I 100% completely understand why authors would want to disable comments on stories considering the "unruly" comments some readers may make. What I don't understand is why some authors disable voting on their stories. Is there even a legitimate excuse? Why is this option even available?
Depends on their reason for writing the story in the first place. Also, it depends on their mindset, some people are clinically incapable of understanding/caring what opinions others may hold. For instance, those in narcissistic spectrum.
What I don't understand is why some authors disable voting on their stories. Is there even a legitimate excuse? Why is this option even available?
The option to disable voting is eventually to be removed.
As to why some authors disable voting, there are a wide variety of reasons. Apart from the narcissistic ones, some authors and some types of story fare less well than their peers.
AJ
The option to disable voting is eventually to be removed.
I would hope the option to disable it for a while when a story is being posted a chapter at a time will still be possible.
Some stories take a while to get get going, and turn out to be be great stories. But because of the slow start they can get hammered by low votes.
There are a few authors that disable voting on a story when they first start posting, but then enable voting once they've got a half dozen or more chapters posted.
There are a few authors that disable voting on a story when they first start posting, but then enable voting once they've got a half dozen or more chapters posted.
I've done that.
I would hope the option to disable it for a while when a story is being posted a chapter at a time will still be possible.
Me too.
But I think it would be extremely difficult for management to arrange, and in a way that's seen to be fair. The latter would require all stories to eventually have scoring switched on, but at what point should management overrule recalcitrant authors and intervene to switch on scoring for stories where scoring was initially disabled. Number of chapters? Length of time since last update?
AJ
I would hope the option to disable it for a while when a story is being posted a chapter at a time will still be possible.
If I remember correctly, it will not. When the change is implemented, voting won't be able to be turned off.
I would hope the option to disable it for a while when a story is being posted a chapter at a time will still be possible.
I could support voting being disabled on all not completed stories. It is a bit like awarding the cup on the half-time scroe.
I could support voting being disabled on all not completed stories. It is a bit like awarding the cup on the half-time scroe.
Another point of view on that, is scores halfway through or on an uncompleted story can be of great use to the writer. If a story is scoring really badly, the writer has the option to either improve or scrap the story. If the story is scoring well, then that just might be the impetus for the writer to pull their proverbial out and finish it.
Scoring is a tool, and like every tool, the use is in how you wield it. Some will wield it better than others, and just because some can't use it, doesn't mean it should be removed from those that can...
If a story is scoring really badly, the writer has the option to either improve or scrap the story. If the story is scoring well, then that just might be the impetus for the writer to pull their proverbial out and finish it.
What if a story is well written and doesn't actually need improvement from a technical standpoint, but due to the actual content and subject of the story - which is included in the tags and description, so based upon what everyone says on here, means they shouldn't read it or score it - does get low scores, at least originally?
What if a story is well written and doesn't actually need improvement from a technical standpoint, but due to the actual content and subject of the story - which is included in the tags and description, so based upon what everyone says on here, means they shouldn't read it or score it - does get low scores, at least originally?
A number of readers who enjoy the types of stories that are less popular on SoL don't let high scores guide them. They expect such stories to score lower and judge accordingly.
I'm not referring to the M/M M/m stories. They seem to be searching for a backdoor entry to increase scores.
Scoring is a tool, and like every tool, the use is in how you wield it. Some will wield it better than others, and just because some can't use it, doesn't mean it should be removed from those that can...
Exactly.
A possible compromise if Lazeez wishes, would be to increase the number of votes required before scores are visible.
Doing so would allow '1 bombs' to be diluted by the larger number of votes.
A possible compromise if Lazeez wishes, would be to increase the number of votes required before scores are visible.
The number of votes required before scores a visible is not arbitrary. It is a function of the rule that throws out the top and bottom 5% of votes as outliers when the score is calculated.
A minimum of 20 votes (the cut off to show a score) is required for a whole number (1) of votes to be removed from each end.
The number of votes required before scores a visible is not arbitrary. It is a function of the rule that throws out the top and bottom 5% of votes as outliers when the score is calculated.
A minimum of 20 votes (the cut off to show a score) is required for a whole number (1) of votes to be removed from each end.
