Is the count for times the post is read off in some way? Does it count only unique readers, or does it count every time the same reader goes back to the post? Does it count every time the author goes back to the post?
Some topics if one doesn't know the answer one can't post a response. Some topics may genuinely take a long time to answer, and maybe one doesn't have time. Some topics asking for IDs or other information may have already been answered.
But if the topic is more personal and one has time to read it, I really don't understand why when there seem to be a lot of readers there aren't more responses.
No, I haven't posted a new post. I'm asking for a friend.
Is the count for times the post is read off in some way? Does it count only unique readers, or does it count every time the same reader goes back to the post? Does it count every time the author goes back to the post?
Barbara, are you talking about posts in galleries or posted items in the forums, or both?
1) Not sure about that item.
2) Every time the reader goes back.
3) Not sure about the forums. It does not ever count in the galleries, unless the person has not signed in I believe, then it would count again.
Oh, sorry, posted items in the forums. So if the same person reads the same post/thread 10 times it would count that as 10 views? Okay, if that's the case then my question -- my friend's question -- is irrelevant. Thanks, Paul. :)
Barbara, yes whenever a non-author reads or rereads a post it will increase the count.
Posted by Lon Overacker on October 13, 2017 at 2:09 AM
Barbara,
Agree with Paul. Each time a visitor clicks on a post (gallery or forum) the views increase. If the original poster clicks, it doesn't increase the views. I just tested this on my own recent post in Landscape.
Yes, thanks, Lon. In that case the view count doesn't really mean anything if it's not counting unique viewers, so it's best just ignored.
Posted by Mark Seaver on October 15, 2017 at 3:28 PM
Barbara, there's an additional detail in the counting, that I've verified in viewing images, if someone opens an image and then uses the arrow key to go forward and back, the only view that gets an updated count is the original view, the views of other images don't get counted. I suspect that the forum posts show the same counting problem.
Barbara, there's an additional detail in the counting, that I've verified in viewing images, if someone comes opens an image and then uses the arrow key to go forward and back, the only view that gets an updated count is the original view, the views of other images don't get counted. I suspect that the forum posts show the same counting problem.
Mark, thanks for pointing that out. Although I've never really traveled through the images in that manner, it is an interesting little quirk.....
Thanks, Mark. I was trying to figure out in the forum whether it was, as it seemed, that a bunch of unique people read a post that really should have been (in my opinion, and, again, not my post, and it's something I've thought about quite a few times about previous posts by different people) responded to. I just was hoping that and wanted to know whether people cared about each other a least a little bit and not just about people's photography even though it's a photography forum. PLEASE note that I feel very cared about by quite a few people here. Again, this was not a question about my own posts.
So based on the original answer I thought that the actual number of unique people who had read any given post without responding could be much lower than I had been thinking, and so I was "worrying" for no reason. But now with this new information it seems that even more, not less, unique people could be reading the posts and not responding. Right?
But -- I know that everybody's different, that sometimes I worry too much, that this IS a photography forum and people aren't required to be particularly interested in anything else about each other, that I have no right to think that anybody should do any particular thing or feel any particular way, so I just won't worry about this anymore. But I think all the information is very interesting, and since it is information that's displayed and may be incorrect, maybe next time Jim has someone work on the NPN setup maybe he could have them make the counting system more accurate. Just a thought.
Discussion
8 repliesSome topics if one doesn't know the answer one can't post a response. Some topics may genuinely take a long time to answer, and maybe one doesn't have time. Some topics asking for IDs or other information may have already been answered.
But if the topic is more personal and one has time to read it, I really don't understand why when there seem to be a lot of readers there aren't more responses.
No, I haven't posted a new post. I'm asking for a friend.
Barbara, are you talking about posts in galleries or posted items in the forums, or both?
1) Not sure about that item.
2) Every time the reader goes back.
3) Not sure about the forums. It does not ever count in the galleries, unless the person has not signed in I believe, then it would count again.
I hope this helps your friend......
Agree with Paul. Each time a visitor clicks on a post (gallery or forum) the views increase. If the original poster clicks, it doesn't increase the views. I just tested this on my own recent post in Landscape.
HTH
Mark, thanks for pointing that out. Although I've never really traveled through the images in that manner, it is an interesting little quirk.....
So based on the original answer I thought that the actual number of unique people who had read any given post without responding could be much lower than I had been thinking, and so I was "worrying" for no reason. But now with this new information it seems that even more, not less, unique people could be reading the posts and not responding. Right?
But -- I know that everybody's different, that sometimes I worry too much, that this IS a photography forum and people aren't required to be particularly interested in anything else about each other, that I have no right to think that anybody should do any particular thing or feel any particular way, so I just won't worry about this anymore. But I think all the information is very interesting, and since it is information that's displayed and may be incorrect, maybe next time Jim has someone work on the NPN setup maybe he could have them make the counting system more accurate. Just a thought.
Again, thanks to all who provided information.