Scribble Hub Facts: Smut Hub Real or Not?

[Cynthell]

I'd argue that readers' behavior is out of scope of the initial question

Hypothetically, imagine that you land on a website with 80% of its content being hentai, would you accept the statement "you can't consider it a hentai site because most people are just here to look at the non-h artbooks" ?

Regardless of intended function whatever the userbase determines a site/program is used for is how itll be known. Theres probably other examples of this with other apps or sites but I dont have the brain power to look them up right now.

 

[owotrucked]

I mean if they were? Yes.

It seems like you have a liking for defining things according to what more than 50% of people do.

I'd like to emphasize the "you can't" in the hypothetical statement. There are issues in this mode of thinking:
1. The people who emits that statement impose themselves as authority who defines definition and concept. But definitions and concepts are subjective/personal tools to navigate the world first, and tools of communication second. Hence, words often appear in the culture first, and are recorded into dictionary later.
2. The hypothetical site can be considered both as hentai site and not. Real objects are often complex enough that they cannot be categorized with a single sortal criterion

Your statement:

Bad methodology. Just because there’s more non-smut novels, doesn’t mean people are reading them.

implies that you think your implicit definition of smuthub is better and more objective than the other party, and impose it as hard fact without attempt to establish a consensus on the terms of communication.

I'd like to point out that defining smuthub based on 50% reader activity is as subjective as 80% 20% cut off. Even the consideration of the userbase itself is subjective. I find it strange that you can't conceptualize an object in itself without having to consider its environmental context. I feel like there are some serious dependency issues on how you model the world.

In addition, you disallow yourself from conceptualizing things until you have collected enough data from users. For instance, if you haven't checked that more than 50% use their phone as a tool of voice call rather than a entertainment device, you can't categorize as neither without making a baseless claim. And then after categorizing (let's say phones are entertainment device), you somehow reject the other definition (phones as communication tools)?

On the other hand, OP used the simplest and loosest concept of smuthub based on the personal experience of how many type of content is thrown at the reader. This is the smallest scope possible and I find nothing wrong with using that approach.

Regardless of intended function whatever the userbase determines a site/program is used for is how itll be known. Theres probably other examples of this with other apps or sites but I dont have the brain power to look them up right now.

It's because the unintended functions are good, not because the userbase collectively decided to agree on a way to conceptualize the thing. No one sat on a round table to hold a council, "yeah let's spread the glorious scribblehub as smuthub" and yet we all marvel at the abundant harvest of spicy stories. I would be cautious on the order of cause and effect of your hypothesis. In addition, if everyone used the site/program as intended initially, doesn't that forbid the first user to distort the image of the site/program from its origin? For instance, the first one to realize and say tumblr is a nest of horny degenerate is wrong.

In conclusion, it's perfectly valid to criticize the small scope of OP's evaluation. It's also appropriate to suggest to widen the scope to userbase to fuel a more exhaustive judgement. However, disregarding this aspect is not a mistake even if it doesn't satisfy your standards.

bro why do I yap so much just to say that I don't give a shit about other users when I judge stuff?

 

[2wordsperminute]

Regardless of intended function whatever the userbase determines a site/program is used for is how itll be known. Theres probably other examples of this with other apps or sites but I dont have the brain power to look them up right now.

Remember when onlyfans tried to rebrand to safe for work content only?

 

[Deleted member 84247]

It seems like you have a liking for defining things according to what more than 50% of people do.

I'd like to emphasize the "you can't" in the hypothetical statement. There are issues in this mode of thinking:
1. The people who emits that statement impose themselves as authority who defines definition and concept. But definitions and concepts are subjective/personal tools to navigate the world first, and tools of communication second. Hence, words often appear in the culture first, and are recorded into dictionary later.
2. The hypothetical site can be considered both as hentai site and not. Real objects are often complex enough that they cannot be categorized with a single sortal criterion

Your statement:

implies that you think your implicit definition of smuthub is better and more objective than the other party, and impose it as hard fact without attempt to establish a consensus on the terms of communication.

I'd like to point out that defining smuthub based on 50% reader activity is as subjective as 80% 20% cut off. Even the consideration of the userbase itself is subjective. I find it strange that you can't conceptualize an object in itself without having to consider its environmental context. I feel like there are some serious dependency issues on how you model the world.

In addition, you disallow yourself from conceptualizing things until you have collected enough data from users. For instance, if you haven't checked that more than 50% use their phone as a tool of voice call rather than a entertainment device, you can't categorize as neither without making a baseless claim. And then after categorizing (let's say phones are entertainment device), you somehow reject the other definition (phones as communication tools)?