Why wouldn't increasing 20 votes to say 40 have the effect suggested?
Why wouldn't increasing 20 votes to say 40 have the effect suggested?
The point is the cut off may not be set directly.
It is controlled by the percentage of votes removed. It's the point at which 1 vote is remove from the top and bottom.
The underlying code could be doing something like:
If nvotes * 0.05 is less than 1.0 don't show the score else show the score.
If that's how the code is set up, changing the cut off from 20 to 40 would require reducing the percentage of votes thrown away from 5% to 2.5%
This would actually have the effect of increasing the impact of 1-bombs.
If nvotes * 0.05 is less than 1.0 don't show the score else show the score.
If the algorithm is n-votes < 20 don't show scores it's easy to change it to n-votes < 40. No matter what it's just an algorithm that is easily changed to fit the purpose if required.
an algorithm that is easily changed to fit the purpose if required.
The purpose is to not show scores where no votes are removed from the score calculation because there are too few votes.
The purpose is to not show scores where no votes are removed from the score calculation because there are too few votes.
Yes, and the minimum to reach that is 20 votes, but there's nothing that withholds you from setting the limit higher if you wanted to. The only disadvantage with a higher minimum number of votes is that it takes longer before a score is displayed, which might be a long time for some stories.
Some might consider that you've arbitrarily changed the purpose of the cut-off to itself be a disadvantage.
Some might consider that you've arbitrarily changed the purpose of the cut-off to itself be a disadvantage.
If you think in a really convoluted way you might but I think I was clear enough in what I stated.
For a 5% cut-off you need a minimum of 20 votes, you can't cut off a partial vote. It takes time to get those 20 votes. If you change the formula to need 40 votes you enable the chance to cut off 2 one-bombers instead of 1 but it takes longer to get 40 votes and thus it takes longer before the score would be displayed. For some authors that would hardly make a difference but for others getting 40 instead of 20 votes might take a lot longer. Of course cutting off 2 possible 1-bombers also means cutting of 2 possible 10's.
@Keet
you can't cut off a partial vote
I don't see why not.
Because you can't put a partial vote in the system.
Because you can't put a partial vote in the system.
A reader can't make a partial vote but the system could weight a vote so it only partially counts. Actually, two votes would have to be so weighted, the ones at either end of the voting range.
AJ
I don't see why not.
I suspect the system does handle it, but it does not display the fractional counts so you can see jumps in the scores when new full cut offs are reached. For example, if the calculation ends up with 7.91999 it will display as only 7.91 until it reaches 7.92 or higher.
Mathematically you could but logically it would make no sense.
With 20 votes, the ones at either end get excised. With 10 votes, the ones at either end could get get a weighting reduction of 50%. A bit of a faff but no more illogical.
AJ
With 10 votes, the ones at either end could get get a weighting reduction of 50%
I don't see how that would work in a way that reduces the impact of a 1 bomb.
Take the set of 10 votes: 1,6,6,6,6,6,6,6,6,10.
The sum with no drop off is 59. The average is 5.9
If you drop the top and bottom score the average is 6.
How do you calculate the average with a 50% weighting of the top and bottom score?
How do you calculate the average with a 50% weighting of the top and bottom score?
For just the top and bottom score weighted by 50%, sum the scores except those two, add in half the top and bottom scores, divide by one less than the number of scores.
In the general case, multiply the scores by the weightings, sum these products, and divide by the sum of the weightings. Having the weightings as a sort-of upside-down bathtub shape (applied to the raw scores sorted in ascending order), normal curve or half-sine curve would give weighting to scores in the midrange, but still allow some influence from the extremes; making the 'bathtub' asymmetric would allow trimming off more 1s than 10s. And, the weightings could be composite, a product of the positional 'bathtub' influence, and a per-reader weighting where readers who vote on lots of stories and with a good range of scores would have a greater influence than those who only vote on a few stories, and 1s at that. Another weighting could be used to progressively reduce the influence of early votes as more chapters are posted.
