Re 1&2, we should definitely add a note about how early the data goes (it does go all the way back to March 2020). Unfortunately the data I felt was most valuable to plot (views by unique devices), we suffered from a data collection issue in the first half of 2021. Fortunately we do have a note that appears on posts older than June 2021, unfortunately it apparently wasnât noticeable.
Re 3, I had not thought of a dashboard like that, but I like the idea a lot, thanks for making it. (Iâd be curious if other authors reading this also like it, let us know!)
To clarify, the data collection issue was in getting the daily # of views by unique devices in the first half of 2021 right? Thatâs unfortunate, but anyway hopefully it doesnât happen again.
I donât see anything at all about that note on posts older than June 2021. So yes it would be good to mke that noticeable.
Yeah I think this dashboard would be more useful than the current implementation. It would take authors 3 clicks to go see the analytics of their post currently, and itâs much more valuable and easier to see in one table which of my posts got more views, reads, and karma.
In the table or in the individual view, you might even want to include a stat for âread ratioâ like Medium does. I wonder though if what the EA Forum should count as a âreadâ is not just views >10 seconds, but more like a âview where the user spent at least 50% of the estimated time it takes to read that article.â An average time people spent on the post could be useful too.
Oh, interesting. I think this is a bug related to me viewing the data as an admin. Thanks for the catch.
đ, still interested in otherâs view.
Yeah, you can think of what weâre measuring as âbounce rateâ. I was thinking of giving it a relatively âuninterpretedâ treatment (ie: leaving the data raw, rather than calculating bounce rate), but I think more interpretation combined with tooltips seems better.
4.5. Re âaverage timeâ, this turned out to be harder than I expected, so I decided to wait to see if anyone asked for it, but now I have my excuse to spend time figuring it out, mwahaha.
On #3, yeah Iâd be interested to hear otherâs views too.
On #4 and 4.5, ah I see. Personally I think # of reads (i.e. # of views where the user spent at least 50% of the time it takes to read the article) or average time spent would be more interesting to me than the bounce rate, although Iâm unsure.
Thanks! I think these updates are good. Some thoughts/âsuggestions:
Maybe instead of saying âunique clientsâ you can say âunique devicesâ in the note about the data collection issue.
Iâm unsure about how valuable or apt âViews by unique devices > 5 minutesâ because some Forum posts take less than 5 minutes to read. So that data point will be irrelevant for those points.
I think some people will not know what âBounce rateâ is, so maybe you still need an icon that people can click or hover on to explain what that means and/âor how itâs calculated. Maybe you can also say in that tooltip that âThe lower the bounce rate, the betterâ.
Thanks for your feedback, this is super valuable!
Re 1&2, we should definitely add a note about how early the data goes (it does go all the way back to March 2020). Unfortunately the data I felt was most valuable to plot (views by unique devices), we suffered from a data collection issue in the first half of 2021. Fortunately we do have a note that appears on posts older than June 2021, unfortunately it apparently wasnât noticeable.
Re 3, I had not thought of a dashboard like that, but I like the idea a lot, thanks for making it. (Iâd be curious if other authors reading this also like it, let us know!)
Glad to hear! Numbering my responses:
To clarify, the data collection issue was in getting the daily # of views by unique devices in the first half of 2021 right? Thatâs unfortunate, but anyway hopefully it doesnât happen again.
I donât see anything at all about that note on posts older than June 2021. So yes it would be good to mke that noticeable.
Yeah I think this dashboard would be more useful than the current implementation. It would take authors 3 clicks to go see the analytics of their post currently, and itâs much more valuable and easier to see in one table which of my posts got more views, reads, and karma.
In the table or in the individual view, you might even want to include a stat for âread ratioâ like Medium does. I wonder though if what the EA Forum should count as a âreadâ is not just views >10 seconds, but more like a âview where the user spent at least 50% of the estimated time it takes to read that article.â An average time people spent on the post could be useful too.
Yep.
Oh, interesting. I think this is a bug related to me viewing the data as an admin. Thanks for the catch.
đ, still interested in otherâs view.
Yeah, you can think of what weâre measuring as âbounce rateâ. I was thinking of giving it a relatively âuninterpretedâ treatment (ie: leaving the data raw, rather than calculating bounce rate), but I think more interpretation combined with tooltips seems better.
4.5. Re âaverage timeâ, this turned out to be harder than I expected, so I decided to wait to see if anyone asked for it, but now I have my excuse to spend time figuring it out, mwahaha.
On #3, yeah Iâd be interested to hear otherâs views too.
On #4 and 4.5, ah I see. Personally I think # of reads (i.e. # of views where the user spent at least 50% of the time it takes to read the article) or average time spent would be more interesting to me than the bounce rate, although Iâm unsure.
I made some updates that should address a lot of this. Let me know what you think!
Thanks! I think these updates are good. Some thoughts/âsuggestions:
Maybe instead of saying âunique clientsâ you can say âunique devicesâ in the note about the data collection issue.
Iâm unsure about how valuable or apt âViews by unique devices > 5 minutesâ because some Forum posts take less than 5 minutes to read. So that data point will be irrelevant for those points.
I think some people will not know what âBounce rateâ is, so maybe you still need an icon that people can click or hover on to explain what that means and/âor how itâs calculated. Maybe you can also say in that tooltip that âThe lower the bounce rate, the betterâ.