Forum: Author Hangout

Add 'slow' and romantic and you pretty much cover a story that has little sexual content and what is described is just foreplay.

If it only involves M and F, one of each, then its two play, not four play.

If you are going the Clinton route, then your story is 'no sex', but for the majority of readers, masturbation, either self or of a partner, is sex. So 'some sex'. Add 'slow' and romantic and you pretty much cover a story that has little sexual content and what is described is just foreplay.

If it was just one or two instances in a longer story I would say 'Minimal Sex' since 'Some Sex' implies a little more than that. I think 'Minimal Sex' is exactly the scape goat for this type of coding. Virtually no sex but you want to code the partnerships and see to it that the simple touching is coded correctly.

Guess who completely forgot about the 'minimal sex' category...

and sixteen point three seconds,

Oh, the romance.... [Insert swoon here]

Actually, it does, but it's part of the Premier Membership extras.

He said the form search, not category search.

In google search enter "https://storiesonline.net/d/s2" plus the search terms you are interested in, obviously you can use all the search tools google provides.

That's bad, I would have really preferred the forum to be blocked from google.

That's bad, I would have really preferred the forum to be blocked from google.

I've notified Laz in case he is unaware.

I've notified Laz in case he is unaware.

I think he knows that. This site has to make it's money and one way is to be found by search engines. Still, considering the nature of SOL, I would have expected the forum to be a closed community and not public. Stupid, I know. You can even reach and read the forum without logging in. I should have known better. I will be lot more careful with my responses from now on and sometimes not even respond at all.

Does Mrs Shagrin have a pun in the oven?

Nope. Puns are funny, even bad ones.

Are you proposing a punishment upon posting unfunny puns..?

A feature like that might be enough to convince some people to pay for premium.

When you have a Premier Account there is a setting Author Exclusion Preferences where you can enter an author's name and their stories aren't displayed in any of the lists for your view after you log in.

Block user and block author are not the same. I'm not an author and if someone wanted to block my ramblings in the forum from appearing he can't do that.

ETA: Not that I think it would be necessary since a report to Lazeez about an offensive user should be enough to remove a user or post.

If a user of this forum finds anyone on the forum to be a constantly annoying, nattering nabob of nincompoopery it would be nice to be able to click on their username and have their posts blocked - including any private messages to the person doing the blocking.

Wouldn't do the trick: any other user quoting parts of the post and answering would circumvent your blockage.

And if direct answers are blocked too, secondary answers would show up and irritate you. Only solution would be to block the thread part spawned by the blocked user, but that would cut you out if the focus would wander away from the original topic to an interesting discussion without further input from the blocked user.

HM.

That's interesting. M/F is under the category of age/gender. It says nothing about romantic or lustful. It's simply giving the age and gender of the (main?) characters.

do you want to wager that most of the readers see M/F as Sex codes and not MC leads?

Even if there is no sex, I ( and i bet almost everyone else) sees M/F as two adults of the opposite sex in a romantic relationshsip in the story.

not just the sex of lead characters.

Shad

Edit: Codes are guides to make it easier for our readerst to choose their stories.

I believe the codes were created for sex stories and are being forced on no-sex stories.

Since only 10% of the stories on SoL are tagged 'No Sex', it is pretty much a given that SoL is predominantly a sex story site.

More than half of those that are coded 'no sex' have no codes to indicate age/gender, of those that do include those codes the majority appear to include the 'romantic' tag or similar.

That's why when the story is no-sex, the gender code shouldn't imply romantic or lust.

Attempting to make gender codes dual meaning seems a pointless way to spend eternity. This forum isn't representative of the site readership, or even of every author, yet the opinions concerning coding in general are hardly cohesive.

More to the point, if 'no sex' stories should require gender codes, are you suggesting that finestories.com should include them..?

The problem is there are one set of codes with different meanings.

No, there is one set of codes with one defined meaning. The problem is people who perhaps should know better trying to pile a second meaning on top of them without any consensus.

The tag "mt/ft" is defined as "Teen Male under 18, Teen Female under 18". It doesn't define what relationship there is, if any, between those characters.

It defines a relationship otherwise there is no reason for them to exist in pairs. Given the combinations that exist, most will view that relationship as romantic and/or sexual. Further, without the relationship being romantic or sexual, specifying age with gender makes little to no sense.

mt/ft

Based on a Google search, mt/ft involves converting meters to feet.
To get a centipede you would need a lot of electric meters.

Without the / so your search is for mtft I got "MTFT - Multiple Tube Fermentation Technique for microbiological analysis." Didn't sound very interesting.

Since only 10% of the stories on SoL are tagged 'No Sex', it is pretty much a given that SoL is predominantly a sex story site.

And what percentage of dead-tree novels contain "no sex?"

And what percentage of dead-tree novels contain "no sex?"

Why do you think that relevant..?

(I thought I'd sink this thread before richardshagrin).

There are a lot of definitions for "sink". If yours is like your sexcitement, it means ink since the s is excess. But thank you for mentioning my name. It means I am arguably famous, at least on this forum. I don't always pun, sometimes I look up words online and report what I find, if I think it is interesting.

Later I discuss what my search says mt/ft means.

It means I am arguably famous

Methinks you meant infamous... :)

Methinks you meant infamous... :)

Me to the grinning Richard: Here, hold this can of baked beans for me.

Now he's a has bean. :)

beans

Beans, Beans, the magical fruit, the more you eat the more you toot, the more you toot the better you feel, so lets have beans with every meal!

the more you eat the more you toot

If you are going to fart about all day, every day, you'll have to complete an environmental impact report, probably a loud one...

A cow burps and farts between 160 to 320 litres of methane per day.

That's between 240 and 540 billion liters, EVERY DAY. And no one has thought about a way to conserve that for fuel usage opposed to the huge negative climate impact.

A cow burps and farts between 160 to 320 litres of methane per day

It's funny how the more invested the source in cow methane being a problem, the higher the estimate of the amount produced per cow.

AJ

You people really need to compare the carbon footprint of one volcano to human and agricultural ones.

No need to compare, it's about adding together the different sources. Volcanoes we can't control, others we can. My main point was that considering the numbers it should be viable to try and make a use of it.
I did some checking, it's not 1.5 billion but a little over 1 billion cattle in the world. Still a lot. The funny(?) thing is, over 30% (including water buffalo) are in India while they eat almost no cow meat. Add in Brazil and you have over half (~55%) of the worlds cow population.

Adding a tidy bit of seaweed to a cow diet dramatically reduces methane production.

The only problem is convincing farmers in Brazil to do it.

Adding a tidy bit of seaweed to a cow diet dramatically reduces methane production.

Can't be any harder than it was to get European farmers to feed cows minced animal spines, brain matter etc... That was BSE.... against which seaweed is little more than a brain fart...

Or GM soya. Which, based on how the cost of beef jumped, is actually more expensive than animal spines, brain matter etc.

The GM part has little to do with it. The soya has to be grown, harvested, processed, shipped.

The animal spines, brain matter etc were waste products that the meat processing plants had to pay to have disposed of until they convinced farmers to feed it back to their livestock. The cost was minimal and converting it to animal feed additives was almost pure profit for the processing plants.