New Feedback Email System
To encourage readers to send feedback to authors, storiesonline provides an easy to use form at the end of every story and an email contact link in every author's page as well as a feedback link at the end of every blog entry.
In order to encourage those who are reluctant to disclose their email address to still send feedback, the mailing system provided allows for anonymous messages.
The system works very well and storiesonline, according to many authors, is the source of the most feedback received; which is very good for authors.
However, like every system, it is possible to abuse it. Hiding behind the afforded anonymity, some cowardly people abuse authors by sending them abusive messages through the anonymous system.
To deal with the problem, the mail system has been updated to allow authors to refuse all mail, or to refuse just anonymous email.
When an author chooses to refuse all email, the site won't show any mail forms or links.
When an author choose to refuse anonymous email only, then the forms on the site will have the reader's email inserted by default.
Since this is a risk of privacy for the reader, every reader is given the option of having a specialized contact email address in their account for such cases.
The main email address or the contact email address can be used in contact forms, however, either one have to be confirmed within 30 days when used.
Email address confirmation is done through a confirmation message sent to your email address, and requires you to follow the instructions in it to have your email confirmed.
Messages sent to authors who refuse anonymous feedback from readers who's email addresses have not been confirmed are put on hold until the email address confirmation is received.
Of course, authors who refuse anonymous feedback are assured to receive less feedback.
If you are a reader that would like to send feedback to authors, but you don't want to use the email address that you used to subscribe to the site, then get another email address and add it to your account using the 'Email form settings' page. The page is always accessible through the 'My Account' page on the site.
The system needs to make sure that addresses used are still active after their first usage. So if you want to send messages to authors refusing anonymous feedback, your email address used must be confirmed at least within 30 days.
Some readers may find this practice highly annoying, but you have the option of ignoring the author. If you see your email address in the form, and you don't like that, the mail form preference allows you to hide all email forms that don't accept anonymous feedback.
Additional features of the mail feedback system is that you can have your email address automatically inserted into all mail forms to save you the effort of typing your own address into the forms that accept anonymous feedback, and also you can have the system send you a copy of the message that you send to authors.
» Edit Email form settings
Hopefully, the recent changes can address both authors' and readers' concerns.
If you have any comments or concerns about the new system, other than 'this is a bunch of crap and I should be allowed to do whatever I want', please use the comments section to voice them.
In order to encourage those who are reluctant to disclose their email address to still send feedback, the mailing system provided allows for anonymous messages.
The system works very well and storiesonline, according to many authors, is the source of the most feedback received; which is very good for authors.
However, like every system, it is possible to abuse it. Hiding behind the afforded anonymity, some cowardly people abuse authors by sending them abusive messages through the anonymous system.
To deal with the problem, the mail system has been updated to allow authors to refuse all mail, or to refuse just anonymous email.
When an author chooses to refuse all email, the site won't show any mail forms or links.
When an author choose to refuse anonymous email only, then the forms on the site will have the reader's email inserted by default.
Since this is a risk of privacy for the reader, every reader is given the option of having a specialized contact email address in their account for such cases.
The main email address or the contact email address can be used in contact forms, however, either one have to be confirmed within 30 days when used.
Email address confirmation is done through a confirmation message sent to your email address, and requires you to follow the instructions in it to have your email confirmed.
Messages sent to authors who refuse anonymous feedback from readers who's email addresses have not been confirmed are put on hold until the email address confirmation is received.
Of course, authors who refuse anonymous feedback are assured to receive less feedback.
If you are a reader that would like to send feedback to authors, but you don't want to use the email address that you used to subscribe to the site, then get another email address and add it to your account using the 'Email form settings' page. The page is always accessible through the 'My Account' page on the site.
The system needs to make sure that addresses used are still active after their first usage. So if you want to send messages to authors refusing anonymous feedback, your email address used must be confirmed at least within 30 days.
Some readers may find this practice highly annoying, but you have the option of ignoring the author. If you see your email address in the form, and you don't like that, the mail form preference allows you to hide all email forms that don't accept anonymous feedback.
Additional features of the mail feedback system is that you can have your email address automatically inserted into all mail forms to save you the effort of typing your own address into the forms that accept anonymous feedback, and also you can have the system send you a copy of the message that you send to authors.
» Edit Email form settings
Hopefully, the recent changes can address both authors' and readers' concerns.
If you have any comments or concerns about the new system, other than 'this is a bunch of crap and I should be allowed to do whatever I want', please use the comments section to voice them.
Comments
I never mind mail no matter what the reader says, but I am sometimes disappointed the reader won't give me the opportunity to talk with them.
E. Z. Riter
I'm hoping that you read the comments to your blog, or someone knows another way to contact you.
Love your site. Wish I could afford to be a year round paying member.
I am debating whether I should or should not accept anonymous email. I enjoy the feedback, good or bad. It all helps me in future stories.
Doug
the Troubador
Quite simply, this is the Patriot Act of Storiesonline. Not all of us who reply anonymously are flamers who attack writers, or lamers who spam writers.
