Forum: Story Discussion and Feedback

if an author won't even list a score, that again is often a red flag

Authors can no longer turn off scoring.

In most cases, most readers will rate the final score based on the entire story, while they'll often rate the ongoing story based on how they like any given chapter. That's an example of a 'real score', though it's hardly the only one.

Please explain what a 'real score' is.

A 'real' score is the average of the 1s, 2s, 3s ... 8s, 9s, 10s before SOL's median correction algorithm is applied.

AJ

What that implies is that the total score usually includes more 8s and 10s than they do 5s, so drawing a firm line (nothing at all below this number) tend to miss a wide variety of decent stories. Thus, most SOL readers also allow for a certain 'fudge factor' (ex: 7+ = 6 - 10).

In other words, those scores aren't a hard and fast number, instead they're quite a broad range of individual scores, based on a wide variety of factors and individual preferences.

Then how, as a reader, can I see that?

I'm not aware of any way that you can. But you've developed your own heuristic comparison by choosing 7 as your borderline score. If it works for you, stick with it.

AJ

Then how, as a reader, can I see that?

You cannot. And you shouldn't. A lot of work has gone into the scoring system and it does what it's designed to do. I only mentioned the "real" (or "raw") score because that's the score you give a story when rating it and I didn't want you to assume the score you see is equivalent to that score. I don't want you to miss out on good stories because of that misconception.

So don't worry about the "real" vs "actual" score. Just don't automatically rule out a story with a less than 7 score. I think that's setting the cut-off too high. You may find a gem.

Besides, given the way I approach stories, my stories generally rise over time, so while I'm posting, the vast majority of my stories hover in the 6s (mid-to-high 6 score), yet after they're completed, and the readers post the final score, reflecting their opinion of the entire story, rather than just the latest chapter, they finally rise in the 7s.

Thus, I've got one story with a high-6 rating, quite a few older 8s, while the majority are well into the 7s. Yet if you ONLY read scores of 7 or above, you'd likely never glance at any of mine.

Given my writing style, many would appreciate that anyway, yet it shows why using score only is so misleading—especially with Sci-Fi and Fantasy stories, which often contain more initial 'world-building' scenes (and are thus considerably longer than most fiction genres.

Though again, as many have noted, it they don't see the entry on the main page with a score above a 7, they'd likely never consider my stories at all.

I'm fine with anyone who doesn't like how I tell my stories, yet I'd prefer they'd at least give it a shot—to see whether they like it or not.

I got a lot of that for my Country Roads series (well, in other places because it's still posting here) and Going Home (a stand alone) wanting them to continue even though the actual story arc had ended, just to keep going with the characters, and I always resist it for the same reason.

Once the story arc is finished, it's just stuff happening.

If a story is complete, then I'll look at the score, but not as critically as you do.

That's the key, as you NC-Retired suggested, stick to the authors and genres you prefer. 7-rated and above are a sure bet, yet 6s are still worth checking out if they look promising. Yet, since so many stories her never finish, it's best waiting until you have a better idea whether the author is capable of finishing a decent story.

You basically start at the top, then start glancing around to see what else you may prefer.

That said, there are only a few ongoing stories I read regularly, so if I'm desperate, I'll double back and reread the classics, so look up the favorite stories under the Story Recommendations SOL Forum (I have three different ones liked up now, mostly teen Do-Overs).

The next thing I look at is whether or not the story is complete.

Today I came across an author with 60 stories on SOL of which 59 are 'to be continued'.

AJ

Whenever I see that, I think they have no idea on how to end as story, so with no idea of a story arc or story development, they start, quickly lose their way, then bail out before the stories even midway along.

Sadly, it's not uncommon in writing in general. Luckily, publishers generally weed most of those out relatively quickly. Online stories however, there is no 'weeding out' process, as terrible writing tends to predominate on most online writing sites (cough, cough, most recent KDP stories).

In my posting to the various Quora Writing Spaces, a common question focuses on writers 'losing their way', and not knowing how to recover from it.

New writers need to find their voice, yet often, too much freedom is more intimidating than too little.

That too is common on SOL, as we all tend to not vote on stories we opt to not read. As it's really unfair rating an entire story on just a terrible first chapter or two. The 'squick' warnings are there for a reason. ;)

Also, for most of us, we're more concerned with particular 'types' of stories, so even with 'favorite' authors, there are always a few we 'dare not read'. ;)

But I've always seen as non-proofread descriptions as an indication the entire story is completely unedited, which itself is fairly common on SOL (and often, Amazon KDP itself).

it's really unfair rating an entire story on just a terrible first chapter or two

I used to believe that. But I changed my mind because I now believe that I should rate what made me quit reading the story.

For that, I prefer contacting the author (if it's allowed, and telling them why I quit directly). That's always seemed a more honest method, as many stories start poorly, yet get better, the further the story develops. I still won't give it another try, yet again, most authors deserve to hear why readers are turned off, even if they'd rather not know.

And usually, when someone criticizes me, I'm usually well aware of why people dislike my writing, as I hardly hide my preferences, or why I choose to write those types of stories.

But I've always seen as non-proofread descriptions as an indication the entire story is completely unedited, which itself is fairly common on SOL (and often, Amazon KDP itself).

There's an author, who also edits other authors' works, who finishes their story descriptions with

Visit Bookapy and you can see other reader's comments about this story.

