Modular Feedback system

[Devils.Advocate]

First, to be clear, I have not published anything, I am not an author, I read, but largely I don't rate, I don't comment, and I don't write feedbacks unless I am asked directly. Because I don't give out unsolicited feedbacks. Soooo.... I am not too hung up on the ratings, the trendings, the troll, the non-trolls, the harassments, the discriminations, the blind rabid fans, the hatred, the love, the lust and the repulsions.

BUT I do I like seeing if it is possible to create the best human experience.... where possible

And honestly, I have no idea if this is a good idea.

This idea is based on the line of thought, "IF YOU PUBLISH ONLINE YOU MUST BE WILLING TO ACCEPT ALL FORMS OF CRITICISM" While I am not sure if the is a good line of thought, I find this world view to be too... lazy? Irresponsible? Heartless?.... and authors lose some part of what makes writing joyus by subscribing to this paradigm.

BUT IF I were to run with it.

This is the system I can propose.

Authors have the power to manage the following settings

Opt-out of the rating system completely.
Opt-out of all comments on chapters.
Opt-out of reviews
Opt-out of trending

Secondary settings
Authors can:
exchange star ratings for a Like / dislike system

This is, of course, a feature moves the author more into isolation from the readers. HOWEVER, that has traditionally been how authors worked., works are assessed after it is done, and often are quite distant from the consumer.

Also, I am not saying we should be silencing the reader's comments, but readers have a wide variety of options to make their voices heard. they free to make a thread and we've dedicated websites to voice their thoughts, etc etc.

But I do think, in this line of thought, authors should not feel obligated or forced to hear it. Therefore, an author should have the freedom to choose to hear all feedback or not, good and bad.

At some time if they opt-in to be rated, to have the highs, they will need to accept the lows....?

Is this a good train of thought? For authors that turn off feedbacks and get feedback only when they ask for it, what is the downside of it? Can someone troubleshoot this?

Yes, and of course should an author opt-out they will still be in searching ranks under View counts, trending (unless they are opt-out) and other pure numerical stats.

Which lead to a follow-up question, should authors in this modular system, have the ability to Opt-out View count ranking, and Tag rankings as well??

EDIT:
Suggested addition
@LostLibrarian: Opting out of any review and ratings also link to opting out to treading, can't do one without the other
@Aaky: block patreon, paypal, and ko-fi whenever you disable comments and reviews
@UYScuti instead to just make ratings and review invisible to the writer/author

 

[LostLibrarian]

No other website allows you to escape comments and ratings. SH is not a safe-space. Deleting comments is already powerful enough.

I personally agree, but I can also see why people would want to escape negativity, especially if they just start out. If SH decided to be a more "newbie author"-friendly environment, the optional (!) disabling of comments/ratings would be something interesting.

But as I said, given that ratings/reviews are mostly from readers for readers: if one doesn't want to let readers display their negative oppinion, the story should also be banned from trending and the like...

But I personally wouldn't need that feature and I also think, it won't come, as there are things that - imho - are a lot more pressing.

If anything the star system needs to be changed, since people just leave blank ratings. It would help writers more if ratings were public.

I mostly agree with you, but public ratings are the worst idea ever. Given that there are authors who already get angry when they receive a 3star rating, this would only lead to more toxicity. Double Accounts for bad ratings, and fans and authors going after neutral ratings because they aren't 5 stars.

This'll only end in more echo chambers screaming at each other for more drama... :-/

 

[Moonpearl]

Indeed, reviews are for readers, not writers, but I wonder...

Just on this point that follows, yes review and ratings attempt to give people a vague sense of what readers are walking in terms of quality. But on the point of author lying about genres and triggering materials...

First I am unaware the this happens. My question is: Do review and rating effectively police that? Are Genre labels, tags, and "report" button, not sufficient? Do authors actually try to lie about their content?

From my point of view, there are readers that are out looking for triggering material. Hmm.... is it counterproductive to lie, since if writers don't tag correctly will attract lots of people that drop the novel, where tagged correctly will have readers that stay on as readers, right?

I agree, this is a valid point, but is the author that lies, is that common existence or an outlier like a cereal killer in a small town?

Authors are desperate for their work to be read and sometimes that drives them to do disgusting and honestly kind of stupid stuff. Certain genres are abused more than others on SH. If a desperate author thinks they can tick a genre box off based on a little sprinkling of bait they put in one or two chapters, they'll do it.
It definitely will backfire, but they weren't thinking rationally to begin with.
(There are also cases where the author thinks they've written a genre that they haven't.)

I'm still not sure whether novels can be reported for mistagging/lying about genres here on SH. But any author could argue that it "just hasn't shown up yet".

