Anonymous wrote:Thx. Thats a lot of zeros! I wasnt thinking as deeply as you. I was only wondering about the views column for a given thread. How many, of this number are unique eyeballs- on average? Would you guess 2/3? 1/2.

Oh, that? I have no idea. I would immediately deduct 4 because every thread seems to start out with 4 views. After that, I have no idea what's real. I did one comparison to the views to Google Analytics. It's a sample of one, so probably not valuable. But this thread:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/363819.page

shows 424 views. Google Analytics shows it having 329 views. But, Google can have some delay so the difference is probably not quite that big. However, in this case, it looks like the number reported as views is about 30% higher than Google Analytics' number.

Thx. Thats a lot of zeros! I wasnt thinking as deeply as you. I was only wondering about the views column for a given thread. How many, of this number are unique eyeballs- on average? Would you guess 2/3? 1/2.

I'm not sure from where you are getting your page view statistics, but most of the services use Javascripts which are normally not loaded by bots or spiders. So, bots and spiders don't get counted. Furthermore, Google goes to great lengths to filter out such traffic. The real issue is translating page views into unique users.

According to Google Analytics, between Jan. 20 and Feb. 19, we had 1,187,210 unique users. There were 1,771,228 visits and 9,830,993 page views.

What should one divide page views by to get a semi-accurate number in terms of human eyeballs vs. bot or spider views?