fans, back when I could still see what they were doing).

every older white male author the same

Unless I know the author, their penname doesn't tell me anything about their age, race, or sex.

ANY scoring system, is that it promotes bullying and bigotry, rather than promoting quality writing

That depends in part on the author. A poor score could indicate the author needs to improve their writing skills, which if listened to might help promote good writing.

The majority of the authors and readers on this site live in English speaking countries that have similar cultures. I would expect the authors to write from the same basic cultural perspective.

The majority of the authors and readers on this site live in English speaking countries that have similar cultures. I would expect the authors to write from the same basic cultural perspective.

My point exactly. Those who don't (both readers and authors), don't spend much time here, and frankly, I miss hearing different perspectives. Instead, the site ends up sounding like an echo chamber. True, some of the echos are better than others, but they're all repeating the same basic stories.

Consider "Old Man with a Pen".

Sometime back I read a few stories by an author I thought was male, but I don't recall the penname. Later I learned the author was female. I learned to not assume anything based on the penname.

ETA: Old does not define an age. I've met people in their 30's who felt like they were 'Old'.

ETA: Old does not define an age. I've met people in their 30's who felt like they were 'Old'.

A comedian once said: "The definition of 'old' is 20 years older than you."

'Where did all the years go?'

They went into making me old. :)

Old does not define an age. I've met people in their 30's who felt like they were 'Old'.

I've met five and seven year olds who seemed like 'old souls', and I've also met 80 year olds who seemed like temperamental teenagers.

I've also met 80 year olds who seemed like temperamental teenagers.

No, that was actually a mirror ...

AJ

Consider "Old Man with a Pen".

Maybe I should create a pen-name of "Old Man with an Attitude!" or "Old White Man with an Agenda". 'D

I was just curious how any knew they had this many 5s or that many 9s.

There are two ways one is accurate and one is a guess.

The bar graphs has the number of votes beside the highest number of votes, so when you look at that bar it has the number beside it. So if your largest vote number is the value of 8 it has a vote count beside it of 150 votes. If the bar for the value of 7 is half the height of the 8 value you can estimate the count for the 7s as being 75 votes.

I just checked the bar chart on one of my stories.
Each bar has the number of votes on the top (excluding the top and bottom 5% votes). So there's no guessing.

I'd like to see that implemented for every author.

AJ

I'd like to see that implemented for every author.

If you agree not to complain about the scoring system you will see it.

I think it's difficult to differentiate between observations and complaints. I'd like to be able to see raw scores and I'd like totals over each bar of the graph. However I like to make observations on scores and voting patterns even more and, on occasion, they have proved useful to admin.

AJ

I think it's difficult to differentiate between observations and complaints.

I still participate on discussions about scoring. I just accept that it is what it is and don't bitch. But if I notice something new, like my observation of losing 7s rather than 1s in the 5%, I'll talk about it. Not to complain. Just because it was a revelation.

My asking for all the raw scores to show (including the 5%) was not a complaint. But I'd love it to be included again. My complaint was with the people who complained so much Lazeez removed them.

So I didn't agree not to discuss the scoring system. Just stop the kind of bitching that drives Lazeez crazy.

I don't get that. Perhaps it's a premium member thing? I havn't quite achieved that status yet.

No.

Over the years, there has been a lot of bitching over the scoring system. The dropping of the top and bottom 5% was actually implemented due to it.

Because of the bitching, Lazeez, the webmaster, said enough is enough and hid the raw data that is used to compile the final score. Some of us said we would really like it. He said that whoever promises not to bitch about the system will be able to see the raw data (not seeing the 5% dropped came later when more people cried about the 1s).

Premier is for readers. There is no such thing as a Premier membership for authors. Authors can earn a Premier membership, but it's for the readers.

So, have you figured this place out yet? LOL

Each bar has the number of votes on the top

On my bar chart there is only one number and it is at the far right of the bars. What theme do you use or is there a setting we are overlooking to get numbers for each bar?

What theme do you use or is there a setting we are overlooking to get numbers for each bar?

Lazeez turns it on by author. If the author agrees not to complain about the scoring system, he turns it on for them.

Each bar has the number of votes on the top (excluding the top and bottom 5% votes). So there's no guessing.

