I’ve been thinking about this recently…on the one hand, I want to provide easy access to the posts which are most popular. I’d like to think that these posts are most popular for a reason, in general. On the other hand, once a post is in this “most popular” list, it’s inclined to stay there.
Giving easy access to the posts which are the most popular pretty much guarantees that those posts will STAY the most popular.
Not sure what I want to do about this…I though about making it random; but I’m not sure that would really serve the purpose I have in mind.
Perhaps I’ll just randomly alter the selection – sometimes the top 10, sometimes the bottom 10; sometimes a group somewhere in the middle. I’ll just introduce some variables, and see what happens.
Joe Dolson; February 24, 2007 at 10:21 am
It’s definitely critical to disable it while working on a site…it can be REALLY annoying in that circumstance. When you’re getting heavy traffic, though, it can be helpful to reduce server load. Significantly reduces the amount of work the server has to do, since it only needs to re-render the page as frequently as you tell it to.
But if you have to work on a blog where you don’t have access to disable it…ouch. That would really suck.
Mike Cherim; February 22, 2007 at 11:25 pm
I despise that wp-cache plugin. I was trying to work on a theme for someone’s blog and they had that installed. Every time I made an edit I had to find a fresh page to check so I could actually see the change. it was most annoying.
Joe Dolson; February 20, 2007 at 11:37 pm
I like the randomized array from the top 50 idea…although I’ve also come to realize another problem with the plugin I’m using right now…the fact that I also use the wp-cache plugin causes some serious discrepancies between actual views and the numbers recorded.
I’ve realized that the array is in fact completely inauthentic.
I think I may aim for a top 50 selected posts, instead. No reason not to wield some editorial control, after all!
Mike Cherim; February 20, 2007 at 10:21 pm
You could create an array of, say, the top 50 then randomize those in shots of ten. Maybe. I do understand what you’re saying… once they’re displayed as popular posts curiosity will keep them that way.
Another idea, which I did myself — got it from Zeldman — is to do a year-end recap which gives them a second life albeit for a short period.
Joe Dolson; February 16, 2007 at 11:39 pm
Hidden treasures would be good, if I rewrote the select query to eliminate recent posts. Seems a bit fair to call recent posts “hidden.” Hmmmm…thanks for the suggestions!
Tom; February 16, 2007 at 9:17 pm
Sadly neglected posts?
Unloved orphan posts?
Joe Dolson; February 16, 2007 at 7:07 pm
I’ve decided to put up my 10 least popular posts for a while. Many of these are actually just my most recent posts, so I’m not sure that “Unpopular” is really appropriate…
Any suggestions for a different way of labeling this?