Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

What do thread views mean?


TopBilled
 Share

Recommended Posts

While I certainly loved and appreciated the manner you took in reminding people to "be nice" around here Mr. Admin(and btw, I think a better alternative to my "Jay Silverheels" joke to darkblue would have been to think of and use Tarzan's manner of fracturing the English language and not Frankenstein's Monster) I would like to ask you a question about this whole "going off-topic" thing in this thread.

 

You see, I've just went back to the OP's original post in his thread and re-read it, and I while I COULD be wrong here, I got the impression that his thread was primarily started to just call attention to his being the originator of so many threads which receive a high number of "viewings", and not so much the question as to "what do thread views mean?".

 

And so, as it seems to me that his thread title's "question" was offered up more in a rhetorical manner, and thus not apparently in an attempt to discover an answer to this query, I'm wondering here why going "off-topic"(and hopefully in a humorous fashion as I know you know I'm prone to around here) in this particular thread would or could be considered either "rude" and/or an "affront" to the OP or anyone else who's taken the time to reply in this thread?

 

(...thanks in advance for taking my query seriously and responding to it...oh, and yeah...if you'd like to use a little humor in your reply, that would of course be viewed by me as an "added bonus" TOO!) ;)

 

Since my response, and I agree that Tarzan would have been a better example than the Monster on further reflection, had nothing to do with the original post and since when we post we generally are posting to try to keep focused discussions from getting derailed too badly (along with reminding people to treat each other with respect), I wanted to ensure my post concluded properly, lest I be hoisted by my own petard.

 

I will also say that tensions are currently running high between some people on these forums and I highly encourage the use of the ignore feature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Frxeyman

 

There may be a fault with your analysis of the FrankGrimes thread. The total replies include all replies dating back to the inception of the thread. The Views count include ONLY those views that have been generated SINCE this latest upgrade. That's why there are so many more replies than views.

 

Second, I believe that is impossible to have a higher reply count than view count. I'm not 100% sure of this, but a reply also counts as a view. They are not tabulated separately. For instance, if four people view a thread but don't post, and two others view a thread but do post, the total views would be 6. The data would therefore read, 6 views, 2 replies, and NOT read, 4 views, 2 replies. I believe this is right but would stand corrected

 

But I agree that the Reply count is more indicative of popularity than the view count. And if there is quite a disparity between views and replies, i.e., 5,000 views, 25 replies, that would represent a lack of popularity. Given the haphazard and sometimes compulsive clicking behavior on a forum such as this, people might click on a thread for a variety of reasons, not necessarily because they think it is hot. In fact, a lot of views that don't result in a reply might indicate that the thread is not compelling, in fact, a downright bust. A reply indicates an active engagement and a much better indicator of popularity IMO.

 

Well apparently my suggestion based on the Frank Grimes Torture thread over on the Favorites Forum can happened as evidenced by the screen capture I just took a few moments ago here on General Discussions under "Who's going to watch THE BABY" thread that MORE REPLIES THAN VIEWS can happened:

 

Unfortunately for some ODD reason the number of views just jumped 22 views up to 84. Geeze, I wonder how that happened? Oh well, just goes to show you how fast things can change here on the boards. Still though there is the below screen capture.

 

98rsi1.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, the 'baby' thread was initiated prior to the recent update. It started Jan 2013, the upgrade went into effect April 2014. From April 2014 the views started over at 0. But the replies that occurred prior to the April 2014 upgrade were retained in the count. Therefore at thread beginning, there were more replies than views. At the time of your screenshot, the views had not yet caught up with the replies.

 

I'm pretty sure this way of looking at it is correct but maybe a moderator who knows the software can comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, the 'baby' thread was initiated prior to the recent update. It started Jan 2013, the upgrade went into effect April 2014. From April 2014 the views started over at 0. But the replies that occurred prior to the April 2014 upgrade were retained in the count. Therefore at thread beginning, there were more replies than views. At the time of your screenshot, the views had not yet caught up with the replies.

 

I'm pretty sure this way of looking at it is correct but maybe a moderator who knows the software can comment.

 

You are probably right. I never though about that. But still, it was weird.