As for triggering material - not all of it is available on the tagging system, and authors may not go out of their way to let readers know ahead of time. There's a certain literature "philosophy" that believes that everything a reader encounters should be unexpected, even if that unexpected thing sets off their PTSD. And sometimes, writers just didn't remember that people can be hurt by reading about these things.
But since the majority of readers avoid heavy or distressing material, triggering material does limit your readership.

As of right now, the reviews here are of limited use for sniffing this stuff out - but mostly because bad reviews are extremely rare. On other sites, reviews are the first thing I scour.

I fully agree with that.

I am assuming, and maybe incorrectly so,
@Aaky brought in the element of money, this alludes to the connection to payment in kind, that there is an unspoken professional transaction and being judged is a price that authors should pay.

And both you and @UYScuti both have pointed out being a writer there is no escape, it comes with the territory.

There is this image of what a writer, what and the author is...

But what I am wondering is, what place is there in the world for people that "write" but do not identify as "authors" or "writers". I personally, just enjoy the act of writing, putting ideas into sentences. And I do not identify as an author, I do not publish, I don't "write", I have no intention of sharing what I have written over the years. Cos I am only writing for fun. for myself and I am happy with that.

Things that I have written, I see no value in it. If there is a fire, and burn all the books I have written, I will be heartbroken, but I don't feel like my writing is of any value to the world, and it's no real loss to others. To the world at large, I'd' say, "One can not cry over milk that doesn't exist."

BUT in a great act of hypocrisy, I don't feel the same way about other people's work. I think I value work for just being written, I appreciate, writers' act of simply writing. And the result of the writing, musings, fancies it is a testimony of the times and feelings of an individual.

So to these works unseen due to the fear of judgement, to give writers the choice to choose what amount of judgement they receive, is this a good thing? Will more publish if that is the case? I wonder, should writers be given a choice in this?

If you fear judgement, keep it private. But you still won't avoid it. I have people in my life who will just straight up guess what I'm writing and then give judgement based on that, no matter how wildly wrong they are. You'll get judgement just from people knowing that you write.

And, in the absence of that, you'll start providing that "feedback" for yourself.

Indulging in the fear of hearing people's opinions is unhealthy for everyone. It increases the fear for the writer, making them become almost tyrannical in their need to control what their readers say or think, and it makes a restrictive and suffocating environment for readers.

Ultimately, readers will just create new places to express their opinions anyway, once you release your work into the greater world. You can't control them. Either you make peace with it or it will destroy your mental health.

And to the point:

I sense that this is true, but amongst all the possibility of a person stop writing, why does "negative feedback, because they received no feedback," need to be one of the reason? Is a thing I often wondered.

What is the happy medium that makes the most people happy?

And just before anyone says "start your own website" I am not trying to make SH something it is not, I am not advocating this suggestion, but simply unpacking its contents and see what it means to people.

However, this is just a personal thing, whenever someone says, "that's just the way it is" "That is what it means to be a ________"

I feel that it's not a sufficient answer to how the world works. "Why?" is often what I wonder s'all. Why do we need to adhere to tradition, if it makes people unhappy? why does it work that way? Is unhappiness the norm. if so, Why what is the value of this unhappiness? What is the nature of the system? Is it good to question it?

Oh and on the note on depriving readers of review and rating,
I am not saying "Fuck the reader, Field of Dreams, bitch! If I build it they will come"
BUT I am saying a choice could be given, so writers the onus can be on the writers to say if they want to "FUCK" the readers or not.

Plus, I think rather than the binary, I am looking at variance, The answer of the level of engagement between readers and authors, can it be managed or is the answer a simple binary to publish accept it all or not publish and get none.

Hmm...
I feel Iike I keep derailing myself a lot ... in my post

It's not about the reason - the reason is an unintentional excuse, really. If there was no negative feedback, they would quit because there's no feedback. If they had only positive feedback, they'd quit because it wasn't enough. I've even seen authors quit because they were angry that their positive feedback didn't say exactly what they wanted it to.

There's no reason to restrict everyone else to try to prevent something that can't be prevented.

The unhappiness experienced by writers comes from within. It's the author's inability to separate their sense of self and self-worth from the work they've produced. Everyone has to learn to overcome this, not only in writing, but in life. It's just that creative work forces you to confront it more directly.

 

[Devils.Advocate]

Anyway, thank you for indulging my random idea with your time thoughts and replies
@CL @UYScuti @LostLibrarian @Aaky @Toomanysorrows @Moonpearl @CupcakeNinja @bigbear51
Even @Leti

It's always interesting to hear other people's perspective of the world. And since I can only live one life, and have my own world view, hearing what others see, that I can't imagine was very fruitful for me

I added some thoughts pointed out to the original OP, of the sake of... providence(?) or just interest.

And @Moonpearl as always your experience and understanding of the wide wide online world has been fascinating, and added dimension to my understanding.

Cheers peepo
(≧∇≦)/