Yes, it is great to see what people are reading. I wondered why a couple of my most recent reviews have such high numbers, then saw that the stats are effective only from April 24, 2008. There's no data prior to then. That accounts for the fact that some reviews have more "Yes" votes (formerly "Good points") than they have reads. A truck tire review of mine from a few months ago has 102 reads in a week... that's a lot of activity!

--Bob

I need different colors for different levels. I think the 100 and 500 are both orange. See if Kyle has some more crayons OK? I've a visual learner/thinker.

But yeah, stats are kinda cool. I'm not a big numbers person. Nice to see people are reading (love all 1 and 2 of them on some) and happy bubbles or orange and some other color I forgot. I get the idea with the bubbles beside (-:

So, yay stats. I'll never be spreadsheeting them, but I may see areas where folks are needing/wanting info.

Ok, I get the stats, but what are the "top 50" "top 100" tags for? Sorry a little slow.... I just recently figured out we have stats now! lol! AND message boards! I guess I need to check in more often!

There's a list for the site overall on one side and then a list in the category. So you might have a top 100 for a review on something in books under books. And, it might be in the top 500 for the whole site with all categories and reviews combined (though it's rare for a book to get so many visits).

Those buttons can vary in terms of total visits. You might get 100 visits to a movie review but not have a rank - due to a lot of people writing movie reviews. Then you get something in health and wellness and only have 15 visitors but it's a top one for that less visited category.

Hope that makes sense.

Oh yes! I got that (-: I actually do appreciate the one or two on some. Much better than none - for sure.

I'll look forward to watching them go up, up, up.

I noticed that I have written more reviews than are listed on the stats. Why would that be? Does it mean that some of my reviews have zero reads?

i have mixed feelings about overall rankings. I like the idea in principle, but I worry about the "dark side" of the competitiveness it might bring out in some people.  I still have some not-so-happy memories of my early reviewing career at Amazon, where the only incentive was, and still is, ranking.  It often got pretty nasty, particularly in the Amazon Discussion Boards, with reviewers feuding among themselves and all sorts of nonsense. 

I'm not saying I'm dead set against the overall ranking notion.  I just want to make sure Viewpoints' happy community remains happy.

My stats echo the pattern from another review site where I write. My most-read review is a list of movies, and my second most-read Viewpoint is a book review.  Movies and Books are a constant in my universe, I suppose.

 I suppose that if I were to tailor my reviewing output to match the stats, I'd be writing more lists.

I do find the stats rather interesting, but I have one question... are they outside hits only, or are they a combination of member visits and outside hits?

I love goals! Especially when it comes to writing, and super-especially (I made that one up) when it comes to online writing. When I wrote for Miami-Dade Community College, South Campus' student paper, it sometimes was pretty hard to gauge whether or not my articles were making a ripple in readers' consciousness unless I got some feedback. I did, a few times, get some of that, more notably when the College President wrote me a letter about a column I wrote about intolerance on campus, but most of the time....

I suppose if the rankings were private, it would eliminate the possibility of the nastier side of competitiveness....