So I opened the latest "Civil War" thread for Dan Bongino's team to review viewership and it got me thinking:

What if there was feature showing the relationship between Views and Posts? Some equation to identify thread success, assuming that is the definition of success. I guess that opens another question because stars and replies could identify success.

I fell into that "Civil War" headline and prompted this thought. Probably not worthy of a post.

Also, that civil war thread has 2.8k view and 16 posts.

there are exponentially more views than posts

FBI FBI FBI

FBI agent wants it to do the arithmetic though to get the ratio and percentage. Math is hard.

Quote:

---

FBI agent wants it to do the arithmetic though to get the ratio and percentage. Math is hard.

---

Obviously, well maybe not obvious, I see the numbers. However, math is tedious and it just seems there could be a column or whatever added that does it for the viewer. I would define a successful thread to be one with longevity, involvement (stars and replies) without the mod identified derails. Some ratio.

Definitely not part of any bureau but more than likely on their lists. However no short lists.

Once an equation for a successful thread was defined, I'd like to see what some of the more successful are. Perhaps search by that characteristic.

The ones that stay on page one have long term success.

That's about it.

IndividualFreedom said:

---

Quote:

---

FBI agent wants it to do the arithmetic though to get the ratio and percentage. Math is hard.

---

Obviously, well maybe not obvious, I see the numbers. However, math is tedious and it just seems there could be a column or whatever added that does it for the viewer.

---

You mean like after tapping your credit card and the server hands you the electronic device that wants to ask you a few questions starting with the 22% tip ($3.33) for handing you a $14 stadium beer?

Quote:

---

However, math is tedious

---

Another example, our department of "education" was a complete failure.!! There is nothing even close to tedious about this math! It's simple arithmetic!

Texags doesn't have a ranking system by design. Other platforms have proven how bad a ranking system can tilt discussions one way or another.

I personally prefer it this way, I suppose it does put a little more work on the user but still, I prefer seeing things posted in chronological order.

So let's not Reddit texags.

Quote:

---

Texags doesn't have a ranking system by design. Other platforms have proven how bad a ranking system can tilt discussions one way or another.

---

This makes sense. I don't use other platforms so little other experience.

What a ridiculous OP. At no point did it approach a rational thought and we are all now dumber for having read it. May God have mercy on your soul.

58 views / post on this thread. What a lame OP.

ntxVol said:

---

Texags doesn't have a ranking system by design. Other platforms have proven how bad a ranking system can tilt discussions one way or another.

I personally prefer it this way, I suppose it does put a little more work on the user but still, I prefer seeing things posted in chronological order.

So let's not Reddit texags.

---

Speak for yourself...I'm #21 all time in blue stars while you are 1,200+.

You are a Loser!!!