On the other hand, OP used the simplest and loosest concept of smuthub based on the personal experience of how many type of content is thrown at the reader. This is the smallest scope possible and I find nothing wrong with using that approach.


It's because the unintended functions are good, not because the userbase collectively decided to agree on a way to conceptualize the thing. No one sat on a round table to hold a council, "yeah let's spread the glorious scribblehub as smuthub" and yet we all marvel at the abundant harvest of spicy stories. I would be cautious on the order of cause and effect of your hypothesis. In addition, if everyone used the site/program as intended initially, doesn't that forbid the first user to distort the image of the site/program from its origin? For instance, the first one to realize and say tumblr is a nest of horny degenerate is wrong.

In conclusion, it's perfectly valid to criticize the small scope of OP's evaluation. It's also appropriate to suggest to widen the scope to userbase to fuel a more exhaustive judgement. However, disregarding this aspect is not a mistake even if it doesn't satisfy your standards.

bro why do I yap so much just to say that I don't give a shit about other users when I judge stuff?

 

[CharlesEBrown]

Here is my issue - what exactly is "sexual content"? Is it two characters kissing? Is it full on hard core porn? Are two characters intently cuddling with implied sex after "sexual content"? Is it a Roman Orgy? Since people self-tag in most cases, some may flag a story as "sexual content" for one sex scene or just for kissing. Others may find just about anything is "non sexual" unless it is very explicit with detailed depictions of actions from the Kama Sutra...

 

[ThatTwat3000]

Here is my issue - what exactly is "sexual content"? Is it two characters kissing? Is it full on hard core porn? Are two characters intently cuddling with implied sex after "sexual content"? Is it a Roman Orgy? Since people self-tag in most cases, some may flag a story as "sexual content" for one sex scene or just for kissing. Others may find just about anything is "non sexual" unless it is very explicit with detailed depictions of actions from the Kama Sutra...

Sexual content is what the author has marked as sexual content.

 

[CharlesEBrown]

Sexual content is what the author has marked as sexual content.

View attachment 30569

Which is exactly my point - one author may see stuff as sexual that another sees as just "normal"; and a hypothetical reader may think they both have it backwards

 

[uCare]

Which is exactly my point - one author may see stuff as sexual that another sees as just "normal"; and a hypothetical reader may think they both have it backwards

The term gets mistaken far too often for being pervasive.

 

[Sylver]

So in short, confirmation bias.

 

[Navillus]

Interesting...

 

[Anonjohn20]

Hello all.

I know the age-old question: is Smut Hub real?

So, I did some data analysis.

Percent of Sexual Novels on Scribble Hub​

Data Name	Value	Method
Total Novels	25914 (+126)	Series Finder | Scribble Hub www.scribblehub.com
Sexual Novels	8380 (+40)	Series Finder | Scribble Hub www.scribblehub.com
% of Sexual Novels	32.34% (+0%)	[(8380/25914)*100] rounded to the nearest hundredth.

Let’s compare this result to...

Percent of Non-Sexual Novels on Scribble Hub​

Data Name	Value	Method
Total Novels	25914 (+126)	Series Finder | Scribble Hub www.scribblehub.com
Non-Sexual Novels	17511 (+86)	Series Finder | Scribble Hub www.scribblehub.com
% of Non-Sexual Novels	67.57% (+0%)	[(17511/25914)*100] rounded to the nearest hundredth.

Now, you may be thinking: wait a minute! Sexual-tagged and Non-Sexual-tagged novels should add up to 100%! It only goes one of two ways, right?!

However, 67.57% + 32.34% = 99.91%

Yes, my fellow readers. ~0.09% of novels on Scribble Hub... don’t exist!

This isn’t due to some rounding error on my part. It simply is that 17511 + 8380 does not add up to 25914

So, Does Smut Hub Exist?​

Well, I would suppose so. 1 out of almost 3 novels will contain sexual content. However, more than that, we should go and address the ~0.09% of novels that just went... poof.

Spoiler: “Archive - 8 July 2024”

Percent of Sexual Novels on Scribble Hub​

Data Name	Value	Method
Total Novels	25788	Series Finder | Scribble Hub www.scribblehub.com
Sexual Novels	8340	Series Finder | Scribble Hub www.scribblehub.com
% of Sexual Novels	32.34%	[(8340/25788)*100] rounded to the nearest hundredth.

Let’s compare this result to...