That's because you promised the boss man that you wouldn't bitch about scores. Something I chose not to do, so I only see one set of numbers, like most new authors since the change was instituted.

Generally, long stories score higher than short stories. That's what the readers want so the authors writing that are rewarded. The scoring system is working the way it's designed.

Your summary is spot on, Switch. My problem, is I'm not really crazy about the power distribution. I'd rather minimize the harm while keeping the benefit, thus I prefer a 4-star system rather than a 10-point system. With 4-stars, a 1-star might infuriate the author, but it's unlikely to drive an entire class of authors/readers from the site.

But ... I've ranted enough. Everyone knows my objections by now, and I've got nothing to gain by continuing to complain, so I'll quit bitching. No one's going to listen to my lone dissenting vote, so as you say, it's the best system we can get.

3) Most authors believe their story deserves a 10

If that's true, they should enter them into story-writing competitions and submit them to publishers.

AJ

If that's true, they should enter them into story-writing competitions and submit them to publishers.

AJ,

Go have a good look at the rules for most of those competitions. Some require you to pay an entry fee, some require that you submit stories never posted anywhere before, some require you let the organisers publish them in a book about the entries without paying you royalties, some only accept from authors in print by a recognised publisher, and some require you submit via an agent. Give me a ling to one where they don't demand a fee, or the right to print without a full royalty or an agent and I'll consider it. I've looked at a few dozen competitions I've seen advertised, and many are more like con jobs than anything else while the rest don't offer anything at all.

Some of those points are true, yet there are a number of free-to-enter competitions around and a number of websites/forums/twitter feeds etc dedicated to publicising them so there isn't really any excuse.

Getting short stories published, in whatever form, is considered a significant step on the way to becoming a recognised author. The BBC's National Story Writing Competition, for example, isn't actually open to the nation but only to authors who have had work at least one work published in one of a select list of publications, most of which hold competitions.

But the point, which I failed to make, is that most authors don't really think their stories deserve 10s, but they see other authors getting them so they feel it's only fair they get them too.

AJ

Some of those points are true, yet there are a number of free-to-enter competitions around and a number of websites/forums/twitter feeds etc dedicated to publicising them so there isn't really any excuse.

I'm not a twit and I don't use anti-social media. Nor do I get heavily involved with forums beyond this one. I have checked several websites that have been mentioned and found them all to fit within the comments I made previously.

edit to add: Some of the websites I've looked at have been from sites mentioned in this forum and from sites I found in google searches on contests.

But the point, which I failed to make, is that most authors don't really think their stories deserve 10s, but they see other authors getting them so they feel it's only fair they get them too.

I may be unusual in that I don't worry about the scores, except when I use them in regards to discussions on this forum.

I may be unusual in that I don't worry about the scores, except when I use them in regards to discussions on this forum.

As much as I bitch about the misuse and abuse of scores, I don't pay much attention to them. What I do pay attention to is how my stories scores differ from the norm (i.e. which are rated higher, and what that tells me about what people are looking for, or more precisely, what they don't like about my currently posting story.

One of my all-time highest scores on Fine Stories is my lowest time scores on SOL. That tells you all you need to know about the value of scores in rating stories.

One of my all-time highest scores on Fine Stories is my lowest time scores on SOL. That tells you all you need to know about the value of scores in rating stories.

I think it tells you more about the differences in the expectations of the readers on the two sites. I know a lot of my FS readers are not eligible to join SoL, and that means they have a different outlook on the stories. Mind you, my attitude is a basic - I dun wrot' it, an' now I dun dun wid it. I don't follow the reactions on a chapter by chapter basis, and I don't care to. I got better things to do with my time.

As much as I bitch about the misuse and abuse of scores, I don't pay much attention to them.

Believe it or not, that's true of me, too.

My complaint, if you will, is that the scoring system provides misinformation. And THAT is what bugs me so much.

My complaint, if you will, is that the scoring system provides misinformation. And THAT is what bugs me so much.

Yeah, I agree with that, which is WHY I brought up the point of factoring in 'first readers' instead of 'rereads' when calculating reader responses to stories. Otherwise, you skew the statistics even further. As it is, the story statistics are highly questionable, as the vast majority are 'read ahead' false positives and shouldn't be used to judge your success as an author.

But the point, which I failed to make, is that most authors don't really think their stories deserve 10s, but they see other authors getting them so they feel it's only fair they get them too.

