Forum: Story Discussion and Feedback

if an author won't even list a score, that again is often a red flag

Authors can no longer turn off scoring.

In most cases, most readers will rate the final score based on the entire story, while they'll often rate the ongoing story based on how they like any given chapter. That's an example of a 'real score', though it's hardly the only one.

Please explain what a 'real score' is.

A 'real' score is the average of the 1s, 2s, 3s ... 8s, 9s, 10s before SOL's median correction algorithm is applied.

AJ

What that implies is that the total score usually includes more 8s and 10s than they do 5s, so drawing a firm line (nothing at all below this number) tend to miss a wide variety of decent stories. Thus, most SOL readers also allow for a certain 'fudge factor' (ex: 7+ = 6 - 10).

In other words, those scores aren't a hard and fast number, instead they're quite a broad range of individual scores, based on a wide variety of factors and individual preferences.

Then how, as a reader, can I see that?

I'm not aware of any way that you can. But you've developed your own heuristic comparison by choosing 7 as your borderline score. If it works for you, stick with it.

AJ

Then how, as a reader, can I see that?

You cannot. And you shouldn't. A lot of work has gone into the scoring system and it does what it's designed to do. I only mentioned the "real" (or "raw") score because that's the score you give a story when rating it and I didn't want you to assume the score you see is equivalent to that score. I don't want you to miss out on good stories because of that misconception.

So don't worry about the "real" vs "actual" score. Just don't automatically rule out a story with a less than 7 score. I think that's setting the cut-off too high. You may find a gem.

Besides, given the way I approach stories, my stories generally rise over time, so while I'm posting, the vast majority of my stories hover in the 6s (mid-to-high 6 score), yet after they're completed, and the readers post the final score, reflecting their opinion of the entire story, rather than just the latest chapter, they finally rise in the 7s.

Thus, I've got one story with a high-6 rating, quite a few older 8s, while the majority are well into the 7s. Yet if you ONLY read scores of 7 or above, you'd likely never glance at any of mine.

Given my writing style, many would appreciate that anyway, yet it shows why using score only is so misleading—especially with Sci-Fi and Fantasy stories, which often contain more initial 'world-building' scenes (and are thus considerably longer than most fiction genres.

Though again, as many have noted, it they don't see the entry on the main page with a score above a 7, they'd likely never consider my stories at all.

I'm fine with anyone who doesn't like how I tell my stories, yet I'd prefer they'd at least give it a shot—to see whether they like it or not.

In most cases that's true, though glancing at the tags helps eliminating the truly objectionable material (scat, dismemberments or those highlighting actual torture for pleasure. Again, that's an example of story codes highlighting individual 'squicks' (personal dislikes) rather than those we do.

I don't object to much in a well-told story, so it's mostly about avoiding those particular authors (i.e. banning them from your feed) than skipping specific stories. As scores alone only tell you so much and there are also certain story descriptions I'd rather not read. Though hostly, those are very rare indeed.

dismemberments

What's the tag for dismemberment?

AJ

Valid point, I was just providing examples of the sorts of stories I'd most prefer banning, merely highlighting how extreme some extremes SOL authors can resort to, though it's hardly common and I'm not sure it even exists anymore (hopefully not).

I got a lot of that for my Country Roads series (well, in other places because it's still posting here) and Going Home (a stand alone) wanting them to continue even though the actual story arc had ended, just to keep going with the characters, and I always resist it for the same reason.

Once the story arc is finished, it's just stuff happening.

If a story is complete, then I'll look at the score, but not as critically as you do.

That's the key, as you NC-Retired suggested, stick to the authors and genres you prefer. 7-rated and above are a sure bet, yet 6s are still worth checking out if they look promising. Yet, since so many stories her never finish, it's best waiting until you have a better idea whether the author is capable of finishing a decent story.

You basically start at the top, then start glancing around to see what else you may prefer.

That said, there are only a few ongoing stories I read regularly, so if I'm desperate, I'll double back and reread the classics, so look up the favorite stories under the Story Recommendations SOL Forum (I have three different ones liked up now, mostly teen Do-Overs).

