Oh, interesting. I think this is a bug related to me viewing the data as an admin. Thanks for the catch.
👀, still interested in other’s view.
Yeah, you can think of what we’re measuring as “bounce rate”. I was thinking of giving it a relatively “uninterpreted” treatment (ie: leaving the data raw, rather than calculating bounce rate), but I think more interpretation combined with tooltips seems better.
4.5. Re “average time”, 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 I’d be interested to hear other’s 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 I’m unsure.
Thanks! I think these updates are good. Some thoughts/suggestions:
Maybe instead of saying “unique clients” you can say “unique devices” in the note about the data collection issue.
I’m unsure about how valuable or apt “Views by unique devices > 5 minutes” 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 “Bounce rate” is, so maybe you still need an icon that people can click or hover on to explain what that means and/or how it’s calculated. Maybe you can also say in that tooltip that “The lower the bounce rate, the better”.
Yep.
Oh, interesting. I think this is a bug related to me viewing the data as an admin. Thanks for the catch.
👀, still interested in other’s view.
Yeah, you can think of what we’re measuring as “bounce rate”. I was thinking of giving it a relatively “uninterpreted” treatment (ie: leaving the data raw, rather than calculating bounce rate), but I think more interpretation combined with tooltips seems better.
4.5. Re “average time”, 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 I’d be interested to hear other’s 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 I’m 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/suggestions:
Maybe instead of saying “unique clients” you can say “unique devices” in the note about the data collection issue.
I’m unsure about how valuable or apt “Views by unique devices > 5 minutes” 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 “Bounce rate” is, so maybe you still need an icon that people can click or hover on to explain what that means and/or how it’s calculated. Maybe you can also say in that tooltip that “The lower the bounce rate, the better”.