More likely, they're 'fan-boy 10s'. Since most authors write the stories that fascinate them, instead of what the public craves or publishers demand, they're more likely to vote their own stories 10 because they fill a nitch not served by other stories.

There's nothing wrong with that, but those stories still wouldn't deserve being on the N.Y. Times top-ten list.

If that's true, they should enter them into story-writing competitions and submit them to publishers.

Just because someone writes a terrific story doesn't mean the mainstream publishers will be likely to publish it (see how many times J. K. Rowling was rejected out of hand).

Publishers pick what they think will generate the most money (for them), not what they consider to be wonderful stories.

With the caveats that publishers will publish an average story by a known author in preference to a good story from an unknown author, and that some of the story material in SOL stories is unsuitable for commercial publication, there's something dodgy if an author rates their story as 'most amazing' but is not prepared to expose it to professional scrutiny.

AJ

With the caveats that publishers will publish an average story by a known author in preference to a good story from an unknown author, and that some of the story material in SOL stories is unsuitable for commercial publication, there's something dodgy if an author rates their story as 'most amazing' but is not prepared to expose it to professional scrutiny.

So, you're saying there's something 'dodgy' about SOL authors, or you don't abide by your own advice?

There are sometimes very good reason not to waste years, trying to get anyone at all to read your work from a major publisher. I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss everyone out of hand—leave that to the professional. 'D

So, you're saying there's something 'dodgy' about SOL authors, or you don't abide by your own advice?

I'm saying there's something dodgy about authors who award 10s to their own stories but don't risk subjecting them to professional scrutiny.

AJ

I'm saying there's something dodgy about authors who award 10s to their own stories but don't risk subjecting them to professional scrutiny.

Maybe so, AJ. However (you knew that was coming, didn't you), it's all but impossible for many authors to subject their stories to the professionals for scrutiny unless they want to pay said professional big bucks to look at it. I live in a rural area where I have good telecommunications but to go to one of the major cities where the few agents, publishers, etc are for a face to face takes three days out of the week and incurs large accommodation and travel bills. When I tried to contact agents many didn't respond, and the few who did reply insisted on a face to face meeting first, and not just send them in the manuscript. As to contests, we covered that earlier, most want money out of you or you have to already be published author. For someone like me it's just not a viable option, and many of the other authors here are in similar circumstances.

I'd welcome the opportunity to submit my stories for review by the pros, as long as I can do it without having to pay out money or to give them the rights to publish it from now until eternity without paying me anything.

When I tried to contact agents many didn't respond, and the few who did reply insisted on a face to face meeting first

I never heard of that. Everything's done electronically now, even signing the contract.

An author acquaintance of mine (on wattpad) lives in Ireland and her agent and publisher are in NYC. She never met any of them face-to-face. Another author is in Australia or New Zealand (I forget which; I think NZ) and her agent and publisher are also in NYC. She never met her agent or editors face-to-face. The only time travel was required was for book signing tours. I don't know who paid for that. Probably the publisher, but I can't say for sure.

I once entered a contest with Writer's Digest (my flash story "Coming Home"). No entry fee. The winners didn't get paid, but their stories were published in the magazine. That would have been more than enough "pay" for me.

As to "Do authors think their stories are a 10?" I thought my entry was better than the winners. LOL

Switch, if you know of any agents who'll take unsolicited manuscripts electronically for review I'll be happy to receive the information and try to work through them. I gave up on the book publishing about 6 years ago because the dozen or so agents I could get email addressees for in the USA all said I needed to come visit them first or said they weren't taking on new clients at that time. The few Australian ones I could contact all said I had to go through my local writers groups registered with the state and national writers association - and they're nearly all little 'pat each other on the back' closed groups. When I lived in Junee I contacted the writers club in Wagga eight times by email and letter over 4 years, and never had a reply. I gave up when I got told the only way you can join the government supported group was to be well known by two of the existing members and recommended for membership by them. At the time the many publishers websites I visited said they didn't read unsolicited manuscripts and I had to go through an agent.

Switch, if you know of any agents who'll take unsolicited manuscripts electronically

I used Google and QueryTracker to find an agent. Those accepting new clients didn't want a manuscript. They wanted a query letter (and maybe a synopsis and first few chapters). If that interested them, then they would ask for the manuscript. None asked for a face-to-face meeting. In fact, that's the last thing they would want at that stage. They're too busy.