I've long thought that a weighting system on scores where the weightings are given to the readers could be used to reduce the influence of habitual fanbois and unibombers, but that's changing the scoring system so probably won't happen (unless Lazeez clears his backlog and gets really bored).
The number of votes required before scores a visible is not arbitrary. It is a function of the rule that throws out the top and bottom 5% of votes as outliers when the score is calculated.
I believe the former came before the latter. The minimum number of votes to display the score was in existence before dropping the bottom and top 5% was implemented. They have nothing to do with each other.
But like Ernest, my memory is shot.
I believe the former came before the latter. The minimum number of votes to display the score was in existence before dropping the bottom and top 5% was implemented. They have nothing to do with each other.
Correct. My short term memory is in need of a major upgrade, but my 'ancient history' memory is good. I can remember what was going on more than 7 years ago better than I can remember what was going on 7 minutes ago. The 20 votes before display was in place for many years before the 5% cuts were introduced to help deal with author complaints about the 1-bombers and the fan bois.
Another point of view on that, is scores halfway through or on an uncompleted story can be of great use to the writer. If a story is scoring really badly, the writer has the option to either improve or scrap the story. If the story is scoring well, then that just might be the impetus for the writer to pull their proverbial out and finish it.
Scoring is a tool, and like every tool, the use is in how you wield it. Some will wield it better than others, and just because some can't use it, doesn't mean it should be removed from those that can.
Well stated Pixy.
I have been writing for some 20 years. I have been improving slowly. I took some college courses to improve my writing. Posting my writing here, and the feedback and constructive criticism I get has resulted in greater improvements and motivated me to write more.
I could support voting being disabled on all not completed stories.
What about stories that never end? "Arlene and Jeff" started in 2006 and is still not completed.
What about stories that never end? "Arlene and Jeff" started in 2006 and is still not completed.
I surrender.
authors would want to disable comments on stories considering the "unruly" comments some readers may make.
I've never allowed comments on my stories, and it had nothing to do with the fear of comments being unruly. That never crossed my mind.
I never allowed comments because I didn't want spoilers to appear. At one time, before comments were available, I didn't allow reviews for the same reason. But I changed my mind about reviews and now allow them.
The only authors I know who disabled voting did so because they got fed up with idiots 1 bombing all of their stories because they disliked a political comment in one story.
The only authors I know who disabled voting did so because they got fed up with idiots 1 bombing all of their stories because they disliked a political comment in one story.
I have four consistent 1-bombers. Without fail, as soon as the first chapter of a story is posted, BAM, the 1 votes show up. Sometimes it takes two chapters, but almost always with in a few hours of posting the first chapter.
My take? (said in best Birgit voice) 'What-ever!'
I have four consistent 1-bombers.
Courtesy of something not making sense at one point, Laz did a bit of extra research regarding my most recent story. He found a couple of log-ins that were specifically created for the sole purpose of 1-bombing stories, and deleted those. Doesn't mean they haven't created new long-ins, but if you KNOW you get 1-bombed, you might ask him to make sure those are people who are actually READING stories, and not just pure trolls.
I would actually be a bit honoured that someone went to all the hassle of creating an e-mail address, and then an account here, purely to one bomb one (or all) of my stories.
That's a quality level of angry right there...
purely to one bomb one (or all) of my stories
They weren't just doing mine - but they ONLY logged on to that account to one bomb stories.
If you visit Lit you will find as soon as a batch of stories are uploaded they will all be hit with a 1 bomb within minutes, regardless of author, subject or length. Some spiritually broken individual's life revolves around anonymously downvoting other peoples creations.
IIRC there is a minimum number of votes required on SOL before the score is visible, which makes it less satisfying for the trolls.
Not just votes and comments are sometimes blocked. I tried to review some very good (in my opinion) Argon stories and his stories don't permit reviews.
However one of his stories was reviewed in 2008 "Joerg Isebrand".
I just don't believe in reviews, sorry. By definition, a review is a single reader's opinion, while the score represents the degree of appreciation over a large cross-section of the readers — crowd intelligence if you will. Author's favourites are also quite helpful for me, since they are more like the peer review to which I am accustomed from my work. But that is just me and my personal and possibly lone opinion.