I -like- being anonymous. I've been reading at SOL since, IIRC, EZ's "My Inheritance" was still a work in progress. That was what, around Clinton's first term in office?
I don't reply to every chapter, but I reply often, to a lot of authors. I don't want my messages tracked back to me by an author, and I don't need to hear an author's response either - his response is the next chapter or the next story, or, if he really has to, its his next blog entry.
Every author who turns off anonymous posting should have to reveal his real name and email address as well. Why are only the good readers being inconvenienced?
By closing the loophole you're telling me that my constructive, self-governed feedback is worth no more than those who abuse the system.
It shouldn't be that difficult to have implemented this solution on a per-user basis. Anonymous emailer flames author. Author logs into SOL and reports the SOL email id for the message - really, this could all be done with a single click.. Laseez approves moderation for the account (with a single click) that sent that flame so that all future emails from the flamer to the writer are denied, and votes from the flamer on the writer's stories are discarded/disallowed. Abuse of multiple authors ad the flamer loses the ability to vote or send feedback at all, or gets him banned.
Why do I have to lose features because of punks screwing things up? Which is more important: stopping the abusers or receiving feedback? This solution may do the former, but it does so at the expense of the latter.
Now what you're going to see is a rise in hotmail accounts. Get one, log in, sign up at SOL, approve the free email account and let the spamming commence!
And those of us who didn't abuse our anonymity in the first place are STILL fucked over.
The only "losers" in this situation are the authors who will see less legitimate responses, and the readers like me who will no longer be responding.
Not so long ago you were complaining that your authors said there wasn't enough feedback for stories, and as a result I started to comment on more stories, not anonymously , as I believe that if I make a comment I should stand by it, but I have slowed down the number I bother to reply to because of abuse from an author to some fairly innocuous criticism to a story.
Now your wish to make the system so intimidating, and unwieldy that you are guaranteeing that there will be less, the current system is so easy it encourages the giving of feedback, by implementing these ridiculous measures you will only stop all that. I don't think that there will be a rush on free Hotmail accounts, I think that most just won't bother, I certainly won't.
And then in a few months time your authors can start whining again that they don't receive enough feedback.
Now your wish to make the system so intimidating, and unwieldy that you are guaranteeing that there will be less, the current system is so easy it encourages the giving of feedback
The previous system had the option to not accept anonymous feedback too, but you didn't have to confirm you email address.
Did you read the article? Refusing anonymous email is optional. If an author is willing to forego some feedback, why would you want to force him to accept it.
And to anonymous #2:
Forcing someone to accept your feedback in a manner that they don't accept is abuse.
to both of you, it's double optional system:
The author has the OPTION of refusing anonymous email and when they select to do so, they know they'll get less feedback.
The reader has the OPTION to not even see non anonymous forms, so you don't have to deal with those who don't accept your anonymous feedback.
If the author doesn't take any action then the system works in the same manner that it always had.
There are certain authors out there that tend to have a sense of superiority. If you take the time to reply with polite but critical comments, they respond in a derogatory fashion. No matter how much you back your reply up with factual links from prominent sites, they just call you an idiot. Some has gone as far as to reply “I don’t see anything written by YOU on SOL, so shut up.” This will cause a burst of specialized email accounts to respond to authors, which will effectively be blinds. Gmail invites are darn easy to come by…
And, having done this, remember this little tidbit. When we send email through SOL to an author, we don’t see the author’s email address. If they don’t respond, we never see it. Why is the author allowed to automatically allowed to have a hidden email address, but they can force us to bare ours? Many of the authors that have already elected to not receive anonymous emails are ones that don’t regularly respond to reader’s comments, good or bad. So, they want to have the reader expose themselves, but not have to respond. What’s the point of that?
I think that if authors choose to select that box, then when the reader gets the confirmation email, the author’s email address must be included. This way, only someone that has used a valid email address to respond, will get the author’s email address in return. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
Also, in response to the reader who said all authors who refuse anonymous comments: I know at least one author who doesn't bother to use a pen name... Frank Downey.
What I meant to say was "Also, in response to the reader who said all authors who refuse anonymous comments should have to reveal THEIR real name and email address..."
True, I also receive some positive feedback from anonymous readers, but the feedback that I value most, that containing constructive criticism, ALWAYS comes with a return address. This makes it even more valuable, since it allows me to open a dialog with that reader to understand what he or she likes or dislikes about my writing.
It's really a shame that people choose to flame anonymously, since about half of those emails are based on erroneous assumptions or misunderstanding which could be cleared up with a simple response.
I will probably not change any settings for email, but I applaud the thought and effort that went into refining the feedback system this way.
Shakes Peer2B
Be glad Lazeez didn't decide to make it mandatory that you leave your email address for every comment
Why should I be glad? I have no problem in leaving my email address along with my comment. What I don't accept is the need to vaildate my email address every time I leave a comment.
As another reader said this could quite easily be done in the background. Every time I go to the site I log on, if I leave feedback it is logged on the site, even if I don't leave an address Lazeez must have a record of who is mailing who, so if an Author recieves abusive mail it is quite easy for Lazeez to block an abusive user from continuing to use the site.
