On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Oliver Keyes <[email protected]> wrote:
> A metric that is based on a draft RfC that was only created this year > and depends on JS? I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest it has > problems of its own ;p > > On 3 December 2015 at 14:22, Gabriel Wicke <[email protected]> wrote: > > I have witnessed this discussion about what constitutes a page view > > repeatedly over the last months, and suspect that it is only going to > > get murkier the more interactive and non-navigation features we add. > > Some of these decisions are somewhat arbitrary, making the page view > > metric a less accurate indicator for the true engagement of users with > > our site. > > > > I think we should complement pageviews with a new metric that > > side-steps a binary 1/0 decision: Time on Site. I have written up some > > thoughts on this at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T119352. > To be fair, WMF went from Zero to Pageview in 11.4 years, so I think we can cut new metrics some slack. Gabriel, I agree that if we want to keep measuring things [2], we should get better at measuring things. But this process of picking metrics is pretty hard. A good researcher picks a phenomenon, measures it in different ways, conducts controlled experiments, and then decides what measure tracks that phenomenon best. You can see examples of Aaron doing this [1]. [1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wiki_metrics.monthly_editor_counts.1_edit.dewiki.svg [2] personally I'm like, why are we measuring all these things? Do we actually take actions that result in real value based on these measures?
_______________________________________________ Analytics mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
