|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 6 new of 92 responses total. |
other
|
|
response 87 of 92:
| 
Apr 20 02:07 UTC 1999 |
i suppose another, more complex solution would be to provide a frame-inclusive
option.
|
janc
|
|
response 88 of 92:
|
Apr 28 16:21 UTC 1999 |
Putting the item item in the <TITLE> is a little harder than it sounds.
When the interface uses frames, the outer window is generated by a
script that doesn't know the items title. It could get it, but it would
take a non-trivial amount of extra processing to do so. In non-frame
mode it would be easier. This is something that's been on my To-Do list
for a while, but it's frankly a bother.
|
other
|
|
response 89 of 92:
|
Apr 28 23:48 UTC 1999 |
what i meant about using frames is not to pur the item name in the window
title, but to have a part of the screen with a navigation area including the
name of the current item, while the responses scroll by in the frame window.
|
janc
|
|
response 90 of 92:
|
Apr 30 01:29 UTC 1999 |
I did a little digging on usage levels of Backtalk.
This is based on usage during the week of Apr 18 - Apr 24 (7 days).
Here is number of web hits:
TOTAL 67164
BACKTALK 10780
pistachio 10058
peek 309
front page 305
vanilla 108
This makes it looks like backtalk is about 1/6 of our web traffic, but I
some of the other 67164 hits are due to backtalk too - button image fetchs -
so it is probably higher than that. I only counted hits on the actual CGI
program.
Obviously the vast amount of Backtalk traffic is in the pistachio interface.
Peek is an interface used for putting links into the conferences onto other
web pages. Most of those 309 hits seem to have been off the links on our
home page.
Here are some numbers on specific types of actions:
pistachio vanilla peek BACKTALK PICOSPAN TOTAL
ITEMS READ 6791 12 24 6827
ITEMS READ ANONYMOUSLY 158 4 24 186
RESPONSES POSTED 332 0 0 332 878 1210
ITEMS POSTED 18 1 0 19 9 28
The Backtalk numbers are from the httpd logs. The TOTAL number was arrived
by scanning the conferences counting items and responses posted in that
time window. That program had the bug that it was double counting responses
in linked items, so the total number is probably somewhat inflated. The
Picospan numbers are just the total numbers minus the Backtalk numbers (which
means they got all the double-counts). There is probably no way to tell how
many items were read with Picospan. It's hard to draw conclusions from this,
but you might guesss that about 1/4 to 1/3 of all conferencing is done with
Backtalk.
The Backtalk numbers for items read may be inflated - I think I could have
double or triple counted items for people who read with frames on. So I
did kind of a crappy job with this data. Sorry. I have a wiggling baby on
my lap.
Note that there is some anonymous reading going on, but it is a pretty small
fraction of the total - an average of about 22 items a day.
There were 50 different users who had more than 10 backtalk web hits in that
week. The ones with more than 100 are:
1964 md
1001 toking
747 senna
746 jep
485 remmers
382 hhsrat
367 flem
366 danr
317 hematite
249 gregb
247 beeswing
196 maeve
196 little1
171 jiffer
161 bdh1
152 ryan
134 larsn
132 atticus
128 other
127 arthurp
Again, people who have frames on may (or may not) be overcounted in this list.
It's hard to believe Michael looked at two-thousand backtalk pages in one week.
|
toking
|
|
response 91 of 92:
|
Apr 30 02:47 UTC 1999 |
uhmmmmm it's hard to believe that I had a thousand.....
<toking is considering seeking professional assistance>
|
hhsrat
|
|
response 92 of 92:
|
May 3 01:11 UTC 1999 |
382. Well, now I know that I read an average of 54 backtalk pages per
day, which is only about 2 per hour, and only .03 per minute. But, if
you figure most of my grex time is about 20 hours per week, that's an
average of 19 "pages" an hour, or .31 "pages" per minute.
These stats are kind of fun. :)
|