Lazeez you said:
The previous system had the option to not accept anonymous feedback too, but you didn't have to confirm you email address.
So why the need to change it?
Did you read the article?
Don't be obtuse, obviously I read it, you may consider my intelligence lower than yours, but I'm fairly sure I understood it.
Refusing anonymous email is optional. If an author is willing to forego some feedback, why would you want to force him to accept it.
I have no desire to force feedback on any author, abusive or otherwise, but if as you say the author can already refuse anonymous emails, and you have a record of the email addresses of all members, and the ability to bar use of the feedback mechanism, why do I have to go the bother of validating my address every time I send feedback.
My response on the last chapter is lower than usual. If that's because all my readers have to prove their identity, I'm dissapointed. I was perfectly happy with the handling I already did.
The OLD FART
Well, first off the bat, let me state that I'm coming from the reader's point of view here. I'm sort of in the middle ground, being an editor, but since most of the guys I edit for don't share a lot of their feedback with me (just not something that's come up), I pretty much only know the reader's side on this.
However, as a reader, I must say I don't recall more than one occasion where I got anything close to a nasty letter from an author. Perhaps I'm lucky or just have great taste -- however, since neither attribute has shown up elsewhere in real life, I have my doubts.
Which do you think carries more weight: someone dropping a card in the church drop box or someone coming up to you and offering their condolences, congratulations, or whatever personally? Same with emails. It means so much more, for both thanks and criticisms, if there is SOME identity the writer can attach to the letters. Emails with addresses for responses mean so much more to them, I've found, and are taken much more seriously.
Now, I know that most aren't like me and have problems actually tying their real self to what they read. I mean, face it, there are creeps out there who would LOVE to find out who certain readers are just so they can try to use their interests against them. Even if it is just a simple hetero romance between two adults and all they are objecting about is consensual sex between unmarried adults. However, it isn't hard to get a freemail account -- heck, I have five I keep open -- so all you have to do is set one up if you don't want to be tracked back by the creeps.
So, what's the problem? We know the authors get harrassed and spammed. If they get so much email from stalkers and/or simply rude jerks who are nothing but derogatory, why should we blame them for wanting to have at least ONE way to try and curb these jerks?
The one guy (sorry, I forget which, but towards the end as I type this) mentioned about the spammers & such getting free accounts too and still attacking them, thinking the authors will just shut things off. Maybe, but with adresses attached to these, they can try to block these fools and let the rest of us through. Authors WANT feedback from us, so they won't shut us off on just a whim. If they block all feedback, it is because there is a campaign out there to drive them away.
Give the system a chance, gang. It sounds like a dang ingenious trick to me, and I congratulate Lazeez for instituting it. And if you're getting nasty feedback from authors, A) check to be sure you weren't nasty first, and B) you might want to rethink what you are reading, if the authors involved just strike you as nasty and mean.
Thanks,
KB (Khyranleander)
Ever'body:
1. No one else does it quite like Lazeez. I find this site well worth some cash every year to keep myself supplied with what is in effect an unlimited number of excellent (mostly) stories from authors who really (obviously) enjoy sharing their private worlds with others via the net.
2. If I am gonna flame somebody I most definitely want them to have a way to respond. Any other arrangement is the same as sniping at non-combatants: only sociopaths can really get off on that. I have it on good opinion (my mother in law) that I am definitely an authority on sociopathology.
3. Anyone that needs to hold onto a paradigm wherein they simply send fucked up messages to people who are giving away for free the work of their hands and not give the receiver of said message an opportunity to directly respond may be a dirtbag. May be. I cannot say for certain that this is so in every situation of this sort. But I suspect the percentage to be in excess of 99 to include those who must sling shit in this venue and don't want to hear back from those they have slung it at. Okay, change that may be to mostly.
4. Then again, what the fuck. Why not? Everybody do as you like. Sling enough shit at some of these authors and maybe they will just stop writing.
5. I know one thing for sure: if I like what someone has written, I let them know it. And I tell them who I am and an address to respond to.
6. If I don't like what I have read, I usually just don't read anything else from that source. I know this may be too easy a solution for some folks but hey I am a simple minded fuck and it works for me. What I DON'T do is write criticising notes to authors whose stuff I don't like; why? Most of my dislike will come from attitudes and opinions. Some of it will be content. Some of it will be context. Some will be everything about the tale. I like to cut my losses and once I have read enough to know that a story is not for me I simply drop it and move on. I recommend this method to everyone. It is elegantly moderate.
Lazeez, this is a very good thing you have done. Thank you for running such a first class operation. I pray this only gets easier for you as time goes by. God Bless and keep you alway.
Arthur
I wouldn't mind this "valid email address" thing, if I didn't have to confirm it each time, or every 15 days... That just smacks of additional hassle. Especially since I usually email anywhere from 1-5 authors a day. Those Monday posting add up!
I have had a premier accout on SOL for probaby 3 or more years. With that premier account, we shouldn't have to put up with the additional hassle of having their email confirmed every 15 days. Let that be one more perk to our accounts. Once the email address is validated the first time, it sticks for the length of the subscription.
