I am no writer, but I think it's fine as long as you don't manipulate votes by voting in your own story. That would be very pathetic.

>Anonymously posting in your own story thread to incite discussion about something in particular, create new opinions - maybe even sway votes if they're being boringly unanimous.
Now that would be just sad for a writer to do this.

>>4691
>Do you do it?

No.

>What would you think of someone who did it? Is it a bad thing, or perfectly fine?

They should have more respect for their readers and pride in their own work. Instead of trying to deceive others through feigning more interest than their story deserves, they should concentrate on their actual responsibilities as an author.

>Would you encourage it if the writer felt it'd make the voting process more interesting and allowed people new insight into the given options?

No. If the audience isn't as involved as you want or picking up on the cues you're trying to push on them, it means that there's a problem of communication. The solution is to talk to them and adjust your story accordingly, not to keep up whatever is making things boring or difficult.

Their story, their rules. I've suspected it on more than one occasion, and the notion hasn't really bothered me. If an author doesn't think they've effectively accentuated an important plot point in the story, and/or aren't comfortable enough saying as much as the author, I'm OK with them doing it anonymously. That said, I'm more comfortable with authors smacking the voting public upside the head, apologizing for something ill-stated, or clarifying a misinterpreted, misunderstood, or completely glazed over piece of information. No one's perfect, and we're more thankful for an update than anything else, regardless of slights real or imagined. If I paid for this I would feign outrage all over, but some guy/lady is providing me with free entertainment: do what you feel needs to be done.

>>4695
'Sup AG author.

>>4696
Thanks for the picture.

There are many times a writer would like to write something for a scene, but can really only give standard options and the chance for a write-in. So long as it's inconsequential to the outcome (good or bad) and doesn't railroad one of the given votes, I think it's perfectly fine to anonymously vote for something else entirely and hope others bandwagon it.

It's kind of strange, I guess you could say, to ask your readers if it's okay for you to choose the next vote, or to even give a summary of what you'd like to write in vote form and allow them to choose it ("oddly specific", indeed) should you have a burst of inspiration. If it makes the story more enjoyable, why not?

I'm not a writer, but I've thought about this, and have decided this is probably something I would do should I decide to start writing. I'd find it too awkward, otherwise.

But to sway votes, change opinions, argue with your readers, or provide insight when you're trying to be mysterious, I find would be in poor taste.

>>4695

What he said.

I've never posted in a the way OP describes. Nor will I ever. Personally, if I found out that an author did so regularly I would stop reading the story. It's insulting to have either side of the writer-reader relationship overstep their bounds.

What the writer needs to do is throw in incentive to get more people to participate. Or at the very least try to communicate. I know this doesn't always work but the alternative is a clusterfuck where everyone loses.

I've used it to pick the reader's brain without inciting uneeded speculations before.

As to giving hints, well, I suppose it's a acceptable, since it avoids the 'word of god absolute' status that it might get otherwise. I don't think I've had to do that before, though.

>>4696
Pretty much this. If there is a communication failure, trace it to the source and hold an intervention.

If it's the author's failing, make adjustments as necessary. If anon is at fault... picture related.

>>4704
>communication failure

You mean HY's bane?

>>4695
I second his remarks.

But it's a terrible thing to have happen and it'd be a cheap stunt as opposed to invoking discussion via your writing or updating faster.

If you're going as far as voting in your own story, then you've basically defeated the point of a CYOA. Getting too hung up on one possible route is a bad move for a writer in itself.

I'm of the opinion that if you want to vote in your own story, show that you are.

On the same thoughtline, I'd be interested to see a story where the voting is determined by the author choosing a vote out of four or so choices, and anon convincing the author otherwise.