 

Although based on the info you have provided, according to the FrankGrimes thread over on the Favorites Forum, the replies are 12,466 and the views are at 3,795. The last post that was posted was on June 4, 2014.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On looking at the ongoing discussion here, I have to wonder, Topbilled, what was the point of your original post? I have to agree to an extent with Fxyman - it really did seem to shout, "Wow - look at how many views my (everincreasing number of) posts have generated!" Isn't the discussion within the threads the point and not meaningless stats regarding them. I mean, popular or unpopular, threads aren't trophies, although common sense would indicate multiple responses to a thread would suggest it was a successful (can that word apply here?) post.

I believe Topbilled is a real TCM board enthusiast, trying to get some discussions going with all these threads, but he also seems to think starting a thread ABOUT his threads is a good idea. Some things one can think, but sharing them isn't really a great idea. (Hmmm - maybe like THIS post?)

And frankly, the continuing argument on whether response count vs view count is more "meaningful" seems like a long distance from the point of the TCM board - an outlet and forum for our mutual love of classic movies.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On looking at the ongoing discussion here, I have to wonder, Topbilled, what was the point of your original post? I have to agree to an extent with Fxyman - it really did seem to shout, "Wow - look at how many views my (everincreasing number of) posts have generated!" Isn't the discussion within the threads the point and not meaningless stats regarding them. I mean, popular or unpopular, threads aren't trophies, although common sense would indicate multiple responses to a thread would suggest it was a successful (can that word apply here?) post.

I believe Topbilled is a real TCM board enthusiast, trying to get some discussions going with all these threads, but he also seems to think starting a thread ABOUT his threads is a good idea. Some things one can think, but sharing them isn't really a great idea. (Hmmm - maybe like THIS post?)

And frankly, the continuing argument on whether response count vs view count is more "meaningful" seems like a long distance from the point of the TCM board - an outlet and forum for our mutual love of classic movies.

 

Ooooh...NOW you've done it!

 

(...you "hater", you!!!) LOL

 

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Again, the 'baby' thread was initiated prior to the recent update. It started Jan 2013, the upgrade went into effect April 2014. From April 2014 the views started over at 0. But the replies that occurred prior to the April 2014 upgrade were retained in the count. Therefore at thread beginning, there were more replies than views. At the time of your screenshot, the views had not yet caught up with the replies.

 

I'm pretty sure this way of looking at it is correct but maybe a moderator who knows the software can comment.

 

Okay, so I just went back to the Favorites Forum this morning, and I clicked on the FrankGrimes Torture Thread and I wrote a post there. I then signed off of the boards, and a few minutes later came back, signed in and here is what the counts showed. As you can see on the top listing, the FrankGrimes Torture Thread still shows 12,467 replies as opposed to just 3,811 views. Can you explain this? I believe you were saying or someone was saying that you can not have more replies than views.

 

2yvtjwo.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so I just went back to the Favorites Forum this morning, and I clicked on the FrankGrimes Torture Thread and I wrote a post there. I then signed off of the boards, and a few minutes later came back, signed in and here is what the counts showed. As you can see on the top listing, the FrankGrimes Torture Thread still shows 12,467 replies as opposed to just 3,811 views. Can you explain this? I believe you were saying or someone was saying that you can not have more replies than views.

 

 

 

The FrankGrimes Torture Thread is an old (pre-existing thread).    In the conversion to a new interface TCM's programmers carried over the number of replies (and also the actual replies),  but NOT the views.      This is how one can have MORE replies than views.

 

If the date of the thread is before the conversion the above may occur.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since my response, and I agree that Tarzan would have been a better example than the Monster on further reflection, had nothing to do with the original post and since when we post we generally are posting to try to keep focused discussions from getting derailed too badly (along with reminding people to treat each other with respect), I wanted to ensure my post concluded properly, lest I be hoisted by my own petard.

 

I will also say that tensions are currently running high between some people on these forums and I highly encourage the use of the ignore feature.

I will also say that tensions are currently running high between some people on these forums and I highly encourage the use of the ignore feature.

 

WOW, is TCMModerator right!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

You too, TopBilled, were right. I forgot how wonderful the Ignore feature is. :D:D:D:D:D

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The FrankGrimes Torture Thread is an old (pre-existing thread).    In the conversion to a new interface TCM's programmers carried over the number of replies (and also the actual replies),  but NOT the views.      This is how one can have MORE replies than views.

