I suspect I have the wrong end of the stick here (carefully chosen idiom) but it is my understanding that when I read an LSF story for the first time the fact that I have done so is added to the author's "Total Views" count, listed in their "Recently Viewed" list, and added to their "Most Viewed" count if they have one and that story features in that list.
I further understand that if, however, having read it and liked it, I go back to read it again, it only features in their "Recently Viewed" list. So it is apparent that I have read it again but the fact that I have read it more than once doesn't push up the "Total Views" count, which only records first viewings.
I can see that would be sensible as it prevents someone, or a small group of someones, skewing the statistics by multiple visits to a single story, just so as to increase the total views.
On the other hand, and this is why I think I may be mistaken, such a methodology would mean that when a story is so successful (loved) that readers go back to it time and time again, this would not be apparent from the stats, which would merely show the number of unique readers of a story.
Also, when I look at the stats for my stories, there is a huge disparity between the number of views recorded for each one, which I don't think can reflect just unique views, or time since posting, and is hardly likely to be caused because some stories have "better" (more inviting) titles than others.
So, am I right, or am I wrong? I suspect only management can answer the question definitively, but anyone know?
Geoffrey Stirling. | 