If this becomes a problem with premier accounts using bogus email addresses, then you can address it later. But in the meantime, can't we have that little tidbit? If not, I suspect a lot fewer authors will see my tagline of "As always, thanks for sharing!"
BTW, I got my first "confirmation" email today, and I was unable to cut and paste it into a different browser. I got an error trying to connect when I did. I eventually had to open it in my ancient Netscape 7.1 that I use for email only, and never go to websites with. That was disappointing.
Garylian
I've just sent Argon-3 quick bit of feedback for chapter 6 of Ellen Trilby, anonymously. Proof anonymity works.
Tony Stevens, however, did not get the raving review for Return from Sally Island he would have gotten if he accepted anonymous reviews (or if I could have used the exploit). Proof the new "fix" is broken.
So that author will not get at least one positive response for this story because of the new system.
And yet, here comes hypothetical nasty awful flamer troll evil reader, who thinks Alfonso had a bigger dick and should have gotten the girl. HNAFTER took a few minutes to grab a hotmail address and a few more to enter it into SOL's system. After checking this new hotmail account once to validate it for SOL, he will never have to check that account again. HNAFTER can now send death threats to Tony Stevens for being a scum sucking whatever. Hypothetically.
So now Tony Stevens has received on anonymous-but-SOL-verified death threat, but -didn't- get my, anonymous, positive comments.
You've exchanged one loophole for another, at the expense of legitimate feedback.
2. Old Fart, you're one of two authors on SOL to whom I've given both positive AND negative anonymous responses - for the same story! I actually don't read your stories anymore, after feeling burned by two of your previous finished works (Wes & Les and the other, more recent big one). I'm using you as an example here, not a target, so please don't be offended.
While I sent many positive reviews to start, by the end of BOTH stories, I'm pretty sure my anonymous comments were very harsh... about the direction or content of the STORY. I do not insult authors, or spam them.
I do, however, tell authors what I think about their works, good or bad. That I choose to send negative or critical feedback w/o revealing my identity is not because I'm a coward or because I don't stand by -my- words, but because I don't need or want a response from any author aside from NOT seeing the same problems in their future stories.
If the author disagrees or agrees with my comments, I will see it in their future stories. I sent positive reviews from many chapters of Wes & Les. When the ending changed my opinion of the story, I commented on it, and probably sang my displeasure loud and clear.
Are my /negative/ responses flames? I do not attack you, and if I didn't get "into" the story I wouldn't feel so strongly.
When the second story of yours I got hooked on began to evoke the same response as the first, I sent feedback stating as much. When my like of the story turned to dislike I stopped reading - without knowing my email address, without ever directly responding to anonymous me, you showed beyond the shadow of a doubt that you disagreed with my opinion.
Proof anonymity works.
2.5. (no longer using Old Fart as an example) THIS is the problem with all the complaints I've seen from authors about readers. For far too many authors, ANY negative or critical feedback is a "flame."
If they can't take /that/ kind of heat, they should be writing in a hard-bound journal, not posting stories to the internet. Or they should care more about the work they release.
This is what -I- want to see: authors who differentiate between critical feedback, negative feedback and flames.
This new system caters to the lowest common denominator. Go look at someplace like Fanfiction dot net, and see how all the insipid prepubescents respond to the dragonball z or eragon or Naruto stories.
If authors on SOL can't learn to accept reviews that don't kiss ass, "UR so k3w1. Rite mor son. kthxbai" is going to be about the only kind of review SOL authors will receive.
3. Who is this new system /really/ being set up to protect? Authors who are being attacked personally, or authors who aren't mature enough to take criticism?
Making an airtight box that lets authors deny anonymous reviews is not the solution. All you've done is throw the baby out with the bath-water.
4.
- I say SOL is now broken.
- Lazeez now says it's fixed.
- I will not review (good or bad) to authors
with anonymous reviews turned off.
- I'm pretty sure Lazeez won't rescind the new policy under any circumstances.
- Everyone has lost.
Except the bad guys.
And with that, I guess I'm done with this irreconcilable difference of opinion.
I like getting feedback and I get much from SOL so that's all good.
I should however apologise to my readers for the truly horrid job of replying or perhaps non-job since I've fallen so far behind in getting back to folks for their kind words.
That said, I'll continue to allow anonymous feedback. If someone sends me a note good or bad I'll read it understanding that there are many good reasons why a person wants their e-mail concealed.
This is a great site and a terrific venue for my stories.
I enjoy writing and my readers support for my efforts is a major boost for my motivation.
Enjoy the journey
Warlord
If I don't want anonymous feedback, as the one who did all the work of writing the story, that is my privilege.
If you don't want to tell me who you are when you send feedback, that is your privilege.
If these two desires clash the worker (author) wins.
I reply to everyone who drops me a line when I can send a reply.
Messages from M Anon are fine because at least they took the time to read and write which makes me want to publish my next story.
If no-one ever sent a message about one story I'd just chalk it up to experience and press on.
A message is a writers only reward and adding your email address is our only way to say thanks.
