Reader Originality Verification
Overview
Reader Originality Verification is a unique content originality assurance mechanism on the StoryForMoney platform. Readers who have read the work participate in voting to collectively determine its originality. After verification, participating readers receive a share of the author's revenue as a reward.
This mechanism is designed to:
- Protect original authors' rights and curb plagiarism
- Incentivize readers to actively participate in content quality oversight
- Build a trusted community verification network through economic incentives
- Provide verifiable originality endorsement for quality original content
Verification Process
Batch System
The system automatically generates verification tasks in batches of 10 chapters. When all chapters in a batch are published, the system opens voting for that batch.
- Every 10 chapters form one verification batch (e.g., Chapters 1-10, 11-20)
- The last batch may contain fewer than 10 chapters
- Each batch is verified independently
Eligibility
Only readers who meet the following criteria can participate in voting for a batch:
- Have read at least 90% of the chapters in that batch
- Have a logged-in platform account
- Have not previously voted on that batch
Voting Options
Each batch has a 7-day voting window. Eligible readers can cast one vote during this period, choosing:
Complete Process Timeline
Chapters Published
Every 10 chapters automatically form a verification batch
7-Day Voting Period
Eligible readers vote "Support Original" or "Report Plagiarism" (with evidence)
Voting Period Ends
The system automatically processes the results based on voting data
All votes are "Original" + No plagiarism reports
Content remains published. The batch is marked as verified original.
Has plagiarism votes or reports
Content is temporarily suspended while evidence is reviewed
Content is automatically restored and the batch is marked as verified original
Content remains suspended. Author is notified and may revise the chapters
Content is automatically restored to protect the author's rights
Voting Rules
Votes Are Final
Once a vote is submitted, whether supporting originality or reporting plagiarism, it cannot be withdrawn or modified. Please consider carefully before voting.
Result Determination
The originality of a work is determined through a structured review process:
- If all votes are "original" and no plagiarism report is submitted → automatically confirmed as Original
- If there are plagiarism votes or reports → content is temporarily suspended and enters a 3-day admin review period
- Admin reviews the evidence and makes a final determination (original or plagiarism)
- If admin does not act within 3 days, the content is automatically restored as original to protect the author
- Voting ratios do not directly determine the result — they only affect revenue distribution
Transparency
After voting is complete, all readers can view the batch's voting statistics (support/report ratio), but individual voter identities will not be disclosed.
Confirmed Plagiarism Handling
When a batch is confirmed as plagiarism after admin review, the following actions are taken:
- The chapters in that batch are suspended (hidden from public view), other batches are not affected
- The author is notified and may revise the flagged chapters
- Once revised, the author can request to re-publish the chapters, which will trigger a new round of reader verification for that batch
- The work itself is not deleted — only the confirmed batch is temporarily hidden
Revenue Distribution
Authors can set the reader verification revenue share percentage (5%–50%). At monthly settlement, the platform takes the book's total monthly ad revenue, multiplies it by this percentage, and distributes the result to verification readers proportionally based on each batch's vote count.
Determined as Original
When a batch is determined as original, the verification revenue allocated to that batch is distributed equally among all voters (regardless of whether they voted support or report).
Determined as Suspected Plagiarism
When a batch is determined as suspected plagiarism, the corresponding verification revenue is distributed only among readers who voted to report plagiarism.
Author Settings
The revenue share percentage is set by the author in the work's settings, ranging from 5% to 50%. A higher percentage can attract more readers to participate in verification.
Reporting Rules
Evidence Requirements
Readers who choose to report plagiarism must provide the following evidence:
- Original work title and author (required)
- Plagiarism type selection (complete copy, substantial similarity, plot similarity, character similarity, etc.)
- Screenshot comparison evidence (required) — must provide comparison screenshots of both this work and the original
- Original work URL (optional)
- Additional description (optional)
Malicious Report Penalties
The platform strictly prohibits malicious reporting. Each confirmed malicious report results in a warning, and the reporter's revenue eligibility for that report is revoked. Cumulative warnings trigger escalating penalties:
- 1st warning: Warning recorded + revenue eligibility revoked for that report
- 2nd warning: Verification suspended for 30 days + revenue eligibility revoked
- 3rd warning: Verification suspended for 6 months + revenue eligibility revoked
- 4th warning: Verification suspended for 12 months + revenue eligibility revoked
- 5th warning: Permanently banned from reader verification
Warning reset: If no violations occur within 30 days after the penalty period ends, the warning count resets to zero.
Note: If the submitted evidence is partially valid, it is considered a good-faith report and no warning will be issued.
What Constitutes a Malicious Report
The following behaviors are considered malicious reporting:
- Fabricating evidence: forging screenshots, providing non-existent original work titles/authors, or creating fake URLs
- Completely unrelated reports: the reported "original work" has absolutely no connection to the work in question (e.g., claiming a romance novel plagiarized a sci-fi novel with entirely different content)
- Targeted harassment: repeatedly submitting invalid reports against the same author's different works
- Perfunctory evidence: filling required fields with nonsense (e.g., original title as "xxx", author as "unknown"), or providing comparison screenshots showing zero similarity
The following are NOT considered malicious (no warning issued):
- Evidence references a real existing work with reasonable comparisons, but the platform determines it does not constitute plagiarism — this is a difference in judgment
- Some evidence is valid while other parts are not substantiated — considered a good-faith report
- Selected the wrong similarity type (e.g., chose "complete copy" when it's actually "plot similarity") — this is an operational error
Batch Status Guide
Voting
The batch is open for voting. Eligible readers can participate. The voting period is 7 days.
Under Review
Voting has ended and the batch has disputed votes. Content is temporarily suspended while admin reviews the evidence. Review period is up to 3 days.
Locked
The review is complete. The final determination (original or plagiarism) has been made and results are locked.
Verified
Verification is complete and results are published. Readers can view the final determination (original/suspected plagiarism) and voting statistics.