The process sucks. You're supposed to send out hundreds of queries in batches of 10. I gave up after 4 or 6 queries total. Most didn't even bother responding. One took over 6 months to reject me. I had already self-published it by that time.

I never heard of that. Everything's done electronically now, even signing the contract.

Really? Ernest has been belaboring the same point for years, and NOW you're suddenly claiming it's the 'first time I've ever heard of it'? But, I do agree with you, I personally think Ernest just contacted the WRONG publishers, who wouldn't give him the time of day, and after several failures, simply gave it up as a lost cause. If you want to help, why not give him the publishers your 'contacts' use who DON'T require a face-to-face meeting to evaluate his book?

If you want to help, why not give him the publishers your 'contacts' use who DON'T require a face-to-face meeting to evaluate his book?

It's more complex than that. Each author has to find the right agent or publisher for their work. Sending it to the right one is the first critical step. That's why QueryTracker is so good. The agent tells you what they're looking for.

As to contests, we covered that earlier, most want money out of you

Perhaps it's because you're in Australia. (Actually, after watching a few episodes of 'The Heart Guy', I wouldn't mind being in Australia too.) Or perhaps it's because you don't look hard enough. I follow a few aspiring authors on Twitter and they publicise a constant stream of free-to-enter contests. Most of them don't have any worthwhile prizes, perhaps pride of place in their on-line monthly literary magazine, but at least it's a form of publication.

AJ

Most of them don't have any worthwhile prizes, perhaps pride of place in their on-line monthly literary magazine, but at least it's a form of publication.

More importantly, it's a decent means of exposing your work beyond the limits of SOL members, something that's VERY difficult for independent authors to do. For that limited exposure alone, I'd be willing to grant those contests the rights to 'publish' my work, as long as they don't claim 'exclusive' rights to the story, but only limited rights associated with the contest (i.e. including the winning entries in their magazine).

@Ernest, seriously, sometimes you really overthink this whole 'publishing rights forever' nonsense. Sometimes, those 'rights clauses' are just what they say, not 'traps' to sell authors work in perpetuity. After all, why would they even WANT the rights to most of the tripe they're sent?

I'm saying there's something dodgy about authors who award 10s to their own stories but don't risk subjecting them to professional scrutiny.

First, anyone serious about writing should make the effort to get published. Just don't blame the system if you aren't successful.

Second, when I rate SOL stories, I do not compare them to traditionally published stories. I score them on a curve. So "most amazing story" isn't the most amazing story I ever read, but rather, on SOL, it's an amazing story.

First, anyone serious about writing should make the effort to get published. Just don't blame the system if you aren't successful.

While I agree with you, Switch, for some of us it just isn't possible to make the effort due to the high costs involved to do so from our home locations. Those who can do so by being near the agents should be in a much better position to try.

on SOL, it's an amazing story.

but not a 'most amazing' story? ;)

Just joking. If you reserve 10 for amazing stories, you're acting more responsibly than many readers.

AJ

Does that make me a less serious writer?

Pffft, you just don't want the hassle of going on book tours, and having to sign your name on the naked breasts of adoring teenage girl groupies ;)

AJ

I haven't yet written a story here to which I'd award a 10 ;)

How are you going to verify the ages of teenage girl groupies? You can't examine their teeth: that's not allowed for asylum seekers because of their human rights.

AJ

If that's true, and I have to concede it's possible, I hope I've deleted that entry.

My policy nowadays is to not publicly criticise my readers. No good comes from it, and it can backfire spectacularly.

AJ

My policy nowadays is to not publicly criticise my readers. No good comes from it, and it can backfire spectacularly.

Amen to that. Whatever a reader's opinion, it's legitimately how they feel about the story, and no amount of berating them will make them like it any better (though sometimes you can get them to read just a little more with a few assurances).

What's more, if someone doesn't like a story, they may vote it down, but if you pick a public fight, they'll bad-mouth you to everyone they encounter, which isn't good for anyone's reputation.

