4
   

How can there be 242 people online, with so few posting?

 
 
McTag
 
Reply Sun 31 Aug, 2008 03:46 pm

Eh?
 
Robert Gentel
 
  2  
Reply Sun 31 Aug, 2008 03:51 pm
@McTag,
The majority of the users are here to read what they searched for and move on.

There are always more readers than writers.

(voting down for naval gazing)
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Sun 31 Aug, 2008 03:51 pm
Two reasons why there seems to be so few postings; 1) many are just browsers looking for something interesting, and 2) they have different interests fr0m you (and me). LOL
Robert Gentel
 
  2  
Reply Sun 31 Aug, 2008 03:53 pm
@cicerone imposter,
And the thing new people keep asking me when I introduce them to this site is why the only thing people here talk about is themselves and the site.

Sure, the new site launch skewed the talk toward site stuff but the threads about us aren't interesting to the overwhelming majority of the site's visitors. Let's talk about interesting stuff like the world around us.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Aug, 2008 04:01 pm
@Robert Gentel,
Robert Gentel wrote:
naval gazing

Submarine races?
0 Replies
 
theollady
 
  2  
Reply Mon 1 Sep, 2008 12:48 pm
@McTag,
McTag,

There were hundreds of topics posted before this change, and many of us have TAGGED the topics we like. While this format ENCOURAGES members to create NEW posts to keep an idea going-- (that is if they are going to be ON THE FRONT PAGE) some of us continue to post in topics we enjoy and want to continue repying in them.
It is possible that MANY posts are made that you will not see unless you go to that older topic, TAG it, and keep up with it.

This is just a suggestion: The fastest way I have found to continue to follow posts of members I like- I click on their name, go to their tags and posts on their profile. There, I often FIND the discussion still ongoing that will NEVER be on the front page.

(Kinda like diggin through the obituaries when youre old -- Mu wah hahahahahahahahahaha)
McTag
 
  4  
Reply Mon 1 Sep, 2008 03:31 pm
@theollady,

Yes, but I usually sort by: All Topics- New Posts, which should show all that is currently going on.

Are you saying it doesn't?

Last night there was about five posts in an hour, with over two hundred people shown as being online. It didn't seem right to me.
theollady
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Sep, 2008 04:14 pm
@McTag,
McTag,
My page does not say NEW POSTS, as relates to ALL TOPICS.

On all topics, it shows all the new topics that have begun, either for ALL TIME, BEGINNING with the top rated...
or during the MONTH, or THAT DAY.
It is NOT all 'posts'...
At least that is the way it is on MY computer.

When I GO TO A TOPIC begun Long AGO....
(for instance, Perpetual Limerick)
I can go to the last post or the first post... but I wont find such an OLD topic easily or AT ALL, in going to ALL TOPICS as I enter A2K. I get it from clicking on ORIGINAL WRITING or my tags.

Maybe I am saying something wrong, but I think All topics begins with what was entered the very latest date (today) and goes backward from there depending upon 'thumbs up and thumbs down' rating.
that is why Craven told us to go to what we like and rate it to keep it up top.
However, when not many like what " I " like ... tee hee tee hee tee hee...
and etc.
0 Replies
 
theollady
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Sep, 2008 04:35 pm
@McTag,
Hold on, I DID find what you mean, I didn't ever look in the 'SELECTION' box before, but I clicked on it and and I see what you mean. thanks I learn from boo boo-ing.
(sometimes more than I WANT to learn.)

But I think a lot online and few posting has something to do with LEARNING the new site. Actually , has EVERYTHING to do with learning to navigate.

McTag,
I am a country girl, third in a line of 9 Siblings, born to parents BOTH decended from the Cherokee Indian Tribe. Some times I am brilliant, and sometimes very DENSE. But I really like your wit and enjoy reading your limericks.
0 Replies
 
jespah
 
  3  
Reply Mon 1 Sep, 2008 04:58 pm
@McTag,
The not posting crowd is often not people at all, but bots from Google. That was the case in the earlier incarnation of A2K, too.
gustavratzenhofer
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Sep, 2008 05:18 pm
http://i.pbase.com/u40/golfpic/upload/25947697.duck4webx.jpg
0 Replies
 
gustavratzenhofer
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Sep, 2008 05:19 pm
They have the coolest-colored feet.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Sep, 2008 05:58 pm
@McTag,
It seems like almost all threads have about 10 views for every post. That's about the way it's always been.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Mon 1 Sep, 2008 06:10 pm
@jespah,
Quote:
The not posting crowd is often not people at all, but bots from Google. That was the case in the earlier incarnation of A2K, too.


which leads to the question of why this number is in the corner and not instead the number of members, you know, a useful number (AKA a resource that the old a2k had that the new does not support). And from there we could ask why on the new a2k is it impossible to have a quick look at who is online, only by looking at each profile can we know. Heck, many forums let the user know exactly were each other member is, so like, if a member we like to read is in a thread that we are interested in we know and maybe we stick around to see if they post.

For a space that claims to be all about options and free choice things around here look a bit like the product of a KGB operation. Oh, never mind, I am just whining again.
Robert Gentel
 
  1  
Reply Tue 2 Sep, 2008 12:58 pm
@hawkeye10,
The last site counted guest sessions in the metrics as well.

KGB? Can you give an example of how the KGB's preference for how to count sessions for the sake of comparison then? Laughing

You are an idiot.

In any case there are improvements planned for the users online feature. Like listing them on the post rows as well and tightening the session count for guests to better filter duplicates.

But you are still just whining, that's a very trivial number and doesn't make this like the KGB
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Tue 2 Sep, 2008 03:12 pm
@McTag,
mctag wrote :

Quote:
Last night there was about five posts in an hour, with over two hundred people shown as being online. It didn't seem right to me.




i'm probably somewhat like mctag . i still keep stumbling around in the NEW a2k , and i'm definetely doing less posting and i don't think i've created a single new topic under the new a2k .
i find "lining up all the ducks in a row" (quotes , links .. in proper order) at least slightly more difficult now .
i understand that most posters like the new a2k better and that's a good thing .

i'm not complaining , just stating where i stand in understanding the new a2k .
if i really put my mind to it , i could probably make a go of it ... too many other things pre-occupy me right now .
probably give it another go once winter and below freezing temperatures set in .
i'll still keep browsing ... don't want to lose touch completely .

btw why does the REPLY WINDOW shrink (all the time ???) , sometimes seems to require using shift bar at the bottom .
was it always that way and i have just forgotten ?
hbg
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How to use the new able2know - Discussion by Craven de Kere
New A2K feature requests. - Discussion by DrewDad
I'm the developer - Discussion by Nick Ashley
JIM NABORS WAS GOY? - Question by farmerman
A2K censors tags? - Discussion by hingehead
New A2K Bugs - Discussion by sozobe
New A2K annoyances - Discussion by sozobe
The a2k world is changing 3: about voting - Discussion by Craven de Kere
LOST & MISPLACED A2K people. - Discussion by msolga
Welcome to the 'New' My Posts - Discussion by Nick Ashley
The "I get folksonomy" club - Discussion by Robert Gentel
 
  1. Forums
  2. » How can there be 242 people online, with so few posting?
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/04/2020 at 06:52:19