How do you feel about people giving your story a bad rating for no apparent reason?

[Lord_Drakonus]

Example: You just posted the first chapter of a new story, and then someone instantly gave it 1 to 3 stars for no apparent reason. You check the grammar, and there's nothing seemingly wrong with it.

 

[Devils.Advocate]

Example: You just posted the first chapter of a new story, and then someone instantly gave it 1 to 3 stars for no apparent reason. You check the grammar, and there's nothing seemingly wrong with it.

"How do I feel?"

Curious... I suppose, But ultimately there are so many reasons to not like something... And I mean, its not like anyone has designated what the stars actually mean, in one system, 1 star might be good. @K5Rakitan

 

[CupcakeNinja]

Maybe the chapter is just shitty.

Anyway If they dont give an certain reason i just dint mind it. If they say something about it, but are vague, like saying " this is such trash, so boring." Then I respond with a "aight mate cool now fuck off. Useless cunt. "
Cuz I cant Improve anything if I dunno wtf you have a problem with.

Of course I'm pretty confident in my writing skills so usually I just say "okay not your cup of tea then, go read something else i guess." If they arent being too mean about. Cuz I dont think I Make boring stories or write blandly( I used to write better, tho, I feel, I just been reading too many shitty japanese and asian stories so I feel my writing has deteriorated a bit.) So I just feel that if they dont like it it's usually just due to a difference in tastes. Or not liking the style of writing I used. Which is understandable. So I'm not a cunt about it if they arent.

Otherwise I tell them to fuck off, yeah

 

[K5Rakitan]

"How do I feel?"

Curious... I suppose, But ultimately there are so many reasons to not like something... And I mean it not like anyone has designated what the stars actually mean, in one system, 1 star might be good. @K5Rakitan

Yes, 1 star tells me that people need to hear what I have to say

 

[NotaNuffian]

Maybe the chapter is just shitty.

Anyway If they dont give an certain reason i just dint mind it. If they say something about it, but are vague, like saying " this is such trash, so boring." Then I respond with a "aight mate cool now fuck off. Useless cunt. "
Cuz I cant Improve anything if I dunno wtf you have a problem with.

Of course I'm pretty confident in my writing skills so usually I just say "okay not your cup of tea then, go read something else i guess." If they arent being too mean about. Cuz I dont think I Make boring stories or write blandly( I used to write better, tho, I feel, I just been reading too many shitty japanese and asian stories so I feel my writing has deteriorated a bit.) So I just feel that if they dont like it it's usually just due to a difference in tastes. Or not liking the style of writing I used. Which is understandable. So I'm not a cunt about it if they arent.

Otherwise I tell them to fuck off, yeah

I think people who puts 1* but does not state the reason why should not be allowed to put the star down.

In the same sense of some people putting 5* but not saying anything.

While the former is a troll, coward or even someone lacking aspects in life that they require to look at the works that somehow irked them and step on it, the latter is some bit of help and out of their goodwill, it is still trolling, because the stars are given as a form of feedback to the author and what they could improve on.

That being said, feel free to harass @Tony if you think your case is legit.

 

[Jamminrabbit]

Doesn't matter to me because there are likely significantly more people giving stories, mine and others, more 5* for... whatever reason. Also, if you're making money from and/or enjoying what you write, who's the real winner?

 

[NotaNuffian]

Doesn't matter to me because there are likely significantly more people giving stories, mine and others, more 5* for... whatever reason. Also, if you're making money from and/or enjoying what you write, who's the real winner?

While the notion of pleasing everyone is impossible, I failed to please everyone in my life, but going off the topic, we would still attempt to check the source of others' displease to oneself in order to "improve ourselves" or to see if their opinions matter and tell them to go shove it up to the highway and become roadkill.

Different people have different scales in their hearts is all I can say.

 

[DreamOfRen]

I proposed a way to fix this, but not many people were a fan of it. I can only assume many of those people are the same kinds that feel justified "weaponizing" negative reviews.

(As if that's even a thing.)

Personally, it doesn't bother me too much.

 

[NotaNuffian]

I proposed a way to fix this, but not many people were a fan of it. I can only assume many of those people are the same kinds that feel justified "weaponizing" negative reviews.

(As if that's even a thing.)

Personally, it doesn't bother me too much.

It is a thing, humans are capable of weaponize anything.

 

[Ral]

No apparent reason doesn't mean there is actually no reason, though, the reason can be very stupid.

Also, I check the story and no 1 star rating there; and from what I know, it is kinda impossible to delete your own ratings.

I read that single chapter and… I'll be honest. It is not good.

I proposed a way to fix this, but not many people were a fan of it. I can only assume many of those people are the same kinds that feel justified "weaponizing" negative reviews.

I think you are confusing ratings with reviews.