The next thing I look at is whether or not the story is complete.

Today I came across an author with 60 stories on SOL of which 59 are 'to be continued'.

AJ

Whenever I see that, I think they have no idea on how to end as story, so with no idea of a story arc or story development, they start, quickly lose their way, then bail out before the stories even midway along.

Sadly, it's not uncommon in writing in general. Luckily, publishers generally weed most of those out relatively quickly. Online stories however, there is no 'weeding out' process, as terrible writing tends to predominate on most online writing sites (cough, cough, most recent KDP stories).

In my posting to the various Quora Writing Spaces, a common question focuses on writers 'losing their way', and not knowing how to recover from it.

New writers need to find their voice, yet often, too much freedom is more intimidating than too little.

That too is common on SOL, as we all tend to not vote on stories we opt to not read. As it's really unfair rating an entire story on just a terrible first chapter or two. The 'squick' warnings are there for a reason. ;)

Also, for most of us, we're more concerned with particular 'types' of stories, so even with 'favorite' authors, there are always a few we 'dare not read'. ;)

But I've always seen as non-proofread descriptions as an indication the entire story is completely unedited, which itself is fairly common on SOL (and often, Amazon KDP itself).

it's really unfair rating an entire story on just a terrible first chapter or two

I used to believe that. But I changed my mind because I now believe that I should rate what made me quit reading the story.

For that, I prefer contacting the author (if it's allowed, and telling them why I quit directly). That's always seemed a more honest method, as many stories start poorly, yet get better, the further the story develops. I still won't give it another try, yet again, most authors deserve to hear why readers are turned off, even if they'd rather not know.

And usually, when someone criticizes me, I'm usually well aware of why people dislike my writing, as I hardly hide my preferences, or why I choose to write those types of stories.

But I've always seen as non-proofread descriptions as an indication the entire story is completely unedited, which itself is fairly common on SOL (and often, Amazon KDP itself).

There's an author, who also edits other authors' works, who finishes their story descriptions with

Visit Bookapy and you can see other reader's comments about this story.

Contact author and story comments are disabled, otherwise I might have pointed out the absurdity of only having Bookapy comments from one reader :-)

AJ

Awww thanks...

Just had a thought. It's actually more than 67, as I went through a phase of posting stories as blogs (though I have since removed most of them) and as forum posts...

I really don't know how Laz puts up with me...

Anyway, has anyone else noticed that Vincent Berg is the thread killer? Creepy music playing...

As always, exceptions and exceptions.

And usually those are included under the 'favorite author' category, or in this case, the promising author, as her stories are worth checking, if not always quite as satisfying as others.

I am a lot of things, consistent is not on the list...

Obviously. Otherwise you'd be an amorphous blob. :-)

AJ

Maybe I am....

Called 'Bob'.

Obviously.

Agree on score being a secondary consideration. I rarely hand out 10s, but the few that I have were for stories that rated in the 5s and 6s, and I've read many in that range that get 8s and 9s from me on the regular.

So many great stories on this site have gotten absolutely thrashed in the scoring because the subject matter offended the fragile masculinity of the SOL Boomer Brigade, who routinely abuse the voting system for punitive purposes. If a story is both well-written and manages to piss off a bunch of SOL oldheads at the same time, then that's a strong indication that I'll probably love it.

The description is the make or break for me. Not only does the story idea have to be compelling, but the description for it has to be well-written too. Nine times out of ten, if the description is well-written then the story will be too. Even if the story concept sounds interesting, a poorly-written description tells me that it probably sucks. Even then, I'll usually still check the first paragraph, just in case.

Yeah, those scores can definitely be discouraging. When I posted one story, which got a TERRIBLE response, I quit posting/publishing for nearly 5 years, so after the LACK of comments after so many with my latest story, I was near abandoning writing altogether, yet forced myself to, just to get past that malaise. Unlike my other stories, this one was purely for myself—I've been writing a few of that source, though none published/posted yet—though they allow me the freedom to try different things, free of expectations.