Percent of Non-Sexual Novels on Scribble Hub​

Data Name	Value	Method
Total Novels	25788	Series Finder | Scribble Hub www.scribblehub.com
Non-Sexual Novels	17425	Series Finder | Scribble Hub www.scribblehub.com
% of Non-Sexual Novels	67.57%	[(17425/25788)*100] rounded to the nearest hundredth.

Now, you may be thinking: wait a minute! Sexual-tagged and Non-Sexual-tagged novels should add up to 100%! It only goes one of two ways, right?!

However, 67.57% + 32.34% = 99.91%

Yes, my fellow readers. ~0.09% of novels on Scribble Hub... don’t exist!

This isn’t due to some rounding error on my part. It simply is that 17425 + 8340 does not add up to 25788

So, Does Smut Hub Exist?​

Well, I would suppose so. 1 out of almost 3 novels will contain sexual content. However, more than that, we should go and address the ~0.09% of novels that just went... poof.

Honestly, I find it funny that people call this place SmutHub because the smut on this site is really tame compared to other sites, some of the stuff on AO3 and Webnovel would get banned if it was posted on this site.

 

[Rezcore]

But I heard from a friend of a friend that only smut is allowed here though

I doubt the.... wait a second.... never-ending move along, nothing to see here

 

[Samsonchui]

Good research. My first time here was because a book I was following on RR was kicked off it.
But looking for non smut was difficult.
My own novel on here gets messages sent to me about, “where‘s the harem.” In my novel the mc has non conventional relationships like poly. But I fade it to black.
i have a harem tag on it though, because it’s not a vanilla relationship.

 

[Kenjona]

Hello all.

I know the age-old question: is Smut Hub real?

So, I did some data analysis.

Percent of Sexual Novels on Scribble Hub​

Data Name	Value	Method
Total Novels	25914 (+126)	Series Finder | Scribble Hub www.scribblehub.com
Sexual Novels	8380 (+40)	Series Finder | Scribble Hub www.scribblehub.com
% of Sexual Novels	32.34% (+0%)	[(8380/25914)*100] rounded to the nearest hundredth.

Let’s compare this result to...

Percent of Non-Sexual Novels on Scribble Hub​

Data Name	Value	Method
Total Novels	25914 (+126)	Series Finder | Scribble Hub www.scribblehub.com
Non-Sexual Novels	17511 (+86)	Series Finder | Scribble Hub www.scribblehub.com
% of Non-Sexual Novels	67.57% (+0%)	[(17511/25914)*100] rounded to the nearest hundredth.

Now, you may be thinking: wait a minute! Sexual-tagged and Non-Sexual-tagged novels should add up to 100%! It only goes one of two ways, right?!

However, 67.57% + 32.34% = 99.91%

Yes, my fellow readers. ~0.09% of novels on Scribble Hub... don’t exist!

This isn’t due to some rounding error on my part. It simply is that 17511 + 8380 does not add up to 25914

So, Does Smut Hub Exist?​

Well, I would suppose so. 1 out of almost 3 novels will contain sexual content. However, more than that, we should go and address the ~0.09% of novels that just went... poof.

Spoiler: “Archive - 8 July 2024”

Percent of Sexual Novels on Scribble Hub​

Data Name	Value	Method
Total Novels	25788	Series Finder | Scribble Hub www.scribblehub.com
Sexual Novels	8340	Series Finder | Scribble Hub www.scribblehub.com
% of Sexual Novels	32.34%	[(8340/25788)*100] rounded to the nearest hundredth.

Let’s compare this result to...

Percent of Non-Sexual Novels on Scribble Hub​

Data Name	Value	Method
Total Novels	25788	Series Finder | Scribble Hub www.scribblehub.com
Non-Sexual Novels	17425	Series Finder | Scribble Hub www.scribblehub.com
% of Non-Sexual Novels	67.57%	[(17425/25788)*100] rounded to the nearest hundredth.

Now, you may be thinking: wait a minute! Sexual-tagged and Non-Sexual-tagged novels should add up to 100%! It only goes one of two ways, right?!

However, 67.57% + 32.34% = 99.91%

Yes, my fellow readers. ~0.09% of novels on Scribble Hub... don’t exist!

This isn’t due to some rounding error on my part. It simply is that 17425 + 8340 does not add up to 25788

So, Does Smut Hub Exist?​

Well, I would suppose so. 1 out of almost 3 novels will contain sexual content. However, more than that, we should go and address the ~0.09% of novels that just went... poof.

Cool Info.