Authorizations, license

Visible by: Everyone
All rights reserved

104 visits

Position Comparison of Statistical Data

Position Comparison of Statistical Data
Left: old arrangement.

1) The arrangement of the FAVs is rather unsteady. (green highlighted)
2) FAVs are jumping into first position as soon as there are no comments. This is increasingly the case up from page 9. (Generally, pictures in 'What's hot' always have favorites, but about a quarter of them have no comments at all.)

Right: new arrangement:

1) The arrangement of the FAVs is neat and always in the same position
2) The absence of comments no longer has a negative effect.

Kawasirius, Malik Raoulda have particularly liked this photo

12 comments - The latest ones club
Related blog posts:

"May I also suggest that you change the order of the statistics to views, faves, comments, instead of the other way round, to avoid the unattractive gap that is left on uncommented photos."
(Isisbridge, click here to read the original)

"I'm in favor of having the statistics in this order: Date (with the posting date remaining under the date of creation) > Views > Faves > Comments > [x]."
(Nicolas Mertens, click here to read the original)

"It seems sense to put Visits first, because it will have a value before Comms or Favs, for a more consistent layout. One might then think that Visits should be last on other pages, where it is right aligned, again for a consistent layout. Another variant to consider is that Visits is only clickable for the owner, not for a visitor, so is it indeed best as it is, with the more meaningful (?) Comms and Favs first, while Visits generally grows over time."
(Rob Stamp, click here to read the original)

"You could change the order of FAVs and COMMENTs. Because it is to be observed that altogether more FAVs as Comments are assigned. This would solve the problem of Isibridge (and others) regarding the fact that many posts are without any comment."
(Bergfex, click here to read the original)
11 days ago. Edited 11 days ago.
 * ઇઉ *
* ઇઉ * club
Unfortunately, the wishes or suggestions of the listed members do not seem to take into account practical working concerns.
In daily work practice for the group "Ipernity Frontpage & What's Hot!", the absence of comments when recording the number of favorites is irrelevant as long as the number of favorites was/is in last place.
Since pictures without comments are comparatively rare, I ask to consider whether a change of the former position of the favorites is really justified and whether another way would not be more advantageous for everyone.
11 days ago. club has replied to * ઇઉ * club
According to a current count (early morning of June 28, 2020), the unsightly position jump described above occurs in the old display mode 40 times, i.e. in about 8% of all images. This gives a poor image of the skills of the respected web designers as well as of the competence of the ima team.

Why an unknown workflow is disturbed by the changed positioning, however, is not understandable for anyone as long as the workflow is not known. You are invited to present it in detail. Because a solution can only be found if we are aware of the subsequent problem you are experiencing..
10 days ago. Edited 10 days ago.
* ઇઉ * club has replied to club
• The expansion in 2013 or 2014 of "Explore/What's hot" from nine to eighteen pages has not proved to be successful, as the added pages are not used by most users to discover new members or contributions, as is proven every day.

• The required minimum number of favorites was reduced from ten to four at that time, and one of the rules of the group "Ipernity Frontpage & What's Hot" was adapted accordingly.

• The required minimum number of comments was completely removed. This may have been due to repeated manipulations, which in turn affected the number of visitors.

• However, visitor numbers were never relevant for images on "Explore/What's hot", otherwise they would have been part of the algorithm. And there are good reasons for this, as indicated above.

Considering the concern for the reputation of the web designers and the ima team, I would therefore kindly ask you to consider a return to the algorithm of that time and reduce "Explore/What's hot" to nine pages again. So instead of tinkering with symptoms, the causes of several "unsightliness" could be eliminated.
In light of this request or suggestion, and for reasons of responsible use of the energy of all of us, I would like to put aside for the time being a description of my work flow as admin of the group " Ipernity Frontpage & What's Hot" and rely at least on the understanding of the ima team.
9 days ago. Edited 9 days ago.
Bergfex club has replied to * ઇઉ * club
It is of little help to unravel the whole package and thus open up a new major construction site. Especially since we still do not know where the algorithm is actually hidden. Rob's assumption is even that it doesn't really exist as an isolated formula, but that the order of the posts in "What's hot" is determined by a multitude of scattered conditions at different places in the program.

Therefore, even if we wanted to, we could not go back to an "algorithm of that time". There is no documentation anywhere where you can read what this one was like. Obviously, the one we live with today is the result of many undocumented tinkering by several programmers in different places. To search for them is hopeless.

Surely we have to really cleanly recreate the general topic in the context of reprogramming. But please don't overwhelm us with it now.

At the moment it is only about the visual harmonization of the layout.
8 days ago.
* ઇઉ * club has replied to Bergfex club
Don't worry, Bernhard. I know about the difficulties to find the algorithm of "Explore/What's hot", and it is not my intention to overwhelm or challenge you at this, i.e. an inappropriate time. It is only important that this project is actually considered within the reprogramming. And you make that clear here yourself. Thank you.
8 days ago.
Isisbridge club
The view count is surely the most important statistic, as all photos will have views before they acquire faves or comments, and some will have no faves or comments at all.

Putting the view count to the far right creates an unsightly gap on unfaved photos, whilst leaving the statistic completely detached on portrait-sized images, so that it appears to belong to the next photo.
9 days ago.
Bergfex club has replied to Isisbridge club
This gallery shows "popular" photos. As * ઇઉ * correctly states below, the number of visits is not relevant for this. It has therefore never been displayed before. Here it is only a question of the order: FAVS - COMMENTS or COMMENTS - FAVS.
8 days ago. Edited 8 days ago.
Isisbridge club has replied to Bergfex club
Okay. I have no idea WHAT we're talking about half the time!
8 days ago.
Bergfex club has replied to Isisbridge club
Design optimization and harmonization of previous discrepancies in the layout of various ipernity subpages.
8 days ago.
Bergfex club
Addendum: My personal impression is that the number of comments seems to have an effect nevertheless. One could find this out by empirical analysis of the positioning even without knowledge of the algorithm. Alternatively, one could carry out targeted test series. For both I lack the time. Besides: what do I do with the knowledge? Manipulate the position of my posts? What for? There are really more important things in my life than dealing with whether and at what point a picture of me appears in "What's hot".

But to be honest: Sometimes I play with the community. Because I know very well which kind of pictures the majority likes. I then have fun uploading a picture of that kind. And look: The community works as expected: (more than 50 FAVs).
8 days ago. Edited 8 days ago.
* ઇઉ * club has replied to Bergfex club
The number of comments has an effect on the placement of an image, but since 2013 or 2014 it is no longer relevant for the appearance on "Explore/What's hot". This is another reason why you can actually invest the time and energy for an analysis in more important things.

Playing may and must be from time to time, if it does no harm to anyone. ;))
8 days ago.

to write a comment.