Time spent answering an email, only go find the address bogus is really frustrating. There really haven’t been that many, and certainly not enough to warrant much effort to put in a system to verify return addresses.
I like involved readers, who responded to a story and volunteered, to become story editors. I don't feel as guilty for wasting their time with my amateur quality stories, and they seem to enjoy the process and involvement with the story. I try to include their suggestions in my story line, as I want them to me more a part of the story process than proofreading.
But I’m not interested in a big production story process; though I think it improves the professionalism of the story. I’m strictly amateur and plan to stay that way. I don’t want a big blog for discussion of the story.
I don’t mean to insult readers, but for me it’s a hobby and I’m willing to put only so much time on the hobby. When it’s no longer enjoyable, I quit. Negative reader reaction tells me to spend my time elsewhere.
I enjoy responding to readers interested in aspects of the story or the origin of a particular idea in the story. I've had a few regular responders and a few I've corresponded with for a while. I've even encouraged and tried to help a few responding readers write stories. I found writers’ forums yielded the least helpful comments and often very critical comments, mostly from non-writers on the forums.
I spend a lot more time reading that writing. I don’t respond to writers as much as I once did, but I’ve never sent an anonymous reply. A low score is the only negative feedback I give.
I have zero interest in anonymous replies. I have no interest receiving them or finding out who sent them. I just as soon they didn't know I don't receive anonymous email, so they don't use bogus addresses. For me an improvement would be a ping to see if the email was valid before they were forwarded to me, but I consider such a project would be more work than warranted.
rougher63
What ever happened to the good old wastebin in e-mail clients?
If you don't like a reply about a story, then bin it. How hard can it be? No one is forcing you to read hate mail.
The loss of anon. replies is Storiesonlines's loss. I recieve a large amount of anon e-mails praising my work, and send anon e-mails to other writers (though I do tend to sign them with Pixy.
This has never been a problem before, but that could be the fact that I never reply to e-mails anyway, so not knowing the senders address has never been an issue.
What is blatantly obvious is that the new system will reduce those that can be bothered to comment, and lets be honest with ourselves here, the amount of people who comment, anon or otherwise is very small as it is.
I do believe that with this new 'improved' system we have shot ourselves in the foot.
I will keep all my channels open, so if your favorite author disappoints you and doesn't accept anonymous e-mails, send your complaint to me, and I'll do what I do with mine, read it, laugh and then go about my business.
Thank you, first and foremost for your time and work. This is the only place that gets all my stories. I'll always accept all feedback. First I get very little feedback so I take what I can get! Ive never had anything rude from SOL. The only oddity with anonymous feedback is how often the reader will ask some questions, which I obviously can't answer without a way to reply! But as the saying goes, it is what it is! I am one who makes an effort to reply to feedback. I think its polite to let them know you received the email, and to thank them for taking the time to send an email. I always encourage them to send feedback to any author they read.
I do think having all options available is a great addition to a great stories site.
As for readers saying no fair and foul think about this... I've been writing and posting online for several years now and gotten mail that runs the gamut of everything. By far the most i get are postive with good, constructive comments in them. BUT, big word that ins't it?, I've gotten people that FREAK ME OUT totally. One wit asked for kiddie porn, (reported him to his mail server as well as mine) some use it to hit on you and get cyber, some are just wierd. They think because you write this stuff you are somehow 'easy' in certain areas. The average reader doesn't get that stuff but authors do. So take that into account when you complain about us being able to hide our e-mail addy
That being said, there is no Right to Criticism. At least no right to put it in the author's face. There's Freedom of Speech (protected in the US Constitution), and I've often felt there should also have been a Freedom of Listening - which is the right to not have to listen to others exercising their FoS.
For myself, I have not had the big problems other authors report with their e-mails so far, and have not chosen to restrict my incoming e-mails. Like many, I appreciate how SOL has given me more feedback than other sites.
Yet I have no doubt that criticism - or even the fear of criticism - has driven many authors away, and we are all poorer for not having their works to enjoy. If this protection brings some of them back, I support it.
I have had anonymous e-mails I've wanted to respond to because the writer has brought up some great points. That got me into blogging on SOL, where I have replied to some anonymous e-mails, and some e-mails where I felt the e-mail and my answer were of wider interest than to just the original writer. In that way my blog also becomes an FAQ so that I don't have to continue to re-answer the same questions.
I've also received at least one obvious entrapment e-mail. Other authors get these as well, I'm informed. I blogged it as well, as a caution sign to those who follow.
For myself, anonymous e-mail has yet to be a major problem, and so I'll leave my options unchanged. If it ever becomes one, I'll try turning it off as an option, since my only other choice would be to leave SOL entirely, and that's a move I'll try not to pull the trigger on too quickly.
For those of you who absolutely feel you must be allowed to anonymously criticize (see Freedom of Listening above) I suggest the following three options remain open to you:
1: Many authors will not likely turn off receipt of anonymous e-mail. Don't abuse them through it and that avenue will remain open.
2: Write your own critical blog/reviews of stories and post it to the Internet. It will have the same visibility as the original stories. Authors might even read it, since who among us has never Googled their name even once?