You never know, once the teen girls realise the Elvis impersonator is also a talented writer, they might ask you to sign both breasts ;)

AJ

Pffft, you just don't want the hassle of going on book tours, and having to sign your name on the naked breasts of adoring teenage girl groupies ;)

Hell, I keep offering, but all I've gotten so far have been slaps to the face—which is decidedly better than some, who'd rather watch them pee on each other while they stay a safe distance away in full view of government cameras!

but don't risk subjecting them to professional scrutiny.

I think I rated my 1st story, but none of the others. Most SOL authors are professional writers, so what reason would they have for submitting their stories for professional scrutiny.

Undoubtedly he mis-typed.

I've sold three fiction pieces as a ghost writer.

My technicla writings are parts of dozens of projects and facilities on two continents.

I don't call myself a professional writer. I'm just an old engineer type who fancies himself a storyteller.

My technicla writings are parts of dozens of projects and facilities on two continents.

I don't call myself a professional writer. I'm just an old engineer type who fancies himself a storyteller.

I'm officially a 'published' author, because I charge people for my books, but I only 'earn' enough for a few spare meals, yet NOT enough to cover my expenses, so it's a net loss, yet I'm not allowed to call myself a 'non-profit enterprise'.

Instead, I do it 1) to get my work out to a broader market and 2) because seeing someone forking over their hard-earned cash for one of my stories is more emotionally fulfilling that watching largely meaningless 'download counts' on a daily basis.

I'm officially a 'published' author

I though you self-published? The term 'published author' usually means someone whose work has been published by a recognised independent publisher.

AJ

The term 'published author' usually means someone whose work has been published by a recognised independent publisher

It does????

I consider myself to be a 'published author' in that I have presented my writing to an audience and they have read what I wrote.

I never consider the financial aspects as a requirement for being a 'published author'. If you want to add in the financial side of writing, I would call the person a professional author, since they are trying to support themselves, fully or in part, through their writing.

it's based on someone else deciding they may profit from publishing the author's work.

We have a lot of them here then, considering how many stories have been found posted by someone else trying to make a profit off of stolen works!

I should have been more clear in defining a 'publisher' as someone who invests their own money in the hope of making a profit by publishing an author's work.

Though that also includes all the vanity publishers, whose main responsibilities in life is ensuring authors have no room in their garage for cars or equipment, and that they'll never publish another books because of the requirements they give the vanity press the rights to the next couple books they produce.

If a 'publisher' demands that you pay them to publish your works, turn around and run for the door. Many choose this option simply because their terrified at the most technical skills required to publish (book and cover design, illustrations, marking, etc., but believe me, you'll pay for each other those, rather than you're readers)!

As EB pointed out, many story-writing competitions (including the BBC competition) only allow entries from published authors. They don't mean self-published, or submitted to websites like this.

AJ

I suppose it all comes down to what published author means. In the trade, it seems to mean an author who gets paid for what they write.

From a grammatical point of view, publish means:

transitive verb

1 a : to make generally known

b : to make public announcement of

2 a : to disseminate to the public

b : to produce or release for distribution; specifically : print 2c

c : to issue the work of (an author)

intransitive verb

1 : to put out an edition

2 : to have one's work accepted for publication

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/publish

As you can see none of the 7 definitions mention money. There is a link to publication and the definition of publication means:

1 : the act or process of publishing

2 : a published work

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/publication

Once again no mention of money, however I do acknowledge most published works are presented for sale.

Personally, I use the grammatical definition of published to define an author.

Found on Wikipedia (spit):

The more specific phrase published author refers to an author (especially but not necessarily of books) whose work has been independently accepted for publication by a reputable publisher, versus a self-publishing author or an unpublished one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Author

AJ

In the trade, it seems to mean an author who gets paid for what they write.

If you missed it, I started out the post with the above.

As Wikipedia said, "The more specific phrase published author refers to ..." If you go with the more general phrase, rather than the specific, money doesn't enter into being a published author.

As Wikipedia said, "The more specific phrase published author refers to ..." If you go with the more general phrase, rather than the specific, money doesn't enter into being a published author.

The specific term as defined in Wikipedia (spit) doesn't mention money either. It's possible to be a published author, in the traditional, penis-comparing sense, without being paid if the prize for a story-writing competition from a reputable publisher is free publication.