Not every story should nor should be a masterwork, yet they help get you to that point. Though again, I'm more discouraged by the lack of feedback than I am low scores. It doesn't matter how good a story is, if no one cares enough to respond to it (most of the comments on this last one were over the lack of editing, as I knew it wasn't publish-worthy to begin with).

It's a tough job being an asshole, but someone has to do it.

Eh, why does someone have to do it?

Speaking of assholes, there are some of us writers that cherish and feed on the anger, disgust, and loathing from readers that cannot tolerate misspelling, punctuation, and grammar errors. I am a proud and repugnant asshole that fills my stories with such errors.

Absolutely your right. It reminds me of two things.

First, there's a quote from a famous author (that I am completely unable to find right now) that says, in effect: 'Reading is hard work. It's the job of the writer to make it easier.' Every error makes it harder, because the reader has to overcome it to keep reading.

The second is from an analysis of fraud emails (aka 'spam'). The misspellings, grammatical errors, and so forth in spam (think of 'Nigerian Prince' emails, for instance) are not bugs, they're features. The goal is to weed out readers with discernment. The spammers only want gullible people to keep reading. Anyone with discernment just wastes their time - they may reply, but they will, sooner or later, fail to fork over the requested money. They may only keep 0.001% of readers, but that's more than enough to make spamming worthwhile.

Reading is hard work. It's the job of the writer to make it easier

A nineteenth century novelist Nathaniel Hawthorne once quipped: "Easy reading is damn hard writing."

And you, sir, presumably do it quite well. So, thanks for your kind service, even if I don't chose to read those stories. ;)

Once again, on SOL, there is no right or wrong way to write stories, instead, the more varieties we offer, the more readers have to choose from. Thus every offering is valuable, no matter how much you may personally despise it.

So bring on the gay, bisexual male, the snuff and the water-play and scat stories, as long as they're properly labeled, I'll know which ones to avoid! The more, the merrier!

Once again, 7.5 is an incredibly high limitations, as few stories actually achieve 8s (I can count mine in the single digits (seven, out of twenty-four). So I generally look for scores of 7 or higher, and then pick any 6's which particularly appeal to me (usually based on genre to topics).

Also, if you're choosing based entirely on score, then there is absolutely NO reason to even consider the "New" stories list, as most of those are too short or too recently posted to have any score (i.e. it's an entirely different criteria, as most of the 'quick yank' stories are often found there, since there's so little actual plot and little character development).

Therefore, if there's a particular squick tale in the high six range, chances are, it's incredibly well written, as the squick itself likely accounts or a 1 or 2 point drop.

I go by 4 things, 1. Previous stories, Ratings (if it's below a 7 i'm not interested)

Voting here is done by less than 1% of the readers, who most likely vote on the outliers (1-2) and (9-10). It maybe a reasonable criteria as a popularity contest for some well established stories, but if the story only has 30 votes out of 3,000 readers, you are really giving those 30 trolls far more power over what you can and cannot read than they should have. They are counting on it.

The same kind of trolls are the type of people that reported the site to the ISP to punish Lajeez, btw.

it's a broken system abused by trolls who often vote against the subject matter and not the story.

"You call this a story?" --yep. It's 100,000 words with thousands of readers.

However, because it has a code for some fetish they don't like, they create multiple accounts to punish the author.

You are only hurting yourself with that criteria by restricting some fantastic stories.

Writer's rule: Never feed the trolls.

I want to say that I ignore my scores, but if I did, my pants would already be smoking. I have to have some gauge of how I'm doing - either through scores or downloads. Even after almost twenty years of doing this, I still lack confidence.

I don't agree - I've seen stories with 2,000 readers, ruined by 10-20 voters - so statistically - that's not enough to base a correct assessment.

The votes don't reflect enough of the readers - so any conclusion made by the scores "Oh wow, I did great" or "Oh wow, I suck as an author and should stop writing" is incorrect - it's like flipping a coin and saying "Statistically, half the time it's right - so just flip a coin and decide if your story is a piece of shit."