Contact author and story comments are disabled, otherwise I might have pointed out the absurdity of only having Bookapy comments from one reader :-)

AJ

Awww thanks...

Just had a thought. It's actually more than 67, as I went through a phase of posting stories as blogs (though I have since removed most of them) and as forum posts...

I really don't know how Laz puts up with me...

Anyway, has anyone else noticed that Vincent Berg is the thread killer? Creepy music playing...

As always, exceptions and exceptions.

And usually those are included under the 'favorite author' category, or in this case, the promising author, as her stories are worth checking, if not always quite as satisfying as others.

I am a lot of things, consistent is not on the list...

Obviously. Otherwise you'd be an amorphous blob. :-)

AJ

Maybe I am....

Called 'Bob'.

Obviously.

Agree on score being a secondary consideration. I rarely hand out 10s, but the few that I have were for stories that rated in the 5s and 6s, and I've read many in that range that get 8s and 9s from me on the regular.

So many great stories on this site have gotten absolutely thrashed in the scoring because the subject matter offended the fragile masculinity of the SOL Boomer Brigade, who routinely abuse the voting system for punitive purposes. If a story is both well-written and manages to piss off a bunch of SOL oldheads at the same time, then that's a strong indication that I'll probably love it.

The description is the make or break for me. Not only does the story idea have to be compelling, but the description for it has to be well-written too. Nine times out of ten, if the description is well-written then the story will be too. Even if the story concept sounds interesting, a poorly-written description tells me that it probably sucks. Even then, I'll usually still check the first paragraph, just in case.

Yeah, those scores can definitely be discouraging. When I posted one story, which got a TERRIBLE response, I quit posting/publishing for nearly 5 years, so after the LACK of comments after so many with my latest story, I was near abandoning writing altogether, yet forced myself to, just to get past that malaise. Unlike my other stories, this one was purely for myself—I've been writing a few of that source, though none published/posted yet—though they allow me the freedom to try different things, free of expectations.

Not every story should nor should be a masterwork, yet they help get you to that point. Though again, I'm more discouraged by the lack of feedback than I am low scores. It doesn't matter how good a story is, if no one cares enough to respond to it (most of the comments on this last one were over the lack of editing, as I knew it wasn't publish-worthy to begin with).

It's a tough job being an asshole, but someone has to do it.

Eh, why does someone have to do it?

Speaking of assholes, there are some of us writers that cherish and feed on the anger, disgust, and loathing from readers that cannot tolerate misspelling, punctuation, and grammar errors. I am a proud and repugnant asshole that fills my stories with such errors.

Absolutely your right. It reminds me of two things.

First, there's a quote from a famous author (that I am completely unable to find right now) that says, in effect: 'Reading is hard work. It's the job of the writer to make it easier.' Every error makes it harder, because the reader has to overcome it to keep reading.

The second is from an analysis of fraud emails (aka 'spam'). The misspellings, grammatical errors, and so forth in spam (think of 'Nigerian Prince' emails, for instance) are not bugs, they're features. The goal is to weed out readers with discernment. The spammers only want gullible people to keep reading. Anyone with discernment just wastes their time - they may reply, but they will, sooner or later, fail to fork over the requested money. They may only keep 0.001% of readers, but that's more than enough to make spamming worthwhile.

Reading is hard work. It's the job of the writer to make it easier

A nineteenth century novelist Nathaniel Hawthorne once quipped: "Easy reading is damn hard writing."

And you, sir, presumably do it quite well. So, thanks for your kind service, even if I don't chose to read those stories. ;)

Once again, on SOL, there is no right or wrong way to write stories, instead, the more varieties we offer, the more readers have to choose from. Thus every offering is valuable, no matter how much you may personally despise it.

So bring on the gay, bisexual male, the snuff and the water-play and scat stories, as long as they're properly labeled, I'll know which ones to avoid! The more, the merrier!

Once again, 7.5 is an incredibly high limitations, as few stories actually achieve 8s (I can count mine in the single digits (seven, out of twenty-four). So I generally look for scores of 7 or higher, and then pick any 6's which particularly appeal to me (usually based on genre to topics).

Also, if you're choosing based entirely on score, then there is absolutely NO reason to even consider the "New" stories list, as most of those are too short or too recently posted to have any score (i.e. it's an entirely different criteria, as most of the 'quick yank' stories are often found there, since there's so little actual plot and little character development).

Therefore, if there's a particular squick tale in the high six range, chances are, it's incredibly well written, as the squick itself likely accounts or a 1 or 2 point drop.

I go by 4 things, 1. Previous stories, Ratings (if it's below a 7 i'm not interested)

Voting here is done by less than 1% of the readers, who most likely vote on the outliers (1-2) and (9-10). It maybe a reasonable criteria as a popularity contest for some well established stories, but if the story only has 30 votes out of 3,000 readers, you are really giving those 30 trolls far more power over what you can and cannot read than they should have. They are counting on it.

The same kind of trolls are the type of people that reported the site to the ISP to punish Lajeez, btw.

it's a broken system abused by trolls who often vote against the subject matter and not the story.

"You call this a story?" --yep. It's 100,000 words with thousands of readers.

However, because it has a code for some fetish they don't like, they create multiple accounts to punish the author.

You are only hurting yourself with that criteria by restricting some fantastic stories.