AJ

AJ

But it does. Your Wikipedia article specifically states:

The more specific phrase published author refers to an author (especially but not necessarily of books) whose work has been independently accepted for publication by a reputable publisher [according to whom?], versus a self-publishing author or an unpublished one.[citation needed]

The author of a work may receive a percentage calculated on a wholesale or a specific price or a fixed amount on each book sold.

'may', not 'will'.

A story-writing contest I came across recently, held by a reputable (IMO) literary magazine, offered a decent prize for the winning entry, token prizes barely exceeding the entry fee for runners-up, and free publication for however many entries the judges decided to rate as 'highly commended'.

Although not receiving any monetary compensation, the highly commended authors could subsequently claim to be 'published authors', allowing them entry into competitions purely for published authors.

AJ

'may', not 'will'.

I take 'may' to mean one or the other.

monetary compensation can be in the form of cash or something of value.

I though you self-published? The term 'published author' usually means someone whose work has been published by a recognised independent publisher.

Yeah, I'm self-published, but the definition of 'published' varies defending upon whom you ask. Most consider 'published' as 'has a book available in printed form', rather than 'has their book available in every damn bookstore in the entire country!'

What's more 'professional' normally mean simply that you charge for something, rather than whether it pays your bills or not. Many of the top-rated books don't earn enough for their authors to quit their day jobs ("Do you want fries, and maybe a copy of my book with that?").

I though you self-published? The term 'published author' usually means someone whose work has been published by a recognised independent publisher.

That's how I meant it, but that's not what it means. Self-published authors are also published.

OOOPs. I got in a hurry and overlooked 'not' was missing. Thanks

I'm saying there's something dodgy about authors who award 10s to their own stories but don't risk subjecting them to professional scrutiny.

Hold on a moment, WHAT authors are you attacking here? So far, the majority have stated that they DON'T vote for their own stories, so who are these boogeymen you're trashing?

I suspect, the ONLY authors who MIGHT vote for themselves, are those who also vote other authors stories simply to help their own scores, which would make them cretins, but we have no actual evidence that such people actually exist on SOL. We might assume they do, but it seems silly to launch entire crusades about potential author abuse.

This diversion came about because of a claim that most authors believe their stories deserve 10s.

I have no evidence that it actually happens, but given the lengths some go to boost their scores, it's not far-fetched to expect that some authors do actually vote on their own stories and award themselves 10s.

AJ

How can you possibly know what most authors think?

I think he means that we're an egotistical bunch and typically like to brag about our accomplishments and opinions. (Not that any of us do, of course!)

All I know is there were 18 candles on my last birthday cake, that makes me 18

If there were fork handles, would that make you four? ;)

AJ

All I know is there were 18 candles on my last birthday cake, that makes me 18

Last time anyone ever threw me a 'Surprise Birthday party': that makes me 13. Then again, 'last time I ever visited Spain' makes me perpetually 24.

to be fair, I don't need my birthday to buy myself cake

Let me guess, and every time you buy one, you put 18 candles on it? 'D

you think it lasts long enough to put candles on it?

The candles are there to prevent you from eating it too fast. You gotta blow out each to eat the next piece. 'D Besides, then you can pretend there are hot 18 year olds attending your party (which is about as likely as when you were 18)!

hot 18 year olds attending your party

Probably his male friends. :)

who said anything about a party? I sit in the dark and eat that whole cake by myself.

Yeah, it's damned hard to cut those little cupcakes up without messing them up.

to be fair, I don't need my birthday to buy myself cake

Actually, if I want a cake, I'll bake one. Those store-bought ones just don't taste as good unless it is from a good bakery. Unfortunately, the affordable ones are scarce as hen's teeth.

Unfortunately, the affordable ones are scarce as hen's teeth.

Maybe 'cause they're full of ... hen's teeth? Or 'cause they can't find enough hen's teeth to make them?

Sorry, but I'm in a 'dumb joke' mood today.

Was Homer a writer? The Iliad and Odyssey were poems and may have been memorized and recited before they were written down. He was a Greek, not a Roman.

More importantly, there's no indication he was paid DIDDLY for his writing, as there were NO copyright protections in his day. Instead, they had 'sponsorships', where some government official (a king or prince or governor somewhere) paid you a stipend to write stories for them, which you were then free to mail out to your friends and family who could read). In that case, the DID get paid for writing, but not for any given 'book' like authors do nowadays. Instead, they were 'staff' positions, roughly equivalent to the court jester in that they kept someone 'amused' during the slow periods in their life.