Wrong.

It's insufficient as a sample set to base any sort of assessment on, and it's primarily used by trolls to punish new authors. I've seen it and felt it myself.

I can assure you - there are some well-written stories on here with 5 or fewer - because the trolls decided it.

A great example of how bandwagon logical fallacy works is rotten tomatoes.

Arguably, Last of Us (the TV show_ based on the video game is a well written story by anyone's standards. It is well acted, has great effects - whether you like the genre or some of it's subject matter is irrelevant. It's a GOOD show in terms of quality.

It is sitting at 51%

Or 5.1 on SOL.

That's correct to you? based on the genre of Zombie shows?

no, it's a manipulated poll that bots have fucking ruined, the same manbaby bro-bots that hate Femdom/FLR stories here and consistently vote them a 1 no matter what - are sad that the show has gay relationships and at their perception of politics where people share stuff and Elon isn't god, etc.

Those people have made that score irrelevant through manipulation. It's not objective or reflective of the quality of the show. There is no "yeah it just sucks, bra"

You may not personally like it, and I hate that one of the main characters died off - I am gutted. However, i respect that the show made me care enough about the character to care about the death - which is a sign of a good story.

Voting on this site is a garbage metric that reflects the outliers and a tool of trolls to discourage new authors. Provides zero value.

Using it to exclude stories will definitely filter out some kick ass stories.

Proof: Look at Vulgus's scores.
He's an old school filth writer with legendary stories in the genre.

He many stories between 5-6. They aren't shitty stories, dude.

They didn't run me off the site - but I've literally seen it happen to budding authors - especially those who write FLR/Femdom.

They definitely made it unfun for me - and it's hard not to take trolls personally.

You have definitely reminded me with your "the votes can't be manipulated, evidence doesn't matter - the scores are always right" why I should steer clear of the forums.

The one thing most people on this site largely agree upon is that the vocal part of the user base is largely toxic.

They don't just one-bomb, they send nasty gram emails and snotty comments on the story, etc. I've seen it - and they are a small minority of people who are largely too apathetic to bother to vote.

New authors who could have been welcomed in a community that offers constructive and positive feedback might have stuck around and become better authors over time. why should they put up with the trolls.

Go on and shit on people like me and Vulgus because "our scores aren't high enough" - it's an irrelevant metric.

It's pointless to argue about it - I've made my case, and I brought evidence and examples. You brought your feelings that since your score is high it works for everyone as an overall objective metric.

It does not.

Phil Phantom, Vulgus, Redlegtiger - they wouldn't be considered based on the 7.0 or higher attribute and they are some of the best of their genre.

Redlegtiger has tens of thousands of downloads and less than SIXTY votes - how in the ever loving fuck can his story be judged based on that?

Meanwhile, the lowest scoring story on the site has 180+ votes and only 400 downloads

It just happens to be political in nature - what a coinkeydink. Was it shitty? maybe - my point is that number of votes, total downloads, and votes are insufficient as criteria by themselves OR even in combination.

Redlegtiger's stories were already epic when I first started my journey, and it just happens that since it's not pinned to the top - many people don't see it anymore and that's why it's not getting the readership it probably deserves. It was probably posted when SOL had a fraction of the regular traffic too.

There is a 3Kb BDSM story that has a 2.3 and 4000 readers and about the same number of votes that his did. How could it possibly be a sufficient sample size?



I have seen another site that uses "Thank yous" - a simple metric to show how many people took the time to thank the author.

That to me - is a lot better of a metric. A 5.1 because literally 20 people took the time to vote out of thousands isn't valid - no matter what anecdotal belief you have that since you have higher than 7 it must be right. (Which is what confirms your bias, I am guessing).

If an author like Vulgus doesn't have a 7 or higher in his genre - it fails. simple as that.

If the Last of Us has a 51% on rotton tomatos, the poll is wrong.

They didn't run me off the site - but I've literally seen it happen to budding authors - especially those who write FLR/Femdom.

