Forum: Editors/Reviewers Hangout

I suspect the winner would be "Australian Story" with 7 reviews.

I read the reviews which were extremely favorable. A couple of 9s for technical and one reviewer doesn't use numbers, but mostly 10s and appear to be well deserved. However, I am not motivated to read the story. What the reviewers liked is not why I read stories on SOL. I am looking for action, perhaps some sex, and good things, at least to read about, happening. I didn't get that impression from the 7 reviews I read. I don't want to feel emotional about the characters, at least not particularly. I am happy to like the characters, but what happens to them should be interesting. The story is clearly very long and while Covid 19 has put a lot of free time in my schedule, I think there are other stories I would rather read.

So I learned something about at least one story that was reviewed a lot. It made reviewers feel emotional. Good for them. Not quite what I am looking for.

It actually was a rather entertaining story, with quite a bit of plot, as I recall. Although it's been years since I read it...

So I learned something about at least one story that was reviewed a lot. It made reviewers feel emotional. Good for them. Not quite what I am looking for.

So the reviews functioned as intended: they added information to your decision matrix based on which you decided to not read the story. It proves the value of reviews.

@richardshagrin

So I learned something about at least one story that was reviewed a lot. It made reviewers feel emotional. Good for them. Not quite what I am looking for.

So the reviews functioned as intended: they added information to your decision matrix based on which you decided to not read the story.

Now see I read that as it wasn't what he was looking for from the reviews.

Consider the thousands of stories on the site. Less than one percent of stories are reviewed. (That was another reason I didn't like reviewing stories that had already been reviewed... there's too many stories that need reviewing to duplicate other's contributions.)
Some of my reviews were of randomly selected stories. Actually, quite a few were. Even if someone was doing that today, your stories would still have a low probability of getting reviewed, just due to numbers.

negative

Reviewers are "encouraged" not to post negative reviews. Constructive criticism is allowed, but if a reviewer hates a story then communicate directly with the author, if needed. Reviewing is a privilege and that privilege can be removed.

The site needs authors more than it needed reviewers. Reviews can be useful, helpful to readers and sometimes authors. It can be viewed as a financial issue. If authors didn't post stories, readers don't log in to read stories. Some of the readers join the site as premier members which is what pays for the site. Everything is a balance which negative reviews upset. So you shouldn't see negative reviews and if you report them to management, corrective action may be taken. Even Forum posts that are too negative can result in topics being closed. Fortunately, for me, puns are allowed.

Reviewers are "encouraged" not to post negative reviews

I actually had to rework one review, as it originally got shitcanned for being negative.
That said, I also did a number of harsh reviews, but as long as you point out what the author did correctly, or at least how the author could improve, it's usually ok.

Consider the two following reviews:
This story was horrible - it barely qualifies as English, the characters were at best one-dimensional, and what passed for a plot was a mere collection of cliche and meme. At no point was this rambling, incoherent drivel was even close to anything that could be considered an actual story. I award it no points...
vs.
This writer took a familiar spin on some well-known story types. Unfortunately. the story fell flat due to overdoing the attempt to cram so many tropes in. As well, the characterization could've been improved significantly and without much effort. Lastly, a skilled editor - or even a skilled proofreader - could've fixed the many grammatical and typographical issues.

Both reviews tell the same story of the same story. They differ only in tone and approach.

Why?

The information is shown on the page of the author who's made the story a favorite.

What does someone care if, looking at your page, he sees that Beating Off Bob loved your story? Unless the reader has read that writers' stories, it means nothing. Maybe JustPlainBob made your story a favorite. If I didn't know whether I loved or hated his stories, it would mean nothing to me.

If someone recommends an author and I look at that author's stories page(s), a count of how many authors favorited each story would play a big part in deciding which story to sample first.

Why?

If fifteen idiots liked one story, does that make it a better story?

What if one guy who you know likes the same kinds of stories you enjoy liked a story, but nobody else seems to have noticed it?

Who recommends something is far more useful information than how many unknown individuals would recommend it.

I'm sure you know but for others who may not, on the main page, LH side, under Top Lists > Completed Stories > Authors' Favourites is an ordered list of the top 100 'Stories Most Recommended by Authors'

when an author writes like that and continues on a series, the scores tend to get higher and higher as they go along.

If someone likes the first of a series, they are more likely to read - and vote on - subsequent episodes, so there is a natural tendency for the scores to rise even if the quality of episodes remains the same. So it's a worrying sign if subsequent episodes don't have higher scores than preceding ones - perhaps the quality is s falling off or things are getting too repetitive.

gun porn

Does gun porn tend to be anal, oral, or vaginal? Or is it just hand jobs. Guns are not inserted, just held. Although ammunition can be lovingly inserted.

"The Stand"

I believe his wife used the same idea in "The Trap"

You can do that.

Any author who has selected stories as 'favorites' will have on his story page a link (ironically enough labeled 'favorites') to those stories.

Well, it's not difficult to generate a list of favorite stories. But it is work, and most people don't want to do any more of that than absolutely necessary.

Hmm. I remember it being pretty straightforward to find. I wonder if Laz discontinued it, or simply moved it.

@bk69

Hmm. I remember it being pretty straightforward to find. I wonder if Laz discontinued it, or simply moved it.

After the end of what had been posted of a story there is an alternate way to add the story you are reading to your author's list.