Even more startling is the factor Höffner believes caused this development -- in his view, it was none other than copyright law, which was established early in Great Britain, in 1710, that crippled the world of knowledge in the United Kingdom.

I'm sure there are two factors to this 'explosive growth' in German publishing: their history (with the Gutenberg Press), but more importantly, even today, copyright mainly profits publishing companies, at the expense of authors who often get little to nothing from their efforts, while the copyright holders retain their tiles for ungodly amounts of time, keeping them OUT of the public's hands where they might do some good.

The traditional professions were Religion (being a Priest or Minister), Law, Medicine, and probably Engineering. Maybe Architecture instead of Engineering or in addition to it.

You forgot the oldest profession.

You forgot the oldest profession.

Selling apples?

Clearly there were no professions before the universe was created.

What about Self-Ruling Ruler, since there was no one else around. :)

What about Self-Ruling Ruler, since there was no one else around.

There were plenty of others around. Why do you think Satan was so pissed that God gave man free will, and demanded the angels give him the same deference? Clearly God had plenty of minions to do his bidding, but wanted someone who could come up with a few creative ideas, good or bad.

There were plenty of others around.

Interesting point. Satan is supposedly an Angel who fell out of favor. Thus Angels were around before Adam. Since God has supposedly always been in existence, have Angels always been in existence? If not, where did they come from?

everything written in the Bible

I have a vague recollection that the original content was about the local areas, people, customs, culture, and politics. The following seems to me to be a good link for the history of the Bible, but I need a dictionary to understand what it says.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_the_Bible#Authorship

Universe creation?

The 'apple seller' wasn't a reference to God and the creation of the universe, but instead to either the serpent (and original sin) or to Eve herself, who supposedly coaxed Adam into trying it. It's more metaphor than preachy.

it's increasingly unnecessary for a professional author to be a published author.

Did you misstate that? I find it hard to understand how a professional author could be an unpublished author.

Authors who self-publish are not "published authors"

They are. Self-publishing is a new era.

Authors who self-publish are not "published authors",

If you checkout Awnlee's Wikipedia article under the topic of Self Publishing, it says:

Self-publishing, self-publishing, independent publishing, or artisanal publishing is the "publication of any book, album or other media by its author without the involvement of a traditional publisher. It is the modern equivalent to traditional publishing".

The Wikipedia article is focused on the publishing industry and is written from the point of view of the traditional publisher. It is also contradictory in at least one place in that it say self-publishing is the modern equivalent of traditional publishing but then indicates that an author must be paid by a traditional publisher in order to be a 'published' author. So if the self=publishing author gets paid directly by the buyer, he isn't a 'published' author. I call that bullshit.

I'm not sure 'idiom' is the right term for industry jargon, but I agree.

A few people have said that since I have stories available on websites, I'm a published author. But if I made that claim in a writers' group meeting, the most common reaction would probably be to roll around on the floor laughing.

AJ

was it jargon in the days before self-publishing?

Were there days before self-publishing? Didn't Moses self-publish?

AJ

Wasn't the literal meaning of 'published author' back then the same as today's literal meaning of 'independently-published author'?

Gutenberg, by definitions, was 'self-published'. What's more, he blatantly 'stole' an existing work, rather than creating new content, and yet he initiated the entire publishing industry. We'd have no 'traditional publishers' if not for the original self-publisher.

he was editor, publisher, printer, bookseller.

And typesetter.

Did he sell it?

Perhaps.

Awnlee's article listed 3 types of authors: published authors, self-published authors, and unpublished authors. The article seems to define the first two as authors who get paid for their works. They don't define unpublished authors, so I guess they mean those of us who distribute our works without charge.

If you want to look into the grammatical meaning of published author, most dictionaries seem to define published as the distribution of the work to the public. Typically, there is no mention of whether money is paid to the author.

Wikipedia defines 'Published' for its internal use as:

The word published derives from the Latin word meaning to make known publicly. Publication is the first threshold that all information must meet to be included in Wikipedia's articles. For Wikipedia's purposes, published means any source that was "made available to the public in some form".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Published

Again it is defined as an author who distributed their works to the public with no mention of financial gain.

The only meaning I can see for unpublished author would be someone who writes stories and never makes them available to the public.

