Re: [podcasters] Voting and podcast stats
- I understand what you're saying, Steve. You can be obsessive about
numbers, but that fades with time.
This is what I'm trying to say (I know I'm repeating myself): I don't
think voting numbers are useless because they contribute to your
visibility in directories. If you track those numbers, you can see where
you stand and how much more work you need to do.
As far as asking listeners to vote or not asking them to vote, I don't
have strong feelings about that for others. I don't like the idea of
doing that myself other than in personal email. I do vote for and review
all sorts of things I have strong feelings about, but that's partly
because I recognize that 1) Most people don't say anything, so those who
do are likely to have some influence, and 2) I want to help the people I
like succeed. I certainly hope that a listener who's considering casting
a vote doesn't feel they have to get some favor in return. But I'm
probably misunderstanding you there.
> I think you might have taken the wrong meaning from my message. I
> didn't say numbers NEVER did any good; I said I checked my own "far
> more often" than they can do me any good. My Feedburner circulation
> is an important figure, but checking it three times a day is not going
> to guide my strategy any more effectively than checking it once a
> week. Same for download totals.
> Likewise, doing a Technorati search on my own URLs occasionally is
> valuable and instructive, to let me know what other people are saying
> about Escape Pod. Hooking an RSS feed to that search for live updates
> is pure ego.
> Also, those data are qualitatively different from voting systems. The
> people subscribed to my Feedburner feed or downloading my files chose
> to do it on their own, to get something they wanted. The people
> talking about Escape Pod in blogs have their own reasons; they're not
> doing it just to please me. (Sometimes that's blindingly obvious.)
> >8-> These sorts of figures matter because they're evidence of a
> value transaction.
> But if I ask a listener to vote, I'm asking them to do something for
> which there's no direct value correlation. There's nothing in it for
> them. There are a few exceptions -- e.g., The Signal asked for votes
> in September to promote the movie _Serenity_, and I found their
> argument strong enough that I actually voted -- but mostly it's just
> the podcaster wanting to feel more special than everybody else.
> Do these distinctions make sense? It's not that all numbers are
> useless. Just that *voting* numbers are useless; and of the other
> numbers, it's easy for us to become far more attached to them than
> their use would require.
> Have Fun,
> Steve Eley (sfeley@...)
> ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
- 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
On 11/2/05, alex_nesbitt <alex_nesbitt@...> wrote:
> We've been having a similar debate about how to rate/vote on
> 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
> 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
> 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
> So something like clickthroughs/day*weighting factor
> +votes*ratings/day*weighting factor +favorites/day*weighting factor
> What do you think about this idea?
> Digitalpodcast.com <http://Digitalpodcast.com>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]