 

If the date of the thread is before the conversion the above may occur.

 

Okay, I accept that. Thank you for pointing this out so that this partially antiquated poster can understand.

 

But still, you have to admit over 12,000 replies to a single thread is quite a number, isn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I don't believe the conversion has anything to do with the phenomenon you all are discussing.

 

Why? Because I've seen it happen before - long before the conversion. Jake Holman has a long running thread about Jakes Music in the favorites forum. One day last year I noticed that all the views were wiped away. There were lots of replies still, but the view count had to start all over again. So, I looked around a little and noticed a couple of other threads that it had happened to as well. But it wasn't system-wide. I'm not sure how many threads were affected, but I don't believe it was a great many - I stopped looking. Apparently there was some kind of glitch in the system that night.

 

These are the threads where the current count of views is less than the posts - and again, this happened last year (I believe it was around August or September, but I'm not completely sure - I just remember the what I witnessed, not the when exactly).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I don't believe the conversion has anything to do with the phenomenon you all are discussing.

 

Why? Because I've seen it happen before - long before the conversion. Jake Holman has a long running thread about Jakes Music in the favorites forum. One day last year I noticed that all the views were wiped away. There were lots of replies still, but the view count had to start all over again. So, I looked around a little and noticed a couple of other threads that it had happened to as well. But it wasn't system-wide. I'm not sure how many threads were affected, but I don't believe it was a great many - I stopped looking. Apparently there was some kind of glitch in the system that night.

 

These are the threads where the current count of views is less than the posts - and again, this happened last year (I believe it was around August or September, but I'm not completely sure - I just remember the what I witnessed, not the when exactly).

 

I don't doubt that there could have been system glitches and this was the cause of the replies count being higher then the view count.     So maybe it wasn't the conversion to the new interface.    I assume this because of the create date for the thread but if glitches prior to the conversion caused the issue these could have been carried over as part of the conversion.

 

Either way,  I believe we agree that using either stat for a 'mine is bigger than yours' type of rant is misguided (at best).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I have to amend my post about it. Looking around now, I see a lot more threads than the few I spoke of from last years "glitch". So, maybe the glitch I witnessed was a preview of the conversion or something.

 

I agree with you, James - about the misguided thing. View counts have been talked about a lot recently and it's kind of a strange topic to receive as much discussion as it has. But that's just me - whoever wants to talk about it more should continue to enjoy it whether we think it's a worthwhile topic or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't doubt that there could have been system glitches and this was the cause of the replies count being higher then the view count.     So maybe it wasn't the conversion to the new interface.    I assume this because of the create date for the thread but if glitches prior to the conversion caused the issue these could have been carried over as part of the conversion.

 

Either way,  I believe we agree that using either stat for a 'mine is bigger than yours' type of rant is misguided (at best).

 

Well, I am NOT using it for that purpose at all. I am just clearly stating that having more replies to a thread is vastly more important than just having a lot of views. The more views to me means very little. But the more replies a thread receives IMHO, indicates that the thread is active and has a lot of interest.

 

The whole reason for posting threads on a message board is to get conversations started about the subject matter that the originator started with. If the originator of a thread was only interested in the number of views, to me that runs counter productive to the whole issue of having a message board in the first place. Agree or disagree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I am NOT using it for that purpose at all. I am just clearly stating that having more replies to a thread is vastly more important than just having a lot of views. The more views to me means very little. But the more replies a thread receives IMHO, indicates that the thread is active and has a lot of interest.

 

The whole reason for posting threads on a message board is to get conversations started about the subject matter that the originator started with. If the originator of a thread was only interested in the number of views, to me that runs counter productive to the whole issue of having a message board in the first place. Agree or disagree?

 

Sorry for any misunderstanding.   Yea, I know it was NOT you that used number of views or replies to feed your ego.

 

I do agree that replies are more important than views,  but there is also an 'it depends' factor there as well.   Take the Candid2 thread.  This is a thread of candid pictures and daily birthday tribute pictures,  I 'view' it everyday I'm at this forum, but I rarely make a comment since the intent of that thread wasn't to create discussions.      But generally I agree; Replies are what count.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I don't believe the conversion has anything to do with the phenomenon you all are discussing.