Possibly my highest bangs per buck story, in terms of downloads/wordcount could be classed as FemDom. It's got a low score but you can't argue downloads.

They definitely made it unfun for me - and it's hard not to take trolls personally.

I thought you wrote MDom, with lots of embarrased naked females, rather than FemDom.

AJ

Possibly my highest bangs per buck story, in terms of downloads/wordcount could be classed as FemDom. It's got a low score but you can't argue downloads.

You literally can argue that downloads can't be disputed, because his ARGUMENT was that score (not downloads) IS reflective of quality.

Popularity + more people served doesn't equal high quality. Taco bell, budeweiser, McDonalds would like to have a word.

The score of 7.0+ as a selection criteria would automatically eliminate you from even being considered by the original premise of the post - that something is wrong with any story that doesn't score over 7.

As far as downloads being king - that's also BS. I could literally write a nothing story and because I have 1000+ followers -if I hit the update page just right, my first chapter would have 10,000+ views in the first day or two.

The authors with even more reach would dwarf me. They'd have more downloads than all others - and it's not indictive that the work they just posted is of the same quality or better. Yes, they have been here a while, but if even I can get 1,000 perverts to follow me - it's not proof I write better than someone with nobody following them.

I'd dwarf someone with no followers who is getting 30-200 downloads int the same time, and I'd be dwarfed by the person with more followers. It's just how the system works, and the RSS feeders do automatically add to that count.

Twats the night before Christmas got 17000 views on chapter one alone - that's not really MY doing. That's a combination of the things - including the RSS readers that automatically download the first chapter which provides a bump.

That already puts my first chapter of one story above many other authors - without any consideration for quality of my story.

I can check my next new story, because it's been a few days so I probably can't use my most recent story as proof -

but just consider that my latest story has 5000+ views on chapter one, and the stories posted around the same time have around 200. Am I just that much better than them by a magnitude of x25?

5000 views is probably about half the total views of most of your stories that have been on the site a long time. Does that mean mine are twice as good? fuck no. It means I got lucky/more downloads and that's it.

There probably is a way to create a better quality score, but taking a single metric from this site - or even two or three alone as an indicator is probably not ideal.

I am not a super statistician or anything - but I know enough to know that the collection of this data, how easily it is manipulated and the fact that authors like Phil Phantom would automatically be disqualified - mean that the 7.0+ voting filter is going to filter them right out - and make the reader conclude they must not have been kick-ass stories.

He has lower readership, and scores - but it's not reflective of his ability to write and the product of his work. He's not the exception - he's the rule. I can find dozens more but I chose those three (redlegtiger, Vulgus, and Phil Phantom) because off the top of my head - I consider them to be greater authors and I know that if they don't rank - then I am in good fucking company.

I would say that while total readers, total followers, votes can be one indicator - it's not credible enough to be a good filter - even combined, there are enough examples of good work that would be filtered out to say that none of those metrics are worthiwile to quantify if a story is worth someone's time.

I've got stories that had 5000+ views that will never get noticed that were good, and I have later stories with tens of thousands of views that I think are ho-hum by comparison.

As to your question about themes of my stories, I write a lot of stories and not exclusively one thing or the other. Many of my femdom stories were bombed and I got the nasty gram experience first hand. if even a cuckold type character exists in the story it sets them off.

Some of my longest stories may involve a combination of submissive/dominance based on gender. A good example would be a submissive couple that's seeking out a dominant.

Another would be a story about a summer that the main character's cousins feminized him to teach him not to be such a mysogonist know-it-all, and in the end after throwing a party and wrecking their mother's apartment - they ended up getting a taste of their own medicine.

I love stuff like that. I read your stuff too. I don't care about votes - I care about the quality of writing and the story. I don't like to limit myself based on fetish.

I've even written game of thrones and other fantasy scenarios. One of my most popular earliest stories was a civil war era fiction.

You've literally agreed with me that you got low scores for a popular story, and still it feels like people are trying to convince themselves that voting is not flawed.