3: Write your own stories in response to the flaws in theirs and post them to SOL. I've written stories in response to movies, books, and other authors where I didn't feel they got it right for me. Heck, the reason I'm an Internet author at all is because of that. And at least one very well known web-author and Internet/usenet personality (has his own Wikipedia entry) as admitted in the past he has written entire stories to refute my own because he's convinced that I'm getting it wrong. Great stories, btw.
My point: there remain other avenues for valid criticism besides feeling you have some undefined right to shove it in an author's e-mail face. Stories, like other art, are supposed to affect you. Obviously you're affected when you care enough to actually write afterwards. Maybe you were really upset after reading a story, and want to make that author equally upset in return so that now you're even. Is that really a wonderful goal?
And think for a moment about authors whose mail rules automatically block or trash anonymous e-mails at their end already. At least this way you know before you ever put the effort in to write them in the first place.
- - -
Now for authors: I find the best way to not get many critical e-mails has been to carefully code and summarize a story properly. This way the reader knows what they're getting into before they ever click to open the first page. Readers most often get angry when they feel tricked. The most criticism I get is about the lack of explicit details in much of my sex. That's because I'm writing stories, not stroke. Because there aren't codes yet for 'discreet sex' or 'use your imagination', I will probably continue with these occasional criticisms.
Alternatively, one story of mine - Encounters: Cat Women - will actually be rewritten in the future to incorporate some more graphic items that weren't part of the original. I agree with the readers who felt more could have been said there. So constructive criticism can have an effect - either in an existing story, or the next one where the author may more tune things to their reader's wishes.
The only problem is that constructive criticism seems to be a lot like diversity. It seems that everyone has their own definition of it. You may feel you're being constructive, when the author, all their friends, and nine-out-of-ten strangers on the street would insist you're not. Try viewing your comments from an author's perspective, and then revise them if they may not create the goal you're trying to effect.
So those are my (long) thoughts about the change in allowing author's to now have better blocking of anonymous - or even all - e-mails. You can consider trying what I suggest above. You can accept that you can't send anonymous comments to some authors any more. You can rage about how your rights have been violated. Or, you could finally start putting your name to it.
Posted to both Lazeez's and my own blogs.
There may be a solution.
The need to "reveal" a valid email address kept me from registering at SOL for a long time. I've worked in IT security and got some oversensitized to privacy issues there.
What is the situation now:
Many authors use a pen name, much of them probably for good reasons. The email address of authors is hidden by means of an email form. So their privacy is somewhat secured at SOL.
Authors may get abusive feedback - may it be just annoying spam or real frightening and cruel wording. They should have a possibility to save them from that.
Readers in first instance stay unknown. If they want to give feedback, there is even a possibility to give anonymous feedback. Then the author cannot give a response and they cannot get a response. If they want to get a response, they have to sacrifice some more of their anonymity.
Some of the problems arise from the use of email as communication medium.
Readers as well as authors already seem to trust Lazeez. Not all may be aware of how far this trust goes. They trust that:
- their email address will be kept private as long they do not give unanonymous feedback or respond to it
- their email address will not be abused by lazeez
- lazeez will not gather extensive access information (e.g. who likes what stories) or at least will not abuse this gathered information
- the web server and web application are kept secure enough that nobody can steal their email address, personal settings and potentially gathered access info (trust me, this is really hard to achieve against someone dedicated enough)
- lazeez has the standing in case of an law enforcement investigation of one of the authors or the readers to only give away information on behalf of a legally binding search warrant and only information regarding the investigated person, not all of the readers and authors.
That said, there is no real need to send feedback and respond to it by email. It's a lot of work, but SOL could contain a web based messaging system which even hides nicknames from the readers feedback and still lets the author respond to this reader.
Notification for new messages could still be sent by mail - with even more effort, even the response could be sent by mail to an address at SOL and there be forwarded. But I think this would be too much of a full blown email anonymizer. Responding using a web interface should do it.
This way, both sides could be kept anonymous to each other if they want, blacklisting readers with abusive or spam feedbacks could be done on site, lazeez could be a form of referee in case of abuse and assassination threats could still be reported to the police.
There are three downsides:
- readers and authors have to trust lazeez even more because he actually gets a full record of feedbacks and responses (he could get the feedbacks even now)
- the site gets even more complex, which makes it even more prone to security problems where somebody else, who nobody really would trust, can steal all the gathered information.
- there are "nearly anonymous" email accounts. It's very hard to stay really untrackable in the internet, but it may be to much effort to track down somebody "only" bothering an author using abusive language.
(2 cents on steroids - this got a bit long - have to thank db_story that his entry is even longer ;-) )
Storiesonline is the best story site on the web. That guy who equated your anonymous email system to the Patriot Act (which I gather is something of a controversy in America...) is ridiculous. Like you said, it's optional both ways.
You can't please everyone no matter what you do. I appreciate the work you put into the site, and give us amateur writers a place to post our stuff!
I allow anonymnous comments, and I appreciate that I can post comments anonymously--after all, given the nature of our stories, anonymity is important for all concerned.