I remember that thread and I'm one of the vocal opposer.

Okay, giving us such negative presentation is the very thing you are supposed to be against. You are weaponizing negativity. Just because we disagree doesn't mean we have negative intentions or anything.

 

[DreamOfRen]

No apparent reason doesn't mean there is actually no reason, though, the reason can be very stupid.

Also, I check the story and no 1 star rating there; and from what I know, it is kinda impossible to delete your own ratings.

I read that single chapter and… I'll be honest. It is not good.

I think you are confusing ratings with reviews.

I remember that thread and I'm one of the vocal opposer.

Okay, giving us such negative presentation is the very thing you are supposed to be against. You are weaponizing negativity. Just because we disagree doesn't mean we have negative intentions or anything.

You're arguing semantics.
The truth of the matter is my proposal didn't remove your ability to do anything.
It just added a way to verify whether your intentions were pure or based solely in illogical behavior. That means you either didn't take the time to read it, didn't understand it or -- you were up to no good and didn't want to be discovered.

To reiterate:
Yes, if you dislike accountability then it means by default you're doing things that you wouldn't want people to find out about.

People who aren't up to no good don't care about being monitored as long as the regulation is unbiased.

Also I said most, not all.
If it doesn't apply--why would you respond?
Kind of just seems like you may be feeling guilty.

 

[Alienix]

Off world

 

[Ral]

You're arguing semantics.

In what way? You are presenting your opposer negatively. That all they want is to hurt and cause chaos. That they are trolls. How is that you not using negativity as a weapon to anyone who oppose your ideas?

The truth of the matter is my proposal didn't remove your ability to do anything.

That is not issue we are pointing out, isn't it? There a lot of things to consider here.

It just added a way to verify whether your intentions were pure or based solely in illogical behavior. That means you either didn't take the time to read it, didn't understand it or -- you were up to no good and didn't want to be discovered.

And your opposers have pointed out the issues with your idea.

And again, you are weaponizing negativity here. If we oppose you, that must means that we didn't read what you wrote or we have bad intentions. You make the option agreeing with you the only "good," heck, the "moral" option. You have to agree with me, or you are a stupid or a bad person.

To reiterate:
Yes, if you dislike accountability then it means by default you're doing things that you wouldn't want people to find out about.

Again, we have shown what the issue of your idea is. Heck, even Tony would have not agreed with your idea.

Again, the weaponized negativity. If we against your idea, that is because we have questionable intentions. There is no other reason.

Again let me expose your logic here. Why do people litter? Is it because they want to destroy the world. They are some Captain Planet villains. Maybe, but more likely no. It is more likely because they are lazy, aphatetic, stupid, etc.

Don't automatically attribute everything to malice.

People who aren't up to no good don't care about being monitored as long as the regulation is unbiased.

You surely can't be thinking this?

 

[MasterHiatus]

I hate those idiots who rate me 1 star for no reason but I dun care anymore.
They're like that blob, lurking.... until they find their prey and rate them 1 star. Those insolent bastards, balls shall be crushed!

 

[DreamOfRen]

In what way? You are presenting your opposer negatively. That all they want is to hurt and cause chaos. That they are trolls. How is that you not using negativity as a weapon to anyone who oppose your ideas?

That is not issue, isn't it?

And your opposers have pointed out the issues with your idea.

There's issues with the current system. So... not doing something because its not perfect means....just don't do it at all?

And again, you are weaponizing negativity here. If we oppose you, that must means that we didn't read what you wrote or we have bad intentions. You make the option agreeing with you the only "good" heck the only moral option.

What you're labeling as "negativity" is constructive criticism. Words exist for a reason, to differentiate things.

Constructive crit = great.
Negativity for any reason other than constructive crit = not helpful.
Period.

Again, we have shown what the issue of your idea is. Heck, even Tony would have not agreed with your idea.

It's an idea. I don't require people to agree with me in order to have or present it.
You're mistaken if you believe otherwise.

Again, the weaponized negativity. If we against your idea, that is because we have questionable intentions. There is no other reason.

No, I never said that. I said there are only 3 reasons you'd be against it. And all three of those reasons are rooted in reality.
Lack of accountability breeds corruption.This is something that's been proven time and time again. Only fools would argue otherwise and you don't strike me as a fool.

That means you have ulterior motives. I don't need you to confess those things to me, it is what it is. And maybe you don't realize it yourself. But it sound like you just want the freedom to screw people over if you desire.

That's all well and good but..don't try to put words in my mouth.

Again let me expose your logic here. Why do people litter? Is it because they want to destroy the world. They are some Captain Planet villains. Maybe, but more likely no. It is more likely because they are lazy, aphatetic, stupid, etc.

Don't automatically attribute everything to malice.

You surely can't be thinking this?