There is a link titled 'Favorite Story' located between the 'Similarly Tagged Stories' and 'Reader's Comments' (if enabled.)

Of course if someone else has already reviewed it, my contribution is less meaningful.

This isn't necessarily true if you either honestly disagree with the other review(s) or you see something important that has been missed. But if it's just "....yea, me too", then I couldn't agree more.

I never rely on a single review, not on SOL or anywhere else. Multiple reviews give a reader a better and more balanced view of the story. Even reviews that disagree with each other do that. A single review just gives the opinion of a single reviewer, it only becomes more valuable if more reviews for the same story appear.

I don't quite agree.

If you've read enough reviews by a given reviewer, you'll have some idea of what you'll think of a story based on what that reviewer thought. Sometimes, of course, that review will be meaningless (I recall one reviewer who rarely had anything even slightly critical to say about any story, ever) to you, but more often I suspect you should be able to find a reviewer who either accurately predicts your opinion or who regularly has the opposite opinion of your own. Either is more useful.

If you've read enough reviews by a given reviewer, you'll have some idea of what you'll think of a story based on what that reviewer thought.

That's more like judging the reviewer, not reading reviews :)

Anyway, if I check, I check the reviews for a story, thus I see multiple different reviews (if I'm lucky), not multiple reviews from a specific reviewer. I could look at all the reviews from a reviewer and that could give me some idea of the way he/she reviews but that says less than multiple reviewers for one and the same story.

I never rely on a single review, not on SOL or anywhere else. Multiple reviews give a reader a better and more balanced view of the story. Even reviews that disagree with each other do that. A single review just gives the opinion of a single reviewer, it only becomes more valuable if more reviews for the same story appear.

I agree with that to a certain degree. But what does multiple reviews add to the picture if they all say the same thing? Multiples are most useful if they either differ in opinion or add something the other one doesn't, their degree of utility being determined by how much they differ.

If they each parrot the other, what can one infer? Maybe it's a great story. Maybe those that don't think so don't want to make the effort to make their views known. And if they present that view vociferously, it's likely to be rejected by management and never be posted.

What I'm saying is that multiple reviews may not necessarily add much new information over a single one. Likely they do. But not necessarily so.

I agree with that to a certain degree. But what does multiple reviews add to the picture if they all say the same thing? Multiples are most useful if they either differ in opinion or add something the other one doesn't, their degree of utility being determined by how much they differ.

Not necessarily, if all reviewers agree than the chance that it's a fanboy review is less compared to a true agreement of opinions for that story. It tells me just as much as multiple reviewers that disagree. I don't see it as one parroting the other although that too will happen every once in a while but that also means they share the same opinion about a story.

What I'm saying is that multiple reviews may not necessarily add much new information over a single one. Likely they do. But not necessarily so.

They may not add new information but they can confirm the opinions in other reviews.

If they each parrot the other, what can one infer?

Well, I have to admit, seeing later reviews of stories I've reviewed are quite welcome when they agree (or outright cite) my earlier one.

But yeah, that point is why I normally didn't review stories that had already been reviewed unless I had something new to address.

2. Apparently, only a few people are allowed to review.

Back when I was one, I think the total was 12. Think about it. Twelve reviewers. How many thousand stories?

As to point 3 - basically, as I recall, the process is as follows:
1. contact Laz and tell him you want to be a reviewer.
2. Laz checks to see if there's a inactive reviewer slot
3. If the answer in 2 was yes, you become a reviewer (if the answer had been 'no' then presumably Laz would put you on a waiting list until one of the current reviewers' activity lapses into 'inactive')

I haven't really kept up with what reviews have been like. I recall a number being just cheerleading and giving blanket 10s. But after looking to see the answer to OP's question, I admit being a little dismayed at the amount of times stories received multiple reviews. With reviews being such a limited resource, not spreading them out over more stories is kind of a shame.

I'm sure there was a purpose at the inception of the idea, but whatever that purpose was, it's apparently been lost.

There isn't a story here that deserves blanket 10's. Conversely, the rules of this site assure anything rating blanket 1's would not be posted to begin with.

Anyway it goes, reviews are a poor source for choosing what stories to read.

However, I'm sure there are reviews that do get killed by the authors.

I had a few reviewees respond badly.

Oddly, one of my harshest reviews (not the harshest, but getting there) I actually felt pretty bad about... but the author responded to my review, and even blogged about it, and rather than being upset appreciated the honesty. I remember Gina Marie Wylie mentioning once that she would've appreciated more honest criticism than fawning appreciation when she first started writing, as it led to her burning a few bridges trying to commercialize her work.
But then someone who the only criticism I provided - in a review that otherwise was completely favorable - was that the use of a volunteer editor would greatly improve the readability of his work? He got all unhinged about the idea of his work not being absolutely perfect.

I have never seen anyone criticize the writing on such a document. Oh, it might not be a large enough amount, but the writing is almost always perfect.

I have a problem with many such checks. They don't have my name on them.

For only the second time in almost 20 years, I had a story reviewed today.

Okinawa

"Review by Cowboy [other reviews by Cowboy]

Reviewed: 2003-09-24

Great plot. The story is very good. So I would like to tell everyone to read it. It is a must read."

I also reviewed it, much later. 2016 I liked it too. My review was a little bit longer.