Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [podcasters] Voting and podcast stats

Expand Messages
  • Dennis Hays
    Yeah, but... It takes quite a bit of effort and maybe a little luck to get up towards the top where you can be visible and therefore make some difference in
    Message 1 of 33 , Nov 2, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Yeah, but...

      It takes quite a bit of effort and maybe a little luck to
      get up towards the top where you can be visible and
      therefore make some difference in publicizing your podcast.
      I really don't know if this is the way to measure your
      efficacy.

      I use Libsyn and Feedburner numbers to get an idea of my
      success or lack thereof. Also, I grab the Libsyn logs each
      month (and maybe once ortwice during the month) and run
      Kevin Devin's podstats applet against them to see some
      numbers that are more meaningful. Actual downloads, even
      though they maybe skewed (false starts, multiple downloads
      from the same IP address, etc.), but they're based on some
      empirical evidence, which is a damn site better than
      arbitrary ratings from an audience in which not everyone
      votes, just the ones that want to.

      Dennis

      Quoting Paula Berinstein <pberinstein@...>:

      > You know, I usually agree with just about everything Steve says, but I
      > disagree on this one. It isn't just about ego. It's about visibility and
      > assessing whether your publicity methods are working. I don't check my
      > numbers because of my ego; I check them to see if I'm doing the right
      > things.
      >
      > Paula
      >
      >> Quoting Stephen Eley <SFEley@...>:
      >>
      >> Well said.
      >>
      >> Dennis
      >>
      >> >
      >> > I honestly believe it's entirely about ego. We all have egos, or we
      >> > wouldn't be podcasting. I check many numbers associated with my
      >> > podcast far more often than they can do me any good. Nothing wrong
      >> > with ego. The fallacy would be in thinking that *my* urge to feed my
      >> > ego is a compelling reason for somebody else to act on something.
      >> >
      >> >
      >> > --
      >> > Have Fun,
      >> > Steve Eley (sfeley@...)
      >> > ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
      >> > http://www.escapepod.info
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >> --
      >> Dennis Hays
      >> Secrets of Digital Imaging Audio Magazine
      >> http://www.imagingsecrets.com
      >> http://www.haysdesign.com
      >> +1 518.479.4220
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >



      --
      Dennis Hays
      Secrets of Digital Imaging Audio Magazine
      http://www.imagingsecrets.com
      http://www.haysdesign.com
      +1 518.479.4220
    • P. Dilly
      Podcast pickle origianlly had a 5 star rating method when we first started. The problem with it was that people would rate a podcast with a bad rating to lower
      Message 33 of 33 , Nov 3, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Podcast pickle origianlly had a 5 star rating method when we first started.
        The problem with it was that people would rate a podcast with a bad rating
        to lower it. Then by lowering it, they passed it and became a higher rated
        cast

        On 11/2/05, alex_nesbitt <alex_nesbitt@...> wrote:
        >
        > We've been having a similar debate about how to rate/vote on
        > podcasts.
        >
        > We have used overall rating score, number of votes, number of
        > inclusions in My Podcast favorites and outbound hits ( all with ip
        > limits) to create lists of top ranked podcasts. I think we have two
        > (and maybe more) problems with our rankings. First, ratings are
        > based
        > on a 1-5 star scale and it's hard for a podcast that's been in the
        > directory awhile to maintain a perfect score. Second, none of these
        > measures take into account the number of days a podcast has been in
        > the directory. Old podcasts really get an advantage over new
        > podcasts
        > for total click throughs and total votes.
        >
        > Here's how I'm thinking of changing our overall ranking - we need
        > something that considers the curiosity factor (click throughs),
        > quality (ratings/reviews), quality of ratings (number of votes ) and
        > inclusion on favorite lists. Then we need to make sure we normalize
        > for the number of days on the site to take listing age out of the
        > equation.
        >
        > So something like clickthroughs/day*weighting factor
        > +votes*ratings/day*weighting factor +favorites/day*weighting factor
        >
        > What do you think about this idea?
        >
        > Alex
        > Digitalpodcast.com <http://Digitalpodcast.com>
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >


        --
        Gary Leland

        http://www.podcastpickle.com

        http://www.sportpodcasts.com


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.