 

Why? Because I've seen it happen before - long before the conversion. Jake Holman has a long running thread about Jakes Music in the favorites forum. One day last year I noticed that all the views were wiped away. There were lots of replies still, but the view count had to start all over again. So, I looked around a little and noticed a couple of other threads that it had happened to as well. But it wasn't system-wide. I'm not sure how many threads were affected, but I don't believe it was a great many - I stopped looking. Apparently there was some kind of glitch in the system that night.

 

These are the threads where the current count of views is less than the posts - and again, this happened last year (I believe it was around August or September, but I'm not completely sure - I just remember the what I witnessed, not the when exactly).

Well in the Linda Darnell for SOTM thread I started, the number of replies was carried over after the conversion, but the number of views started from zero.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well in the Linda Darnell for SOTM thread I started, the number of replies was carried over after the conversion, but the number of views started from zero.

 

Boy, that must be a harrowing thought for some (a few? Just one or two perhaps?). Can you imagine, waking up some morning and finding all those views, GONE.  Do I hear an unspoken cry shimmering through the boards, "Oh please, God, no more upgrades."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We should not fall into the trap of defining why threads are created.  As james pointed out, "it depends."  Anyone should be able to start a thread about anything, and not have his/her popularity (or lack of same) judged by views, replies, likes, etc. We have seen over and over again that these numbers are unreliable. If someone wants to start a thread in which virtually no discussion is needed, that's fine with me. If someone else wants to encourage discussion in his/her thread, that's fine with me as well (as long as discussion is encouraged and not shut down). 

 

I only object to threads that spread misinformation or make unfounded conjectures, unless, of course, they are satirical in nature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If someone wants to start a thread in which virtually no discussion is needed, that's fine with me. If someone else wants to encourage discussion in his/her thread, that's fine with me as well...(snip)...I only object to threads that spread misinformation or make unfounded conjectures, unless, of course, they are satirical in nature.

 

That sums up my feelings as well.

 

Page views and "likes" don't even show on the new mobile version of the boards, anyway. Not on my phone, at least. Which is how I usually read the forums so most of the time I'm unaware how many views a thread supposedly has or who liked what. You can switch to the full version but that defeats the purpose of having a more streamlined format that functions & displays more quickly and smoothly on mobile devices.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That sums up my feelings as well.

 

Page views and "likes" don't even show on the new mobile version of the boards, anyway. Not on my phone, at least. Which is how I usually read the forums so most of the time I'm unaware how many views a thread supposedly has or who liked what. You can switch to the full version but that defeats the purpose of having a more streamlined format that functions & displays more quickly and smoothly on mobile devices.

 

I access the boards on my phone and on my laptop. When using your phone, do you have the issue where you can't bring up the latest post in the thread? I've found that even though I can see that there are recent replies, I'll be brought to an old response and cannot access the new ones no matter how many times I "click" to try and get in. That's been the only drawback to using the mobile version of the message board I can see right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UPDATED

 

News: ME-TV Cutting in on TCM's Audience............4778 16351

Summer Under the Stars Lineup August 2014.......4622 4980

Classic film pairings........4769  4877

Why are some threads locked, words prohibited?....3543 3570

Guest Programmer Dolores Hart tonight on TCM.....3272  3351

Why do movie stars commit suicide?...2951  3024

Hollywood's depictions of death on screen...2759  2847

September 2014 Schedule.............1941  2741

Classic yes but is it essential?....2595  2648

So how many films have y-o-u recorded…?....2471  2567

News: Director blasts Leonard Maltin for inaccurate review....2476 2509

News: Kim Novak blasts bullies….2118  2171

It happened on this day.....1001  1961  

Any ideas who will be September's SOTM?.....1483  1501

Ruth Roman……..1037  1252

Movie Swan Song...............1074  1100

News: Dame May Whitty more popular than Rock Hudson!...1071 1095

On Broadway, but not in the movie....1022  1045

 

NEW

 

What do thread views mean?...2006

Top 10 most-searched titles on the TCM database…1927

Kay Francis appreciation thread…1836

Any ideas who will be October’s SOTM?...1292

News: Some viewers feel hosts do not watch all the movies they introduce…1128

 

