Jump to content


Photo

view counting


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 Peter T Chattaway

Peter T Chattaway

    He's fictional, but you can't have everything.

  • Member
  • 30,171 posts

Posted 17 September 2009 - 10:05 AM

This is no big deal, but I've noticed it, and it's got me curious.

It used to be that whenever I started a new thread and then clicked on "view new posts", I would find that the thread already had 1 or 2 views -- frequently 2. I figured one of those views would be my own, and the second one might be some automatic board feature.

Lately, however, when I start a new thread and click on "view new posts", the site tells me that there have been 0 views in that thread. Okay, I figure, my own viewing of that thread doesn't have to count here; it certainly doesn't count when I look at photos in, say, my own Flickr account.

But just now, I posted a reply to a new thread, and then when I clicked on "view new posts", it STILL said that the thread had had 0 views. This, I don't understand -- someone else had started the thread, and I myself had to view the thread before I could even think of posting a reply. So how could the view-count still be at 0?

Has there been some change in the board software that would account for this? I'm guessing that, if there is, then it might just be so highly technical that it would fly right over my head. But on the off-chance that I might understand it, I figured I'd throw this observation/question out there.

#2 SDG

SDG

    Catholic deflector shield

  • Moderator
  • 9,118 posts

Posted 17 September 2009 - 10:10 AM

I've noticed bugs in the view-counting recently too.

#3 Anna J

Anna J

    Member

  • Administrator
  • 439 posts

Posted 17 September 2009 - 06:27 PM

QUOTE (SDG @ Sep 17 2009, 08:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I've noticed bugs in the view-counting recently too.


I have no idea. We haven't started upgrading the board yet. Could be just a glitch in the Invision software since it's getting old.

#4 Overstreet

Overstreet

    Sometimes, there's a man.

  • Member
  • 17,483 posts

Posted 17 September 2009 - 06:36 PM

My ego depends on that view counter, Anna. If I don't see 25 views by the end of the day on a thread I've started, I drink myself to ruin in the evening. So there's a lot at stake here. smile.gif

#5 Persona

Persona

    You said you'd wait... 'Til the end of the world.

  • Member
  • 7,463 posts

Posted 17 September 2009 - 09:46 PM

Similar topic -

In The Informant thread, Peter lists the actors in the title, but then goes on to list them "for the search engine" in the thread itself. I thought if something was listed in the title it would automatically turn up in a search. Not true?

The searches in particular throw me a bit off. I think we've lost some stuff from years ago. I was looking for the thread to Tales From the Gimli Hospital, which I swear was a thread since the time we became A&F, but apparently there is no longer such a thread.

#6 Peter T Chattaway

Peter T Chattaway

    He's fictional, but you can't have everything.

  • Member
  • 30,171 posts

Posted 17 September 2009 - 11:33 PM

Persona wrote:
: In The Informant thread, Peter lists the actors in the title, but then goes on to list them "for the search engine" in the thread itself. I thought if something was listed in the title it would automatically turn up in a search. Not true?

The A&F search engine has never paid any attention to thread subtitles. Titles, yes. Posts, yes. But subtitles, no. I wonder if this is related in any way to the fact that new A&F threads will show up in the RSS feed with titles and posts, but no subtitles.