Reviewers review stories. Should someone review reviewers? I can start by recommending Celeste who was a reviewer here for a while and left some outstanding reviews. And at the site that starts with an ass had a lot more. There must be someone else who does SOL reviews who can be recommended to others, at least other reviewers, as a good example and one that should be emulated by other reviewers.
But who will review the reviewer reviewers?
That being reviewed...
A rereviewer will be appointed, but will need oversight, so applications will be invited for the post of rerereviewer...
Who of course will need oversight, so...
I recently read a review in which the reviewer awarded a 10 for quality. The review contained spelling and grammatical mistakes - I would have awarded the review a 6 for quality. I have to wonder whether such a reviewer would have been capable of making a fair assessment of the story's quality.
AJ
I have to wonder whether such a reviewer would have been capable of making a fair assessment of the story's quality.
Sounds to me that was a reviewer review.
Sounds to me that was a reviewer review.
Is it a review if the reviewer isn't identified.
It's a considerable dilemma - there aren't enough reviews and reviewers on SOL, and dissing the fools brave enough to publicly state their opinions won't improve that situation.
AJ
Hah.
You think reviewers don't get dissed?
I had more than one nasty response from some writer who was pissed that a review didn't blow smoke up his ass about how great he was. Or for suggesting that making the story more readable by having someone else look at it would go a long way... that was treated as a mortal insult.
Should someone review reviewers?
While superficially appealing, it could become adversarial and potentially dissuade reviewers from volunteering.
Perhaps a 'Did you find this review useful?' thumbs-up or thumbs-down might be less contentious.
AJ
As a reviewer/editor/advance Reader and long-time fool, I wouldn't object to a simple Yes/No to the question,
'Did you find this review useful?'
That wouldn't worry me at all and would quickly let me know if I had lost my objectivity... I have been known to offer up a couple of 15's now and then LOL
A few times I have had very pleasant thank-you's from Authors. Even some good discussions on points raised. All to the good. Thankfully never a bad response (touch wood).
Cheers, Ian
I think most of us largely do not pay much attention to the reviews. Myself, it is probably because they all largely seem to follow the same authors over and over again.
Some authors seem to have half of their stories reviewed, yet others have none, or only a few. Myself, I am thankful every time I have had one of mine reviewed, but mostly I look to the feedback from the readers.
The only reason I check reviews is to get a better sense of a potentially interesting story than the short and/or cryptic description gave me.
Same here. They can tell you a great deal more about the story, how appealing it might be, and things about the story (positive or negative) that the author didn't or wouldn't say.
No one pays attention to the reviews because they are nearly universally positive and like 2 people on the site are allowed to review stories in the first place.
Reviewer Guidelines:
"Reviews on the site are meant to encouraging readers to read the stories, and to help authors get better at what they do. So if a review is meant to simply drive the author away from writing then it won't be published on the site. So if you don't like the story and can't finish reading it because it is horribly bad in your opinion, then simply don't review it. Better send a private email message to the author.
That does not mean you cannot criticise the story, but make it constructive criticism, not destructive one.
Don't review stories that are on your list of squicks, what's the point? If you hate the story going into it then the review will be bad of course.
Reviews that are all negative will be rejected."
As a reviewer, I do tend to only review stories I like, and any criticism I feel is warranted I send to the author in a private message. This may be why reviews seem to all be positive, and I am pretty sure there are more than 2 reviewers out there.
The temptation to look smart by being critical is strong. We are all wired to be sensitive to the bad, the off, the out-of-place. It's part of negativity bias. I appreciate your willingness to abide by the "positive reviews only" requirement. I suspect it pushes reviews toward being more appreciative, toward looking for what's good and how it could be even better. To me, that's what really takes effort - seeing the possibilities for even better in something that is already good.
Of course, we need to fix weaknesses, at least enough so that they don't ruin the story, but just not being weak won't make a great story. Some people write characters that would entrance me while debating which cereal to have for breakfast. Others create plots that pump life into otherwise stock characters. Where's the possibility for better in an author's work?
I write reviews to direct readers toward good stories. I'd like to direct them away from lousy ones, but as noted here, negative reviews are not allowed. While I understand why some folks don't want negative reviews, the fact is that some stories here are simply crap, and no amount of constructive criticism is going to help turn them into something good.
Just my opinion.
Ok. Let's imagine the "simply crap" stories are not accepted for posting…
That means the moderators decide and with the best of intentions each will have their own views on what is "good enough" to be posted. Not only would that vastly increase the mods workload, it would also discourage first time posters when their story is refused for being "simply crap".
