Fixed a problem mentioned in a review...any way of letting readers know?

Hello all!

A while back, I received a wonderful serial review from the indomitable D.D.Webb. While he praises it in glowing terms, like the lovely human being he is, he also mentioned in his review that he was a bit skeeved out by the mechanism by which I offer erotica interludes; namely that I required a vote on TWF before the reader could access them. This was a perfectly fair criticism and I had no problem with him warning other potential readers who might feel the same way.

NOW, however, after hearing from several readers who have felt annoyed, used, or manipulated by this, I've decided to remove the mechanic altogether, and offer the extra chapters as...I guess just a sort of "here you go" bonus to readers.

My question is; is there any way at all to let readers of WFG reviews know that I've fixed this issue that reviewers warn about? Is it in poor taste to post a review on my own work to just say "hey, this is no longer the case anymore!"?

I'm probably making a mountain out of a molehill with this whole thing, but I wanted to see if there was some convention

I actually thought that was a really clever idea, and had considered doing something like it myself (without Erotica). I'm fairly sure D.D. Webb reads this forum regularly and is going to see your post before long, most reviewers probably don't mind making changes if a point of criticism has changed.

Is there any other way of rewarding readers for voting? I'm wondering.

I used to offer incentives for WFG reviews - a bonus chapter when X amount was reached. You could do the same with TWF votes.

well, dd already commented on her post where she mentioned it, so HE knows, as to other people knowing, i would say ask people who mentioned it in reviews to update their reviews.

*stumbles in belatedly*

Absolutely, I'll go back and update that review! But only because you lavished me with compliments. :)

In seriousness, though, my apologies--I should have thought of that immediately, especially after I've mentioned before in this forum that I'm not averse to editing my reviews if the story in question is altered to make it appropriate.

Maybe I'm missing something here, but how is trading access to bonus stuff for votes different from the patreon or paypal donation access thing that a lot of authors do? For that matter, I don't see a big difference from offering bonus updates in exchange for ratings or recommendations on WFG, which I think is nearly universal.


I think offering bonus content in exchange for votes is a fair and reasonable practice. For my part, the only thing that seemed off was that the bonus content in question was erotica. Personally, I don't have any objection to erotica; I considered my gut reaction to this and decided it wasn't that big a deal. I continued to read the story (it's a damn good story, by the way, you should read it if you aren't), and vote on TWF, both of which I still do.

I did, however, have that gut reaction, and apparently others did too. I mentioned it in the initial draft of my review because it did rub me the wrong way on an instinctive level, but I also tried to be fair and give full credit to both the quality of Twisted Cogs and the fact that this little quibble probably wasn't objectively a big deal.

I can't speak for anyone else but based on how things fell out, I guess enough people felt more or less the same that Maddirose decided to change it.

I should hop in really quick to mention that I absolutely in no way look down on other serialists who exchange votes for bonus content. As Unillustrated says, there's nothing really *wrong* with is, as such, it was just a personal decision on my part to take them down. I had gotten into discussion with a couple of friends of mine whose opinions I trust, and came to the conclusion that a lot of my business practices could perhaps be described as "ruthless" or "manipulative", so removing the vote-for-erotica was just one of the many changes of business plan I made to try to fix that.

(Also thank you D.D.Webb for updating your review (also, based on Hollins' comment you might be a girl? If so, sorry for using the wrong pronouns there (also nested parentheticals are really fun for me for some reason (maybe that's the programmer in me (or maybe I'm just addicted (I can stop at any time I swear!).)?).).)!)

Umm, hmm, i see how my comment could parse. I meant that DD had commented on Maddi's post about it on maddi's website. I was under the impression that D.D. was a dude, but I could be mistaken.

Might I suggest including the vote link at the bottom of every post though? Or top, but I find im less likely to click a link when im about to read something else, and more like to click it when i'm done.