--Hungry Guy
As a reader, I will be happy to verify my email is fine, and to continue commenting constructively on those stories that strike me to do so, with an email address provided so I can receive responses to my comments.
Sometimes I am frustrated by the author's desire NOT to receive any feedback at all, but I also feel it is his or her right.
Providing different levels of 'revealing' enhances the author's control over the email they receive, and if it reduces it, then that is surely their choice.
Just as an author has the right to refuse all feedback, surely enhancing that right by requiring validation when providing a 'valid email' only adds to the author's rights, and takes nothing from the reader that they had before. It just gives authors the sense that the comment they are receiving is in good faith.
Authors have always had the right to refuse feedback or refuse anonymous feedback.
What this change does is add a (hopefully) one time validation of an email address and away you go, everything else has simply been built in.
But then again, I'm a technophobe and probably have it all wrong, in which case maybe this needs to be thought through more... What I can say is that in the time I've been here, I have had cause to talk with Lazeez only a few times, but I doubt he would do anything that was vindictive, foolish or NOT well thought out.
And shit, he can always change it.
Anyway, it's nice to have a forum to discuss it too - not many other sites would.
SirNathan
ps. Isn't "I will no longer send any comments to authors who have anonymous email turned off," oxymoronic?
I'm so use to just putting in my name, email address and clicking away, but instead I had to verify or whatnot. It don't bother me much.
I enjoy this website, I've read alot of great stories. My opinion, if I like your story, I'll give an opinion. I normally email back every other I read, but sometimes I don't. I don't care if someone has my email address, because its my yahoo address and not my main account.
I'm not sure why I'm even leaving a comment here, I don't have any problems with anything, so I guess each their own. I love this site and I enjoy reading it. Whatever Lazeez's wants to do to make things safer or whatnot, more power to Lazeez.
To all the authors, keep up your fabulous work on here. IF you have a story that I might be interested in, please let me know. I'd be glad to read and comment on it!...
Have a lovely day!.
Rose081900
I've seen some of the more hateful stuff, both from conversations with writers and seeing what people will post on Literotica as 'Public' comments.
I do believe this will reduce the feedback on SOL, but I would sacrifice that percentage of my feedback to prevent someone from reaching into another writer's personal space and filling it with hatred.
I've been lucky enough not to be recipient of such vitriol but have seen good writers want to stop writing because of it.
Thank you Lazeez for the effort put forward to protect writers.
I will however maintain the acceptance of any and all emails.
After all, even an idiot can blurt out something intelligent every now and then.
Sincerely,
ElSol
IT ASKED ME FOR SIGNIN NAME AND PASSWORD I DON'T KNOW THESE THE COMPUTER REMEMBERS THEM COULD YOU CONTACT ME PLEASE.
NicholasG
Jim
Perhaps the system should be finetuned, for example requiring confirmation within 15 days of sending feedback, including the past? I.e. when somebody confirmed email, he/she can send nonanonymous feedback for 15 days.
Or perhaps authors should have finer control on accepting feedback. Anonymous, non-anonymous (i.e. with any email), confirmed once, confirmed within last 15 days, confirm every time,... But that would mean more work for our webmaster. Well...
Shadowhawk (reader)
1 - This change is permanent, so the system is here to stay.
2 - Non-premier members have to confirm ONCE every 15 days IF they send mail to authors refusing anonymous email. Otherwise they don't have to confirm anything. Premier members have to confirm their email once per subscription period, so they have to confirm their email address the first time they send a message to an author that refuses anonymous email and that confirmation will last until their premier membership is due for renewal or when they change their own email address.
3 - No cookie setup was changed on the site.
4 - This change is about respect. Just like the site respects the readers' wish for privacy and anonymity, it must respect an authors wish to not have to receive that anonymous email. And the site respects the readers right not to be bothered with non-anonymous forms by allowing them to choose to hide the non-anonymous forms.
The system has been implemented in the most unobtrusive way. One has to confirm their email address once per set duration (15 days for non premier members, subscription period for premier), so if you send multiple messages before you confirm your email address, you'll receive multiple confirmation messages, however, you need to use one of those confirmation messages, and once you do, all your queued messages will be sent through.
However, it should be noted that you need one confirmation message per email address, not per user. So if you do take advantage of the optional email address for contacts and you send one message with your main email address and another with your optional contact email address, then you'll have to confirm both email address separately.
Messages will be held in the system for 15 days, if no confirmation is received, then the messages will be deleted.
I can understand authors not accepting anonymous (with unconfirmed email) feedback. Once burned...
Shadowhawk
Many of the people against this seem to feel that their feedback is as important in the overall scheme of things as the story. It isn't. Not even close. One of the many "anonymouses" here says that he made many positive comments about an authors story and then started making negative ones because he didn't like the way the story was going. Sorry but that isn't constructive criticism. It's whining because the author isn't writing what you want them to write. And doing it under cover of darkness while hiding your face.
There are authors on SOL who are pretentious and think nobody's opinion counts if it goes against theirs. There are also readers that think their opinion is the only important one and are offended if the author ignores it. Asking a reader "What have you written lately?" may well be an earned response.