SoL depends upon authors posting their stories for free, it also provides an excellent place for new authors to gain experience. If you take the time to explore you'll find that many authors stories improve as they write and post again and again. If their first attempt was rejected they may never have tried again, or maybe just never posted to SoL again.
A lot of authors here got started because they read a story and thought,"I can do better", not all of them were correct, yet they took the time to write and post a story knowing their only reward would be an occasional vote and perhaps in rare cases, a review.
Even if their story was utter crap they deserve the respect of seeing their story posted. Why? Because they tried their best. Yes, their story might suck, but they tried. It takes a great deal more time and effort to do but very little to criticise.
Lastly, there are real gems to be found here on SoL, but they wouldn't be as appreciated if only gems were available. It is discovering them amongst the dross that makes them appreciated and encourages the reader to search for more.
That means the moderators decide and with the best of intentions each will have their own views on what is "good enough" to be posted.
Worse, it won't just be the quality of the writing. The moderators will end up imposing their own personal biases/squicks over story content, not just the technical quality of the writing.
It won't just be poor quality stories that get lost, we will loose stories targeted at niche audiences.
The moderators will end up imposing their own personal biases/squicks over story content, not just the technical quality of the writing.
Doesn't it currently take the agreement of two moderators to refuse a story submission, other than for obvious violations like underage sex?
AJ
Doesn't it currently take the agreement of two moderators to refuse a story submission, other than for obvious violations like underage sex?
As I understand it, no submissions are refused up front unless there is an obvious rules violation (underage sex being the only pertinent rule) and such decisions are always made by Lazeez.
As I understand it, no submissions are refused up front unless there is an obvious rules violation (underage sex being the only pertinent rule) and such decisions are always made by Lazeez.
You may well be right as I've no idea where my impression came from. Luckily I've never had a submission declined.
AJ
no submissions are refused up front unless there is an obvious rules violation (underage sex being the only pertinent rule)
An author's first post must be at least 750 words. That's the only other one I can think of.
An author's first post must be at least 750 words. That's the only other one I can think of.
Isn't there something in the submission guidelines about quality?
AJ
Isn't there something in the submission guidelines about quality?
Not in terms of rules that will be enforced by the moderators.
As I understand it, no submissions are refused up front unless there is an obvious rules violation (underage sex being the only pertinent rule) and such decisions are always made by Lazeez.
Currently there is only one other moderator: Vixen.
For iffy postings, she refers them to me. So I'm the final arbiter.
I've rejected a lot of postings for various reasons. Too short, violation of content rules, walls of text among others. I've also started rejecting Dolcett stories as they had really negative effect on those new to the site. Any day that there was a Dolcett story on the new stories lists sign up for free account plummeted by 40% to 50%.
I've also started rejecting Dolcett stories as they had really negative effect on those new to the site.
You might want to update the Posting rules and Author agreement page to reflect that.
Not that there were ever that many of those kinds of stories on SOL. It's a small niche.
Not complaining, just curious.
Are you going to be rejecting snuff and/or cannibalism stories more generally or just the Dolcett/gynophagia stories?
Will you be removing the existing stories from SOL?
You might want to update the Posting rules and Author agreement page to reflect that.
No need. The site's rules do say that we can reject a story for any reason.
Are you going to be rejecting snuff and/or cannibalism stories more generally or just the Dolcett/gynophagia stories?
Since they don't seem to have the same effect as Dolcett stories, I don't reject them despite my personal feelings about them.
Will you be removing the existing stories from SOL?
No. Those who seek them can find them. Those new to the site are usually more shocked at the Dolcett stories than the other stuff, and tend to never come back.
Since they don't seem to have the same effect as Dolcett stories, I don't reject them despite my personal feelings about them.
Hmm, that's interesting. I don't think I've seen any FemCan (Female Cannibal, basically a gender reversal of the Dolcett theme) posted to SOL, but I find it odd that such a story might draw a less harsh reaction than a Dolcett story.
I don't think I've seen any FemCan (Female Cannibal, basically a gender reversal of the Dolcett theme) posted to SOL
https://storiesonline.net/s/69443/classy-conversions
Don't read this series, then. EVER!
https://storiesonline.net/s/69443/classy-conversions
Don't read this series, then. EVER!
I've seen it. Haven't read it. I had assumed it was Dolcett.
I had assumed it was Dolcett.
It certainly looks like it from the description - 1% of females culled for food each year. And its score would indicate that those who complain about their own low scores could learn a thing or two from it.
AJ
And its score would indicate that
It has very few votes from people who aren't Dolcett fans.
A low score can indicate quality of writing issues, but it can also indicate a niche audience story that is not properly tagged or described so that it draws a lot of readers who are squicked by the story.
