In response to a recurrent discussion in the author blog -- do you code for something that occurs in minor form to warn those squicked by it when those attracted by it will be disappointed?
The advanced-search option allows the reader to put in tags to avoid. Why not let authors enter tags in a section which only appears there. So, if I have a 100-word anal scene in a 40,000 word story, I can warn those turned off by anal without those wanting anal to see that tag.
do you code for something that occurs in minor form
I don't.
The way I see it, our readers are supposedly adults. Adults should know that they will encounter many sexual and other, things in our stories that they may find disturbing. If I were to try to code for every possible thing that a reader might feel is a squick, then I and other authors would exceed the code limit that Lazeez has set. There is also the fact that I will overlook the code for some obscure something that squicks out one reader.
I feel it is better to just code for the nature and major activities of my stories.
Your idea about a section for authors to include squick codes is good. Is there a limit for how many codes you think should be allowed?
Keep in mind that if Lazeez implements the idea, readers using the squick codes to filter out stories to read will not find your 40,000 word story even though their squick is only 100 words of the story.
do you code for something that occurs in minor form
No
I write for more open-minded readers.
do you code for something that occurs in minor form to warn those squicked by it
No. Frankly, by the time they get to something like that in one of my series, I can be fairly sure they're tolerant of just about anything!
Generally no, but if it's one of the more extreme squicks you may need to reconsider about the code or include something in the story description.