People join SOL to read stories, not feedback. By the way I'm a reader and not an author so far.
But I question the long stories that just stop and never finish,or are in progress for long periods.
so I thought that by sending something to authors that was their reward for writing.
So no more comments from me period.
"I do believe this will reduce the feedback on SOL, but I would sacrifice that percentage of my feedback to prevent someone from reaching into another writer's personal space and filling it with hatred."
It occurs to me that El Sol -- who sounds VERY self important in his post to the point of Ayn Rand-ness -- and the extreme minority of authors for whom the new system "benefits" ... are probably the only authors that actually GET enough feedback for the lost feedback to not be a problem.
I have posted stories to lists and sites with more than 60,000 hits a day, had several hundred or thousand "hits" on my stories in a month, and gotten maybe a dozen pieces of feedback per story. These same stories have placed in the top two to four in "annual reader awards" contests over the years.
It's a rare author, and a rare story that gets such large amounts of feedback that the writer can so casually say "Let them eat cake" to the other writers as El Sol has in words, and Laseez has in action with the new system. Just because a story is good doesn't mean it will get responses, so ANYTHING that that makes sending or getting a response MORE difficult is to me, A. VERY. BAD. THING.
I vote the email system be scrapped ENTIRELY. Move to a private messaging system, akin to those employed in message boards like phpbb or vBulletin. That way, EVERYONE is anonymous AND responsible for the consequences of their words. Spam/trolls/flames could be tracked through login names and IPs by Laseez. Authors could respond to readers without giving away their email addresses - readers wouldn't have to sacrifice their anonymity either, and yet, everyone still faces the consequences of their words.
Everyone is happy.
The SOL system is now set up to either allow or disallow the Author the option to allow for unsigned or unwanted mail about their story's, whether we lioke it or not is not a point for discussion, it has been done and I for ONE like it that way, I have always signed my mails to each Author and will continue to do so, If any one who either will not or cannot at least sign their mail to the author so that the Mailers concerns or misconceptions can be addressed by the author well so be it.
As I said I like it this way, I have no problem letting the Author or the SOL syatem (Lazeez) have my address.
1. I turned off anonymous emails on my account. Why? Because I realized that 99.9% of my anonymous emails were non-constructive flaming emails, and that 99.9% of my non-constructive flaming emails were anonymous. I didn't see the need to allow these people to abuse me without me having the ability to respond in kind.
2. If you actually believe what you're saying, then you shouldn't have a problem giving me, the author, a chance to respond to you. If you are afraid of someone recognizing your real identity, then you set up, as one person said, an account on a free email server for all of your adult communications.
3. Yes, this system *could* be better. But it would take a lot of time, effort, and system resources, and Lazeez is already overworked as it is. The notion of a "Private Messaging" system such as PHPBB uses was something that crossed my mind, but since I was thinking about implementing such a system before I gave up control of EWP, I already know what a nightmare it is to put in place. If Lazeez wants to go for it, great, but I'm sure as hell not going to bitch if he thinks he has better things to do.
4. I will grant that, with the amount of feedback I receive when I'm actively writing, the loss of two or three comments is negligible to me... but truthfully, comments without a return address on them carry no weight with me, anyway, so there's really no loss. And, as I said, those anon emails are almost universally (in my case) both not constructive and not well thought out.
5. If an author has chosen to make your ability to respond too difficult for you to bear... DON'T RESPOND! Duh. This is about the author having the control. And guess what, folks? We're the ones doing ALL THE WORK. You're bitching because you might have to spend two or three MINUTES to respond, every two weeks or so? Most authors I know spend hours upon hours upon hours writing that thing you're responding to. I have heard of lazy, but this takes the cake. Those who know my history know that people stabbing me in the back and generally harassing me HAVE pushed me into hiding before. I was lucky that I grew from the experiences and was able to come back, because I love to write. Not every author is going to be able to do that... how many AUTHORS do you want to lose before you take remedial action?
6. You have a right to speak. You do not have a right to make me listen to you. If I don't want to hear what you have to say, that is MY privilege, as an author. And if you're not willing to back up your words with a valid email address, then I don't want to hear what you have to say. It's as simple as that. This is the AUTHOR'S CHOICE. We know the consequences when we make the choice.
So, get a grip. You're bitching because you'll have to take 30 seconds to verify your email address IF you choose to respond to an author (like me) who refuses anon emails. Well, quite frankly, if your comment means that little to you, then it means NOTHING to me. I am sick and tired of readers who whine and complain every time they are required to do even the smallest amount of work in order to read stories or respond to them. Us authors put in massive amounts of work, and get nothing in return except your comments... and you can't be troubled to do so little as to click a hyperlink? Then you do not deserve the privilege of putting your opinion in front of me.
Sincerely,
Net Wolf
Author, Reader, Editor, Former Webmaster
No matter what you write him, he is going to respond like he responded here: Full of pompous wind and rhetoric. Or not respond at all. He doesn't care what his readers think. He proved that with his little hiding stunt he had a few years ago. He just wanted to make sure he got his love and affection, while hiding from his detractors.
So, it's no big surprise what side he is on.