ETA: Also with such niche stories a high score does not necessarily reflect high technical quality of writing. With a small audience and an even smaller author pool you can end up with the audience becoming much more tolerant of poor writing.
It has very few votes from people who aren't Dolcett fans.
442 votes. That's a respectable total.
a high score does not necessarily reflect high technical quality of writing
The writers openly soliciting higher scores don't necessarily want to improve the technical quality of their writing. Yet most vociferous IMO have already milked the hot button topics that result in a score premium.
AJ
It has very few votes from people who aren't Dolcett fans.
Actually, it's a very well written piece on a topic that hits a lot of squick factors for many people. Note that I am NOT a Dolcett fan, but I am both a science fiction fan as well as a Criminologist AND a country boy. Meaning I've skinned squirrels, rabbits, and deer, and helped butcher cows and pigs. I think that helped me be the only person in our class that didn't puke when we had to go witness an autopsy.
Think about the regular science fiction classic - 'To Serve Man'. That last line - "It's a COOKBOOK!" Well, as Paul Harvey would say, here's the rest of the story.
Actually, it's a very well written piece on a topic that hits a lot of squick factors for many people.
And a lot of readers tend to vote on general appeal rather than writing quality. So a story with a lot of squick factors hat that has a high score is well marked for it's target audience.
I don't think I've seen any FemCan (Female Cannibal, basically a gender reversal of the Dolcett theme) posted to SOL
What about Many-Eyed Hydra's stories? Do any of them qualify?
AJ
What about Many-Eyed Hydra's stories? Do any of them qualify?
Don't know, I'm not familiar with them.
What are "walls of text"?
"Stories" with no white space other than inter word spaces (long story all one paragraph) and possibly little or no punctuation.
I've seen a couple that got through moderation.
I opted out of getting my stories reviewed a long time ago, and I do not feel that it hurts their visibility. The same is probably true for all authors with an established readership. Ideally, reviewers should focus on newbie authors and their stories and not write the fifth review of a saga that already has 500.000 downloads and a score north of 9. That would raise interest in new authors and lead to more appreciation and feedback for them.
Just my 2¢.
Ideally, reviewers should focus on newbie authors and their stories and not write the fifth review of a saga that already has 500.000 downloads and a score north of 9. That would raise interest in new authors and lead to more appreciation and feedback for them.
Just my 2¢.
The 'only good reviews' problem is not SOL specific. Look at some random web shop reviews and you will see exactly the same. Bad reviews are very rare and often removed. The only usable reviews are on sites fully independent of the target site, i.e. where the target site has no influence on the reviews.
I actually think that's a good idea. I have only reviewed stories with prior reviews when those reviews came out while the story was still a work in progress. On only one occasion did I add my $0.02 to a review of a complete story, and it was only because I felt very strongly about the tale.
That's very generous. Those of us who aren't reviewers could help by sending appreciative comments and encouragement to new authors we like. I've been so busy catching up with some of the best on SOL that I haven't read as many new authors, but I'm going to start looking for opportunities to pass along some encouragement.
I just wish readers were able to post reviews.
I guess that's what the reader comments are, just not as formal.
I guess that's what the reader comments are, just not as formal.
I would say that is more for voting. The comments (if turned on) are only read at the end of the story. SO most will never read them until they had finished it.
I just wish readers were able to post reviews.
I am pretty sure all reviewers are also readers. You can contact Lazeez and ask to be a reviewer. I don't know how he decides, but he accepted my request and my privilege has continued for about six years. Follow the instructions for reviewers, don't insult authors (it helps to review stories you liked, or that you think other readers of your review will like), and keep writing enough reviews that you won't need to be replaced by other reviewers. Not everyone qualifies. Probably paying for full membership might help. If you look at reviews and follow what the other reviewers are doing probably your ability to review won't be revoked.
If I knew how you get to be a reviewer I would tell you. Lazeez makes the decisions. Ask him.
I just wish readers were able to post reviews.
If you feel strongly about it - I would just ask the webmaster to make you a reviewer. There is a commitment to do a review every now and then.
I lament the fact that I have 40 stories - many over 150,000 words and never once a review. I think most people who do reviews aren't interested in my kind of stories and so it's probably for the best if they didn't.
However, I'd love a constructive review from someone who is a fan of the genre/tags I write about for "You Bet Your Ass"
What if we had a review forum? Where anyone who wants could post a informal review of a story?
What if we had a review forum? Where anyone who wants could post a informal review of a story?
We already have a section on here for that. It's called Story Discussion / Feedback.
What if we had a review forum? Where anyone who wants could post a informal review of a story?
You're asking for what already exists: Story Discussion and Feedback