INTERESTING FACT

 

42 out of 52 threads initiated since the upgrade are classified as HOT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UPDATED

 

News: ME-TV Cutting in on TCM's Audience............4778 16351

Summer Under the Stars Lineup August 2014.......4622 4980

Classic film pairings........4769  4877

Why are some threads locked, words prohibited?....3543 3570

Guest Programmer Dolores Hart tonight on TCM.....3272  3351

Why do movie stars commit suicide?...2951  3024

Hollywood's depictions of death on screen...2759  2847

September 2014 Schedule.............1941  2741

Classic yes but is it essential?....2595  2648

So how many films have y-o-u recorded…?....2471  2567

News: Director blasts Leonard Maltin for inaccurate review....2476 2509

News: Kim Novak blasts bullies….2118  2171

It happened on this day.....1001  1961  

Any ideas who will be September's SOTM?.....1483  1501

Ruth Roman……..1037  1252

Movie Swan Song...............1074  1100

News: Dame May Whitty more popular than Rock Hudson!...1071 1095

On Broadway, but not in the movie....1022  1045

 

NEW

 

What do thread views mean?...2006

Top 10 most-searched titles on the TCM database…1927

Kay Francis appreciation thread…1797

Any ideas who will be October’s SOTM?...1292

News: Some viewers feel hosts do not watch all the movies they introduce…1128

 

INTERESTING FACT

 

42 out of 52 threads initiated since the upgrade are classified as HOT.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0V4TZAyd8I&feature=kp

 

Yay, TopBilled is back!!!!!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So again it would seem that Top Billed places a higher meaning on the number of views rather than number of replies. I have gone back and tabulated the replies for each of the threads he has mentioned below and have found that only four out of the 24 threads he has listed is above a 5% response rate.

 

Before anyone decides to challenge me on this, let me say that I think that if you are going to spend this amount of time starting threads in any shape of form, then I would think that the amount of views would not be as important as the amount of replies. The more replies a thread receives the more conversation and debate is going to occur. Hence the longer the thread is going to have a chance to stay alive on the forum.

 

Of course TopBilled may think otherwise. Why else is it that important for him to post the amount of views? And why is the amount of views that important to him? Again, I think if you are coming here to post a thread you WANT conversation to happen. That is why we are all here. Just to list the amount of views and make such a big deal out of that alone, to me negates the overall value of communicating with one another.

 

Here are the threads he posted earlier today with the amount of views. He provided no info on the replies each thread had received. The first number is the amount of views. This is followed by the number of replies and then the % of replies to the thread. The %’s are rounded up. Enjoy!

Ruth Roman……..1253/132/10.6%

On Broadway, but not in the movie....1045/85/8.1%

Kay Francis appreciation thread…1797/114/6.3%

It happened on this day.....1961/104/5.3%

News: Dame May Whitty more popular than Rock Hudson!... 1095/51/4.6%

Hollywood's depictions of death on screen...  2847/117/4.1%

News: ME-TV Cutting in on TCM's Audience............ 16363/653/4.0%

What do thread views mean?...2030/73/3.6%

Classic film pairings........  4878/166/3.4%

News: Some viewers feel hosts do not watch all the movies they introduce…1134/39/3.4%

Guest Programmer Dolores Hart tonight on TCM.....  3351/110/3.3%

Classic yes but is it essential?....  2648/86/3.3%

Any ideas who will be October’s SOTM?...1292/42/3.3%

So how many films have y-o-u recorded…?....  2567/81/3.2%

Why do movie stars commit suicide?...  3025/93/3.1%

Top 10 most-searched titles on the TCM database…1931/59/3.1%

Movie Swan Song...............  1100/31/2.9%

News: Director blasts Leonard Maltin for inaccurate review.... 2509/66/2.6%

News: Kim Novak blasts bullies…. 2172/55/2.5%

Any ideas who will be September's SOTM?.....  1501/31/2.1%

John Wayne as SOTM April 2014……….  7479/124/1.7%

Summer Under the Stars Lineup August 2014....... 4982/80/1.6%

Why are some threads locked, words prohibited?....3543 3570/50/1.4%

September 2014 Schedule.............  2742/34/1.3%
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...