Personally, i find it insulting to be called an unpublished author.

Then submit your work to a reputable independent publisher.

AJ

I considered that and asked for advice in the Forum. Based on comments received, I decided being a professional author might be a bigger problem than I wanted to handle at this point in my life. I'm happy just writing my stories and letting others read them if they wish.

That doesn't mean that I like the 'industry specific' term of 'unpublished' being applied to me because I'm not paid money for my stories when the grammatical meaning of 'unpublished' indicates I am a published author. Call it a ego thing if you wish.

If you want to look into the grammatical meaning of published author, most dictionaries seem to define published as the distribution of the work to the public. Typically, there is no mention of whether money is paid to the author.

You're right about "published", though the definition of "making money" is "professional", so ANYONE who self-publishes is a Published author (as distinct from a 'successful' published author or a 'recognized' published author).

... the stories on that site could be masterpieces ...

Some are masterpieces, it's just very difficult to find them.

Try searching for some names you recognize, you might be surprised. Unfortunately, you really can't search, and you've got to examine each category separately to determine what's buried there.

You're mixing the scoring system and the reader reaction on SOL. That's two totally different things. If the readers on SOL don't appreciate stories from Pakistani authors it has nothing to do with the scoring system.

No, I'm saying, that with a site which gives readers such power to discourage authors, and then equipping them with power of 10 normal voters by voting a 1 instead of merely a single star for stories they dislike, you're equipping the homophobes, racists and misogynists with the power to bully, harass and get away with it.

My 'evidence' is based on having seen it play out with several minorities, but certainly not all, after all, these are vast generalizations, rather than absolutes. But my assumptions are backed up by the almost complete absence of said minority groups. Chances are, if they hear of SOL and come to investigate, they'd leave pretty quickly.

The penalizing, by the way, is the very 1-bombing we're discussing. You don't need 80% of the readership to discourage insecure newbie authors, all you need are a small handful who are vicious, and give them the proper sized stick (the 10-point scoring system), and you're good to go.

That's what I mean, the scoring system gives a small minority an outsized voice. But ... I haven't spoken to any gay or black authors since the 5% rule went into effect (every one I knew left the site long before that).

I haven't spoken to any gay or black authors since the 5% rule went into effect (every one I knew left the site long before that).

Serena Jones. Black. Female.
She's still active on SOL.

Serena Jones. Black. Female.
She's still active on SOL.

Hmm. Guess she stopped participating in the forum then. I'm curious she didn't respond to my latest story, since she helped create it. It's probably because it took so long, over two years, for me to actually do anything with it (three separate edits with a couple years in the middle with an utterly worthless edited version).

Of course, I could always email her. DUH!

Hmm. Guess she stopped participating in the forum then

When it changed from email-based to his forum she had to stop. Something to do with her work environment.

When it changed from email-based to his forum she had to stop. Something to do with her work environment.

Maybe we should switch the Forum over to Fine Stories, so everyone has the option of participating? We could still keep a link to it from all three sites.

When was that?

back in 2013

but I've seen gay authors who

That's probably because they wrote MM, not because they were gay. Just as you'd like to force the pedo authors off the site regardless of their race or nationality. A Muslim or Indian author writing MM would be treated the same as a white male author.

That's probably because they wrote MM, not because they were gay. Just as you'd like to force the pedo authors off the site regardless of their race or nationality. A Muslim or Indian author writing MM would be treated the same as a white male author.

That's exactly my point. The issue isn't whether a Muslim can write the same 'white man beds thousands of women' fantasies the rest of us do, it's whether they're free to write stories (whatever the subject) that reflect their perspectives. What you're suggesting is, if a gay Muslim never tells anyone he's a gay Muslim, he'll never have a problem online ... until he makes the mistake of complaining, and then he deserves it?

As for my rant about the pedo authors, I've stated repeatedly, I don't object to those authors, as they serve a very important role. The issue is when they threaten to upset the balance of the site. I've LOVE if we had a small but vocal gay, pedo, Muslim and Indian population of writers. And if and when they're successful, they'll make it okay for more to step in and be accepted (i.e. they'll both earn readers trust and coach everyone who follows how to avoid flame wars). The problem I was objecting to was a sudden inset of lost pedo authors, such as the rush which essentially doomed ASSTR.