It's flawed. It is often manipulated by a small group of trolls who are not a valid sample set of readers.

A person who uses it solely to censor out all the stories that don't meet a 7.0 is missing out on some potentially great stories. I gave a valid example of Vulgus.

He's brilliant - hands down.

Of the 20+ Phil Phantom stories on the site, he only has about 3 that would meet the criteria to be considered. The rest are garbage/not valid for consideration based on the criteria.

There isn't an old school filthy Internet author that is probably more well known than the iconic Phil Phantom - his stuff is classic kink/perversion. It's well written, it's flawless in terms of grammar, etc.

It's PROOF that if he can get a 5.3 on his kinky stories, that the votes do not reflect accurately on quality.

He's not the exception - he's the rule.

Based on the criteria provided, a person seeking dirty stories that loves the kind of stuff Phil wrote would miss them completely, and that's a tragedy.

I am a fucking pervert, and I can never aspire to be as filthy as Phil Phantom (or as clever) an author.

I have twice his followers on here - and I continue to have higher scores than him - which proves to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that neither of those metrics reflect on quality of writing because Phil will always be better than me.

So, while there are people who consistently have high scores - for whatever reason, the voting on this site is easily manipulated and flawed. It probably reflects the outliers of people who took the time to vote because they were either shocked or delighted.

If everyone were forced to vote/rate after reading the story based on relatively objective criteria and bots were somehow forbidden there may be a case that the scores more accurately reflect the majority of your readers - but you've made the exact case for the opposite outcome:

Your story is popular as fuck with the kind of people who enjoy it, but of the 20+ stories you have only ONE has scored high enough that it would be considered valid by the criteria given here to even look at your stories.

That means if someone used that criteria to search femdom (only stories 7.0 or higher), they miss out on almost your entire body of work.

Doesn't make sense. You write well and your stories are exactly what you say they are in the codes and descriptions. In my opinion, even if I don't particularly get off on them - I can not say they are not GOOD stories.

And when I see consistently 5.0 on your stories, that's saying they are not. That's why the voting system - is arguably bad.

I could see a case made for total downloads over a period of time (say 1,000 a month) versus (100 a month) might be another metric - but for a new author just starting out - it puts them at a disadvantage.

I have stories that have been on here for years that are still getting downloaded regularly and that's awesome, but a lot of times my early shit sits fallow and I think it's just as good if not better than my later stories. It's that people tend to stalk the "recently updated" for fresh stories and don't go back to the early catalogs.

I have tens of thousands of downloads on recent stories and my early stories will never break the 5,000 mark because they are older - that's not a reflection on quality.

I am sure I could have done them better now that I'm more experienced and have better spell check tools. However, the disparity in downloads doesn't mean that my new stories are 20x better than my earlier stories.

Arguably, you have one story with a high score and a lot of downloads, and taken together - one could conclude that it's popular and people liked it.

However, that was the exception. The other 21, many of which you score under 5.0 - people that dig your stories probably loved the shit out of it.

The votes are very likely reflective of a very small group of trolls.

40 people out of the 2000 that downloaded your story, got to decide that score. The 40 people very likely represent outliers that vote extremes of 1s and 10s - and certainly is barely 2%. It's not enough to base a valid opinion of the quality of your story on.

That's why I recommended reviews.

Lot of Downloads may be a good indicator that a story is good. If it's been on the site a long time - it's going to have more and a person may miss out on some newer stories that they didn't give a chance.

Old authors who have 1000+ followers automatically get a lot of downloads. I initially got way more than I did when I first started on the site.

A case could be made if more people like my stories - that they are better.

But as I said earlier, McDonalds serving millions doesn't mean that Culvers has shittier hamburgers because it served less.

High voting score might be a good indicator that a story is good. It may be that 40 people out of 2000 largely voted 10, it's still not enough to tell you one way or the other because that population is not only a small sample set - but they are likely made up of very biased people/bots.