I gave 3 options.
... Why would I give three options if my intention was to attribute everything to malice?
I'ms orry but your arguments really dont' make all that much sense.

You're arguing against the fabric of society as a whole.

Speeding laws exist because if people weren't held accountable, most would fly around and cause wrecks detrimental to the rest of us.

Thousands of real world examples contradict everything you feel on this matter.

And I think that's the real issue. You just don't *like* it. It really has nothing to do with whether it's a good idea or not.

 

[DreamOfRen]

And again, you are weaponizing negativity here.

It must be a convenient world you live in if you can ignore a problem just because you don't think it's a problem.

Posts like this one and many others wouldn't exist if this weren't a legitimate thing.

Can you make this make sense for me? It seems like you're just really bad at trying to twist facts to suit your logic.

 

[EternalSunset0]

People who aren't up to no good don't care about being monitored as long as the regulation is unbiased.

I've stayed out of the many fights and arguments I've seen the past few days, but this one I can't let pass.

To quote Ral:
You surely can't be thinking this?

 

[BenJepheneT]

Have you ever played a GTA game and just drive over some pedestrians on the way just because you can and it's that easy?

Yeah, it's that easy.

 

[Ral]

There's issues with the current system. So... not doing something because its not perfect means....just don't do it at all?

You are constantly twisting what is there. We don't say that we should not do anything. What we are saying is that your solution/idea isn't a good idea.

What you're labeling as "negativity" is constructive criticism. Words exist for a reason, to differentiate things.

Constructive crit = great.
Negativity for any reason other than constructive crit = not helpful.
Period.

What is exactly your criticism here? What you are doing here is paint us as stupid or have bad intentions, if we disagree with you. Where is the criticism in there?

It's an idea. I don't require people to agree with me in order to have or present it.
You're mistaken if you believe otherwise.

Oh! So we can't criticize your ideas now? We can't voice our disagreement?

No, I never said that. I said there are only 3 reasons you'd be against it. And all three of those reasons are rooted in reality.

What 3 reasons? Rooted in reality?

Lack of accountability breeds corruption.This is something that's been proven time and time again. Only fools would argue otherwise and you don't strike me as a fool.

Here it is again. Agree, or else you are a fool.

And again, we disagree with your idea not because it imposes accountability. Heck, we should be accountable. But, there are other areas that we to look into when dealing with things like these. It is not only accountability that you should consider and it is in those areas that your idea fall short.

That means you have ulterior motives. I don't need you to confess those things to me, it is what it is. And maybe you don't realize it yourself. But it sound like you just want the freedom to screw people over if you desire.

That's all well and good but..don't try to put words in my mouth.

But you are putting "intentions" in our hearts. That is if we disagree with you, then it because we might have impure intentions. You just can't accept that your idea might just have faults.

I didn't put words in your mouth. All is there for everyone to read. If we don't agree with you, then we might not have read what you wrote or we have negative intentions. That is what you wrote, right? Everyone can just go and read it. I don't have to put words in your mouth, you put it there.

... Why would I give three options if my intention was to attribute everything to malice?
I'ms orry but your arguments really dont' make all that much sense.

Okay. Look. This is what you wrote:

To reiterate:
Yes, if you dislike accountability then it means by default you're doing things that you wouldn't want people to find out about.

You are automatically assigning us, who disagree with you, as people who dislike accountability, which you then imply that we have impure intentions. That we have ulterior motives.

You're arguing against the fabric of society as a whole.

Here we go again. Why are you putting everything into this over the top context. Can you stop being so melodramatic?

Speeding laws exist because if people weren't held accountable, most would fly around and cause wrecks detrimental to the rest of us.

Uhm. You are kinda confused here. Laws aren't really just about accountability, though it is an aspect.

But the real issue here is with the implementation.

Thousands of real world examples contradict everything you feel on this matter.

And thousands of real world example shows how the implementation can go horribly wrong. The Prohibition in America might be the most suitable example. Alcohol causes problems therefore we should ban them!… Nice.

We have no issue with contributing accountability, the issue is with the implementation.

And I think that's the real issue. You just don't *like* it. It really has nothing to do with whether it's a good idea or not.

What?

You can't be serious.

(And after implying that we didn't read what you wrote or that we have "ulterior" motives.

It must be a convenient world you live in if you can ignore a problem just because you don't think it's a problem.

Posts like this one and many others wouldn't exist if this weren't a legitimate thing.

Can you make this make sense for me? It seems like you're just really bad at trying to twist facts to suit your logic.

I just tried to do the very thing you are asking. And I tried so hard.

 

[EternalSunset0]

And before anyone gets triggered, I don't mean to stir things up, troll, or anything with my copypasted reply, but I just can't think of anything but "really? seriously?" when I read that.