Interactive Content Posting Metric View's Versus Replies Ratios

[WhyFhy]

What can we assess from this metric that proves popularity via interaction ratio's?
Lets say adam makes a post and it has 100 replies with 1000 views  Making his popularity level 10%
or theymos makes a post thats got 1000 replies with 5000 views making his popularity level 20%

average all users ratio's for all active post or something
purpose? I dont know. possibly to see if the topics worth replying to for a signature campaign?
filter out shit post?
it could have other uses can anyone think of any?

[1713488547]

1713488547

[1713488547]

1713488547

[AdolfinWolf]

Useless metric for filtering shit posts. If anything the opposite.

You can open a topic called "What do you use to wipe your ass?" in offtopic, and get 999 replies from users who tell you they use (probably?) toilet paper.

Whereas a highly technical discussion or question will probably only get a fraction of these replies.

What's next, you're going to order posts based on popularity levels? It's just reddit or 9Gag at that point, which well, is useless. I'm not sure what this can be used for really, or why.

[WhyFhy]

Useless metric for filtering shit posts. If anything the opposite.

You can open a topic called "What do you use to wipe your ass?" in offtopic, and get 999 replies from users who tell you they use (probably?) toilet paper.

Whereas a highly technical discussion or question will probably only get a fraction of these replies.

I see your point and I love the shit post analogy. So it reverts to the signature campaign thing , see any use in it in that light?

[AdolfinWolf]

Useless metric for filtering shit posts. If anything the opposite.

You can open a topic called "What do you use to wipe your ass?" in offtopic, and get 999 replies from users who tell you they use (probably?) toilet paper.

Whereas a highly technical discussion or question will probably only get a fraction of these replies.

I see your point and I love the shit post analogy. So it reverts to the signature campaign thing , see any use in it in that light?

You mean signature campaigns pay extra to the topic starter if a topic is popular?

That might be useful for some campaigns, but i guess it depends on the campaign.

If the campaign is about a decently technical product, eg Chipmixer, they probably don't care at all that the signature has 10.000 views in Offtopic, but much rather have 100 views from people from technical boards from people who are probably more interested in the product..


(Not that Chipmixer necessarily advertises for clicks, they obviously run a signature campaign to garner community interest, trust, and name recognition, I just used them as an example.)

[o_e_l_e_o]

-snip-

I think you have your ratio the wrong way round.

A topic which has a high ratio of replies to views is likely to be spam. Lots of users reading it feel they can drop in a post, which suggests that it is a vague or simple topic and many of the replies will be repeated, the hallmark of bounty spammers.

Conversely, a topic which as a low ratio of replies to views suggests many users which read it don't have anything additional to contribute. The topic may be more technical or require more thought, and the replies which are there are likely to be more well thought out.

Obviously this isn't a hard and fast rule, but if we look at the reply:view ratio of a spammy board like Altcoin Discussion, we get an average from the front page at the moment of 0.12. Conversely, the ratio on a non spammy board like Development and Technical Discussion is 0.004, or about 30x lower.

I therefore wouldn't say a post with a high ratio is "popular", but conversely more likely to be spam.

[WhyFhy]

-snip-

I think you have your ratio the wrong way round.

A topic which has a high ratio of replies to views is likely to be spam. Lots of users reading it feel they can drop in a post, which suggests that it is a vague or simple topic and many of the replies will be repeated, the hallmark of bounty spammers.

Conversely, a topic which as a low ratio of replies to views suggests many users which read it don't have anything additional to contribute. The topic may be more technical or require more thought, and the replies which are there are likely to be more well thought out.

Obviously this isn't a hard and fast rule, but if we look at the reply:view ratio of a spammy board like Altcoin Discussion, we get an average from the front page at the moment of 0.12. Conversely, the ratio on a non spammy board like Development and Technical Discussion is 0.004, or about 30x lower.

I therefore wouldn't say a post with a high ratio is "popular", but conversely more likely to be spam.

maybe it could scrape per board ?  A high ratio could indicate a good topic for a signature campaign participant. A low ratio could be someone looking to help out to earn merit or attempt helpfulness/productivity
Its a rater useless metric to most but could be of value to some Im trying to scope out what the potential of the metric "could" be. 

[o_e_l_e_o]

A high ratio could indicate a good topic for a signature campaign participant. A low ratio could be someone looking to help out to earn merit or attempt helpfulness/productivity

Users should be looking for threads to comment in based upon what interests them or where they have something they can constructively contribute to the conversation. Seeking topics for the sole purpose of them being "easy" to churn out a bounty campaign post or earn some merit would at best reduce the quality of conversation, and at worst be downright spamming.

The only value I could see of the metric is to give an idea of which boards are complete spamfests, but everyone who has been around for more than a few weeks know the answer to that already.