I am positive that there are bots on the site - why wouldn't there be? trolls without any real-life power are sad little turds - so naturally they'd invest time and energy in creating bot accounts to manipulate votes. They have no real world power, and the only chance they have to get laid is to crawl up a chicken's ass and wait - so their time literally has no value.

They may be automating the bots or creating fake user accounts by hand - either way works.

That's why I say - a review is probably a more accurate way to choose. Personally, there isn't enough new stuff of the stuff that I enjoy reading on the site for me to discriminate based on an arbitrary value.

I had a friend who was thrilled his story initially got a 7.0.

He was over the moon about it. I told him I was happy for him and I believe he consistently writes good stuff - but I gave my reasons that the system is not a good reflection of quality.

When his score plummeted because now instead of 10 people out of 2000, 20 people out of 3000 voted - he decided it was shit and stopped writing it.

The score meant nothing when it was high (even though it accurately reflected his quality of writing IMHO), because it meant nothing when it plummeted for the same reasons.

It's like having a broken clock that increments in seconds every time someone says "Good job" or "This sucks" and pointing to the times it was right during the day and saying "See! this time it was right!"

We aren't measuring the right thing with it, because it's a flawed way of collecting reader feedback/opinion. IDK how else to say it.

That's the stuff I'd like to avoid.

You literally can argue that downloads can't be disputed

I'd say it means I hit a niche.

Popularity + more people served doesn't equal high quality.

Agreed, it indicates appeal, which the SOL scoring system is supposed to show.

I was wrong - Category Search turns up a dozen of your stories with FemDom. A minority, but non-zero.

AJ

Hey, any non-zero is better than zero. As always, it's usually the story that dictates the response, not the genre, subject matter or reactions. A well-told story is well-told, no matter how much you may despise it. Yet, most well written 'disgusting' stories are usually worth reading, simply because they're SO damn well told!

Though, not every author is capable of those most exhausted ranks.

Though, not every author is capable of those most exhausted ranks.

Huh? Did you mean 'exalted' rather than exhausted?

Yep, another case of 'auto-correct' correcting my text, AFTER I type it, so I never notice. Infuriating is what it is, yet my spelling is SO bad (a part of my autism, apparently), I don't dare turn it off. :(

Simply put, that's why scores alone should limit what you read and what you don't. You may not enjoy the majority of the lower scoring stories, yet on each leading edge, there are a variety of 'just as good', similar quality stories, which only got voted down for any number of reasons.

As noted earlier, if that based on non-coded squicks, then yes, those ARE deserved, yet as long as those squick are listed—even within the worst chapters—then readers will KNOW to avoid them. After all, we can all figure out what happened in any given missed chapter.

I am assuming from context that's a typo and you mean "Scores alone should NOT limit what you read"

It's disheartening sometimes to see a good story get trolled - especially because I think most people do not understand that if it was coded for something - and they don't like that thing, they shouldn't vote it down simply because they don't like that fetish.

I suspect that happens a lot, just from reading the comments. There is one guy in particular on the site who left a nasty gram on several stories I recently read - along the lines of

"This contained (XYZ) and I don't like (XYZ), so 0/10!!!"

And the author clearly coded it. That drives me bananas.

As always, you can't cure idiocy (the complainers, not mine, as there's apparently no simple cure for mine), as it's un-solvable conundrum.

For me, long past my prime, the sex, as part of the underlying romance, is a reflection of the relationship, and thus I value them as much as every other topic, yet I'll often skip past anything that goes on so long it bores me to tears.

As I've long proclaimed, I mostly write sex scenes as a means to an end—to get to the more revealing apres-sex scenes, intimate discussions between equal partners, revealing their innermost, long-held secrets and inner conflicts. Now those topics are much more relevant than 'just another lay' is, under ANY circumstances.

Yet often, romance and sex are largely mutually exclusive. Not always, yet it's near enough, that you can KILL any romance by focusing on every single sexual act in intricate detail.

As an 'old-dude', those romances are what most motives me to read, because if the characters don't give a fuck, then why should readers lend them one of theirs?