Can I see 'views' as well as 'replies'

[KOKOagainandagain]

Just this.



TIA

[Tee2072]

Explain further.

[KOKOagainandagain]

I would like to be able to see how many a times a message has been viewed rather than just the number of replies, if possible

[Tee2072]

Nope. Not available on MN. Sorry.

[TantrumsAndBalloons]

Why?

It doesn't matter how many people look at a thread, does it? What difference does it make?

[Fenton]

No, I think it's dreadful.

Imagine starting a thread and seeing that 300 people had viewed it but only 2 bothered to post.

[KOKOagainandagain]

Academic interest - forums that I research (nb I do not research MN) use different off-the-shelf forum formats that routinely include such information.

The ratio of view:reply appears to vary in line with the emergence of relational products (eg trust) - which is hardly surprising - but may provide evidence/critique of the effectivity of the concept of norm circles.

I idly wondered what the ratio was in MN. I don't like the term 'lurkers'.

[MooncupGoddess]

Gosh, I am strangely fascinated. How do you measure trust, OP? And what is a norm circle?

[KOKOagainandagain]

That ratio may be 'the norm' though Fenton.

Even the most desperate posts on which the data is displayed have at least 20 (but potentially much higher) views for each reply.

Some sites have 0 replies despite thousands of views.

[Tee2072]

I used to use a site that showed views.

I posted a thread needing some serious support and I got 1,000ish views and not one reply.

I left that forum the same day.

[Fenton]

Netmums has that, or at least did the last time I looked over there. I wonder if I'm right in thinking you get more 'didn't want to post and run' type responses because of it, or perhaps it puts people off clicking on a thread if they don't immediately see from the title that it's going to me something of interest to them, or a subject they can offer advice on.

[Fenton]

x-posted - that's why I don't like it Tee, that must have felt horrible.

KeepOn - yes it could well be the norm but at least without the view count it's not obvious to the OP they are being gawped at but no-one can be bothered to help/comment.

[Tee2072]

It really did, Fenton.

It was a forum specifically for pregnant woman with diabetes and I can't remember the question but it was totally ignored. Well, read, but not responded too. Guess it wasn't interesting enough for them.

[KOKOagainandagain]

Have you never wondered how many people read your messages? Do you imagine that the majority of people that read the message then reply?

Tee - sorry you had such a bad experience . Its not just what you post, but where you post it iykim

[OddSockMonster]

I can't say I'd like that.

If no-one posts on a thread of mine on here (and I've had my fair share of never-answered threads) I'd just think 'oh well those who might have been interested must have missed it'.

If I knew loads of people saw it but didn't want to post, I'd feel really quite shit, especially if I was feeling at all insecure about.

[KOKOagainandagain]

Moon - you can't be that bored

Try google scholar if you are.

[rockybalBOOOOa]

We have this function on another forum I use regularly. Every now and then someone gets the hump because loads of people have viewed their thread and hardly anyone has replied. Lack of reply is usually because the post needs some thinking about to respond to so the more trivial ones get lots of replies because it's quick and easy to do. View counter is not a good thing IMO.

[SwedishEdith]

No, I think it's a terrible idea on here because of teh nature of this site. People can post when they are very emotionally vulnerable. I've seen it on technical sites where posters are asking non-personal questions but on here it could be really damaging for some people

[MooncupGoddess]

I might actually do that, KeepOn! Need something to read over my sandwich.

I can't stand 'I have nothing to say as I've never been in this situation but didn't want to read and run' head-tilty posts. Seriously, what a waste of pixels.

[Tee2072]

Are we running out of pixels that we need to conserve them?

[KOKOagainandagain]

Very interesting perspectives.

There are other forums that are more formally organised into sections but MN is relatively unstructured in comparison. There seems to be no-where for the newbie to go. It also appears that regular long-term members are more likely to reply to posts (even if it is only to say they have nothing to say) if they feel they 'know' and have a reciprocal relationship of trust, with them.

[BIWIZ]

Not sure what you mean saying there isn't anywhere for a newbie to go. They can go anywhere! Or they can start a thread saying they are a newbie. Generally though people seem to just get stuck in - and I can't see the problem with that.

[KOKOagainandagain]

Therefore, desperate first posts from a 'stranger' are more likely to be read but not responded to (in the absence of an 'introduce yourself' board that at the very least a moderator will respond to).

The ratio of views:replies may also depend on the originator of the message (at least I can work this out) but I definitely do not want to know when it comes to my own posts!

[MooncupGoddess]

I've always thought that MN is an amazing resource for sociologists!

I haven't seen many forums with an 'introduce yourself' topic though a lot of the more technical ones have a section for newcomers with basic questions.

[KOKOagainandagain]

BIWIZ - my research has specifically focussed upon those who have come to forums as a result of rl health conditions and felt incredibly vulnerable and in need of help and support at the time. The newbie threads were a safe introduction when they didn't feel able to just get stuck in. Not being active in the forum (ie posting) does not mean being passive in rl. Plans are formed and actions are taken as a result of reading posts - sometimes more so than by a perpetual poster who goes around in circles.