Got 1 star because of a comment in forum.

Status
Not open for further replies.
HuaiChi

HuaiChi

Active member
Joined
Apr 25, 2024
Messages
79
Points
33
3guanoff said:
This will exclude people who read without being logged in. It is also easy to trick. Waiting with a tab open for six minutes is not a big deal for a troll. Even if you measure scroll, there are browser add-ons for that. Such measures just end up annoying people who did not log in.
Click to expand...
I also thought that might happen, but it is better than nothing.
For those who read without logging in, that won't be a problem either. You can't rate a story if you are not logged in and don't add the story to your reading list. So you can read without any worry, just can't rate it
 
D

Deleted member 19066

Guest
So I don't usually rate things, but I have now read Conquest: Rise of F*ta Gnoll Overlord

I think for me it either a 3 star leaning on a 2 or a 2 star leaning on a 3.


It was a bit too pulp-y for me, or... it felt... "empty" at times.

Also not the type of book I usually read.

So what's right here, should people only read book they would give 5s to?

Should the rating just be a binary like and dislike?

So I didn't particularly like it and will likely drop it

So do authors rather I give no rating, and not tell them what i think?

Edit: interesting, once you rate you cant unrated something.
 
KoyukiMegumi

KoyukiMegumi

Kitty
Joined
Jun 11, 2021
Messages
1,201
Points
153
Omnifarious said:
So do authors rather I give no rating, and not tell them what i think?
Click to expand...
No, please do tell us what you think. Just make sure to add to let us know what you think. Rating alone is not enough to let me know where to improve! At least I speak for myself! I think that's the main argument for what's going on here. Ratings without thoughts are just meaningless in the end. :blob_pat_sad:
 
3

3guanoff

Well-known memoir
Joined
Jul 14, 2023
Messages
370
Points
133
HuaiChi said:
I also thought that might happen, but it is better than nothing.
For those who read without logging in, that won't be a problem either. You can't rate a story if you are not logged in and don't add the story to your reading list. So you can read without any worry, just can't rate it
Click to expand...
That's not what I meant. If I find a good story while logged in, I will add it to my reading list or if it is on RR to my RSS reader. But I won't bother logging in every time I visit the site. Especially, if it's just to read a new chapter or two. If I find something worth commenting on, it's not too late to log in then.
Your proposed mechanism would exclude all those from reading who were not logged in for at least three or even six minutes. In three minutes, I can read at least 3000 words. Possibly thrice as much depending on the information density.
For many stories 3000 words are three chapters. Imagine the pain of having finished 80 chapters while not logged in and then needing to wait three weeks and log in every time just to leave a rating? I wouldn't bother and just not leave a rating.
 
D

Deleted member 146224

Guest
Prince_Azmiran_Myrian said:
Why are the authors writing? would be my main question.
Is it because they have a story they want to tell or because they only want some validation?
If they quit because of one-stars, they must not have cared enough about the story in the first place.
Sure they can be discouraging, but if somebody is that vulnerable they probably shouldnt be on the internet.
Click to expand...
I can say the same about readers. Why are they reading? If they can't sacrifice a little bit of their time to see if they enjoy the story then they surely must not care about reading that much. And if they can't deal with reading a bad story every once in a while they shouldn't be reading at all.

Some people just want to write. Having others enjoy their writing is a side bonus. Others post in hopes to see if they are good enough and that's when the problem of bombing with 1-stars becomes a thing. They receive the feedback that they are not good enough without any additional guidance and they quit. How many could've told really good stories if they were simply luckier? Who loses the most? The writer, who will probably still write and never share it anywhere, or the reader who now has 1 author less to read from? And what if there are 10 more authors after that. And then another 1000 and then another 10 000?

Saying that if someone is too vulnerable so they should quit internet is what is enabling the toxic cesspool that some parts of the internet are. It completely removes any responsibility from the troll and instead puts the burden of the act on the victim. This is just dumb.
 
