Home » Forum » Editors/Reviewers Hangout

Forum: Editors/Reviewers Hangout



Just an idle thought after reviewing this Sunday morning's Home Page. Some authors are revising or rewriting their original stories. Should this be an oportunity to review the newish story, even again, if some prior reviewer had done so? I look at reviews more as an opportunity to bring to light something burried in the stacks, posted years ago that wouldn't otherwise see the light of the home page. Since the author has brought it back to the Home Page by reposting a revised version, should we also point it out by a review? It may depend on how significant the change is. Any comments? Personally I'd prefer authors to write something entirely new than keep revising stories I have already read. But I am old and stuck in my ways.

Ross at Play

My two cents' worth is:

If improved substantially ... Yes
Else if already reviewed ... No
Else if worthy of a review ... Yes.

Ernest Bywater

How do you tell that on the Home page?

All I ever see there are the blog entries, updates (which don't usually include reposted chapters of revised stories), and new stories other than the usual links and the suggested reading.

Replies:   richardshagrin

@Ernest Bywater

My Scholarship (2018 Rewrite) by LOAnnie2

A rewrite of the very first erotica story I had made many, many years ago. I hope you all enjoy. It's about a 19 year old college girl who agrees to basically be an anal plaything for a very old college professor.

Sex Contents: Much Sex | Genre: Erotica

Tags: Ma/Fa, Consensual, Reluctant, Heterosexual, Fiction, School, BDSM, DomSub, MaleDom, Humiliation, Light Bond, Rough, Anal Sex, Cream Pie, First, Oral Sex, Teacher/Student

| Votes: - | Score: -

Size: 49KB | Posted: 1/7/2018, 5:53:58 AM


Charles & Friends by Richard A King
This is simply the larger chapter version of what you all know as the story of CHARLES, CLAIRE, KALISTA, ANNIE and SARAH. As the three dancers get to the age of 14, there will be sex, and lots more than i had in the past. It will include a Sarrah/Charles/Annie threesome!
Added Chapters 6,7

in progressSex Contents: Much Sex | Genre: Incest
Tags: mt/ft, mt/Fa, Fa/Fa, Mult, Teenagers, Consensual, Reluctant, Romantic, Lesbian, Heterosexual, Celebrity, Humor, Incest, Mother, Son, Brother, Sister, InLaws, Rough, Anal Sex, Cream Pie, Double Penetration, Exhibitionism, Masturbation, Oral Sex, Petting, Pregnancy, Safe Sex, Tit-Fucking, Voyeurism, Big Breasts, Nudism
| Votes: 80 | Score: 7.93
Size: 284KB | Downloads: 4970 | Posted: 1/4/2018, 7:31:37 AM | Updated: 1/6/2018, 4:52:33 PM

Ernest Bywater

Thanks Richard. That would imply they pulled the old story and posted a new version as a new story. I frequently revise my stories and re-post them as replacements of the old version, but they never show up on the front page as such, so I wondered about it. I've done that with about a dozen stories in the last 6 to 8 weeks, and hope to get most of the rest done within the next few months, then I'll blog about it.

Replies:   LOAnnie

I would suggest that if it is simply changing sentences for grammar or ease of comprehension then nothing be done. Anything more such as changing the impact of a character or the storyline then a note to the reviewer indicating the general changes. It would be up to the reviewer if he or she bothers with the story again

Crumbly Writer

I'd go a bit further. It's extremely doubtful that it's a complete rewrite (i.e. the plot has changed significantly), so I'd review it from the POV of whether the new version is any better than the original (i.e. is it any easier to read, less confusing or (hopefully) shorter and more concise, or even better, more fleshed out with more character development.

If not, I'd go ahead and pan it (ex: "A waste to time revising it. Please, spend your time writing something new"), if so, I'd praise the effort as a way of suggesting that others do similar things to their own early works (ex: "Much easier to read and more fully formed than the original work. Restores your faith in both the author and the art of writing in general.")

Since it's a review, I'd provide a quick overview of the plot, but I wouldn't focus on it too much, since most people likely to read it probably already have. Instead, I'd focus on the revision itself.


@Ernest Bywater

In the case of the story of mine that's referenced here, I actually posted the rewrite as a new story--I wanted both up as the original was my very first erotic story, and I wanted to present the opportunity for readers to compare how far I've come in 11 years. :)



I have just had a look at the first several screens of the original story and of your rewrite.
Firstly, your experience over the years shows; the rewrite is a v a s t improvement.
Secondly, I see no objection to your leaving the original version up - it was your maiden oeuvre of which no doubt you were very proud at the time and I would not take that from you
Thirdly, you do not deceive the reader in that you make it clear that the second version is a rewrite.

By contrast, if I were to read a story and later that day, without warning, read what seemed to be a rewrite then I would be very tempted to supply a flame intense enough to overcome any asbestos suit. I don't object to improvements provided the original is overwritten OR a LOAnnie style warning is given

Back to Top