Livejournal introduces 'ratings'?
Thursday, May 13th, 2010 10:58 amIt seems that LJ has put the ratings system formerly on the lj.ru domain into lj.com. (Don't know since when this has been) 'Ratings' show which are the most popular users, communities, and posts by a variety of metrics, such as users friending them/members, page views, and 'digs' (for the posts). These apply to the Cyrillic side of the site.
http://www.livejournal.com/ratings/ <--users
http://www.livejournal.com/ratings/community/ <--communities
http://www.livejournal.com/ratings/posts <--posts
However, I also noticed something interesting. When I went to LJ.ru and looked at the section of the front page that has a box with these ratings in it, the top ten listed there seemed to reflect the non-Cyrillic side of LJ. Very strange. Could this mean that ratings are coming to the non-Cyrillic side of the site?
In some ways, I think a leaderboard system like this might be helpful for DW, especially for comms, because many DW users have felt that they have a difficult time finding active comms. If a leaderboard system for comms was implemented, IMHO it would be best to base the stats on pageviews or comment activity or posts, rather than on number of members. This would enable people to find comms that actually have a high level of activity. (And of course, there should be an opt-out)
http://www.livejournal.com/ratings/ <--users
http://www.livejournal.com/ratings/community/ <--communities
http://www.livejournal.com/ratings/posts <--posts
However, I also noticed something interesting. When I went to LJ.ru and looked at the section of the front page that has a box with these ratings in it, the top ten listed there seemed to reflect the non-Cyrillic side of LJ. Very strange. Could this mean that ratings are coming to the non-Cyrillic side of the site?
In some ways, I think a leaderboard system like this might be helpful for DW, especially for comms, because many DW users have felt that they have a difficult time finding active comms. If a leaderboard system for comms was implemented, IMHO it would be best to base the stats on pageviews or comment activity or posts, rather than on number of members. This would enable people to find comms that actually have a high level of activity. (And of course, there should be an opt-out)
no subject
Date: 2010-05-14 12:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-05-14 12:47 am (UTC)I suppose they could do that by categorizing the comms and having both a global list and smaller lists for subjects like 'politics' 'technology' 'books/literature' or something?
no subject
Date: 2010-05-14 01:41 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-05-15 11:57 am (UTC)I'd also want to call it "stats", not "ratings".