Thread View Count Is Missing From ATS, Please Consider Adding.

I have made this point before but it is worth bringing up again.
I currently post to 7 different forums including ATS, they all have view counts of threads except ATS.
None of them are as good as ATS. They are on all types of different topics of interest to me.

My point is simply this, as these other forums evolved, they added view counts of threads, did not take it away, like ATS. ATS used to have this in case newer members don't know.

I will say again I think ATS is pretty much perfect in every regard except not having view counts, I think it's good to know if a thread has 33 views or 3000 views and then relate that to how many posts it has.

If I make a thread I want to see how many people looked at it, it will help us formulate both titles, content and the types of threads in the future. It really helps us to see what ATS member are interested in beyond the star and flag system. The reason I bring this up is that I recently posted information to two completely different forums, both had view counts, what surprised me was the forum that I thought would get very few views got way more than then the other one. Bottom line, are we wasting our time with certain topics verses other topics, I really want to to know.
Also other threads that maybe I have no interest in, but I want to know how many other people are interested in those topics.

Deny Ignorance, remember !

Please consider this request.

I agree, it would be nice to see post counts shown again

Sounds like a good idea. I read many posts, but don't always star, flag or comment.

Originally posted by DAVID64
Sounds like a good idea. I read many posts, but don't always star, flag or comment.

THIS....is exactly what I am talking about.

If you are allowed, I would like some MODS personal opinions on this, some of you were here when we had the view counts.

Isn't the number of posts a more reliable indication of "value"?

Someone views a thread, says "meh", and moves on. So what?

reply to post by Phage

Isn't the number of posts a more reliable indication of "value"?

Not necessarily, if we take "visual" threads for instance that may show some excellent photography, quite often the Flag system far outweighs the posts and the "value" is evident within the OP and those few whom may contribute to the thread with additional images.

Far too often I see very little flags but the title catches my attention, I click to enter and there is 5+ pages of posts, most of which are a few members conversing, sometimes barely on topic, and adding very little "value" to the content.

5+ pages on a new topic would suggest that certain members wish to discuss the content of the thread but they don't flag it, maybe because flagging is seen as a 'reward" to the OP so when the subsequent poster(s) disagree with the OP they do not flag and the wider ATS community that does not frequent the site on those particular days may miss the opportunity to participate "whilst the iron is hot" so to speak.

A view count (1 member = 1 view irrespective of the amount of times they re-enter the thread) would be good, especially broken down into daily, weekly, monthly and so on and also per forum.

reply to post by Sublimecraft

Flags are also useful.
Both are far more useful than a view count would be.

A view count (1 member = 1 view irrespective of the amount of times they re-enter the thread)

Then you run into overhead problems. ATS is a big site, with a lot of people and a lot of threads. Think about the tracking involved. That is why the feature was dropped in the first place.

reply to post by Phage


If I am not mistaken, as a non-member browsing the site, the star / flag system is not available to view and the pages that happen to get to the new topics / top topics / front page are the only draw cards for that particular portion of the week.

So looking from a non members perspective, it would be good to see a "most viewed" segment - especially those threads that perhaps just miss out on making those pages but may still have significant value to potential members.

When I browse YT (which is not very often) I usually select my category then choose view count/today as a starter.

I do see what you mean about the programming involved though - it would be tough but not outside S.O ability to address and maintain.

reply to post by Sublimecraft

I do see what you mean about the programming involved though - it would be tough but not outside S.O ability to address and maintain.

They decided it was not worth the effort.

Also consider this. A catchy thread title often attracts more hits than a thread with substance.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Sublimecraft

 

Also consider this. A catchy thread title often attracts more hits than a thread with substance.

Indeed, I most certainly cannot disagree with that!

The more familiar I become with certain members, the more I find myself viewing their profiles for new threads.

ETA: And sometimes a catchy title is misleading, sucking you into a thread with no substance. Whereas those members who may not be able to articulate such words may have some good stuff to contribute.

How do all the other forum sites manage, then ?
Maybe they aren't as big or have as many members.
But they sure don't seem to be as good either, one forum I just checked had about 1500 people on right now.
Guests and member are at about 5 thousand for ATS right now, so yeah this site is getting very big.

I just know if ALL the other forums I visit have this, ATS should too.
There advertising $ must be getting pretty good if they have upwards of 5000 people on here at a time, surely they can afford this little software update.

I think this was explained before by SO
It adds to much stress on the database and slows the site down

reply to post by pillock


Yes that was the answer I received when they took it away a few years ago, fair enough.
Yet all these other websites/forums have it, it doesn't seem to slow them down at all, they must face the same issues, with there database collection. These sites are antiqued by comparison, and they must have less robust servers than ATS. If it takes 3 extra seconds to load a page that is trade off I am more than willing to make.

reply to post by Blue_Jay33

Do those other websites you refer to have 5000 + lurkers + members online at the same time ?
That is a hell of a strain on a database