Xcalibur_Xc

Xcalibur_Xc

dEATH tO tHE tROLLS
Joined
Dec 9, 2022
Messages
286
Points
103
Prince_Azmiran_Myrian said:
Well, it certainly doesn't make you look honest. why multiple accounts?
Click to expand...
Doesn't make me look honest? Why not? One account is for Fanfic and trials fic only and one is for Originals that passed the trial phase. Check my profile messages, you will find some mentions of Originals that I worked on. Even my Amazon ac has different name, because I don't want those trolls track me back to my book and spam nonstop nonsense.
RepresentingEnvy said:
What's stupid about that?
Click to expand...
If you can't figure out such a simple thing... Well, let's just say, I prefer to keep fanfics and Originals seperate.
 
Last edited:
Prince_Azmiran_Myrian

Prince_Azmiran_Myrian

🐉Inquisitor Dragon Appraising Hoard🐉
Joined
Aug 23, 2022
Messages
2,841
Points
153
DannyTheDaikon said:
I can say the same about readers. Why are they reading? If they can't sacrifice a little bit of their time to see if they enjoy the story then they surely must not care about reading that much. And if they can't deal with reading a bad story every once in a while they shouldn't be reading at all.

Some people just want to write. Having others enjoy their writing is a side bonus. Others post in hopes to see if they are good enough and that's when the problem of bombing with 1-stars becomes a thing. They receive the feedback that they are not good enough without any additional guidance and they quit. How many could've told really good stories if they were simply luckier? Who loses the most? The writer, who will probably still write and never share it anywhere, or the reader who now has 1 author less to read from? And what if there are 10 more authors after that. And then another 1000 and then another 10 000?

Saying that if someone is too vulnerable so they should quit internet is what is enabling the toxic cesspool that some parts of the internet are. It completely removes any responsibility from the troll and instead puts the burden of the act on the victim. This is just dumb.
Click to expand...
Look, you are giving one stars way more power than they actually have.
I seriously doubt they have as deep an impact as you are making it out to be. It should be a minor annoyance at worst.

As for internet toxicity, it is a given and will not change. That's mankind.
People who cannot get over a tiny offense should just leave. They will kill themselves with stress and anger otherwise. Generally, we can control our own reactions far more easily than other people. If the troll is truly that bad, they get banned.
 
D

Deleted member 146224

Guest
Prince_Azmiran_Myrian said:
Look, you are giving one stars way more power than they actually have.
I seriously doubt they have as deep an impact as you are making it out to be. It should be a minor annoyance at worst.

As for internet toxicity, it is a given and will not change. That's mankind.
People who cannot get over a tiny offense should just leave. They will kill themselves with stress and anger otherwise. Generally, we can control our own reactions far more easily than other people. If the troll is truly that bad, they get banned.
Click to expand...
Listen, let's just agree to disagree. This argument leads nowhere. You won't change your mind, I won't change my mind either.
 
HuaiChi

HuaiChi

Active member
Joined
Apr 25, 2024
Messages
79
Points
33
Omnifarious said:
So I don't usually rate things, but I have now read Conquest: Rise of F*ta Gnoll Overlord

I think for me it either a 3 star leaning on a 2 or a 2 star leaning on a 3.


It was a bit too pulp-y for me, or... it felt... "empty" at times.

Also not the type of book I usually read.

So what's right here, should people only read book they would give 5s to?

Should the rating just be a binary like and dislike?

So I didn't particularly like it and will likely drop it

So do authors rather I give no rating, and not tell them what i think?

Edit: interesting, once you rate you cant unrated something.
Click to expand...
Looks like you have already rated it. But that is not a problem. You have read it. You read, didn't like it, nd gave it one, then it is not a problem. I am not saying I am best writer, or my story would suit every one. It's okay if you don't like it.

However, you missed my point. I am not posted it, because I want validation or want to advertise my novel. I did it because it doesn't make sense because he gave one star to both of my novels because I just tagged k5.
 
D

Deleted member 84247

Guest
DannyTheDaikon said:
Listen, let's just agree to disagree. This argument leads nowhere. You won't change your mind, I won't change my mind either.
Click to expand...
There can be a middle ground. People shouldn't be assholes for no reason, and people can be a bit tougher. People can lift each other while also being honest. But trolling is too OP and the easiest thing to do. It takes no effort and has no effect on the troll. It's an autowin strategy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top