The article 'How can community democracy be strengthened in your local area?' shows up as the top entry of five in the OLO 'Today's most popular' list for Monday 22 March 2010. A screenshot of this seemingly anomalous event, freezing it in time as evidence, can be viewed here:
http://twitpic.com/1a4ib6

The article in question can be viewed here: http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=10078&page=0

(For those OLO users who may not be aware, the OLO 'Today's most popular' list can be reached here: http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/ , and scrolling down a bit, or by clicking the On Line Opinion button at the top of every OLO page, and likewise scrolling upon arrival.)

The OLO article 'How can community democracy be strengthened in your local area?' by Kellie Tranter, published on 23 February 2010, attracted 11 comments. The last comment was posted on Wednesday, 3 March 2010 at 6:13:37 PM.




How has this article's surge in popularity come about?



Presumably, it is views of the article, as opposed to views of the comments thread, that generate the statistics upon which the 'Today's most popular' listing is based. I'm guessing that someone has posted a link to that article through which has come the traffic that has returned it to the top of the list around a month after its publication.

It would be fascinating to know how much traffic it took to elevate the article to its current position, and from where that traffic has come. Is it technically possible to determine this? If it is, would it enhance the usefulness of OLO to its using public if more fulsome site statistics were to be made available? It would also be interesting to know the relative popularity of comments threads as distinct from articles.

Would OLO users accept it being a paid enhancement, available upon subscription?

What other issues, if any, do users see surrounding this surprising return to popularity of a no longer current article?

I am curious as to how OLO really ticks.

As of 7:30 PM AEDST, Tuesday 23 March, the article 'How can community democracy be strengthened in your local area?' as well as showing as top of the 'Todays most popular' list again, is also showing as third most popular for the week.

I wonder how many hits it has taken to put it up there? Does the OLO site record simply the number of views of the page, or the number of unique views, when compiling these popularity statistics? There is a subtle difference between the two.

If it is the former, it would be perhaps possible for as little as one user to game the OLO system to influence an article's apparent popularity, but as to what point there would be in doing that I am unsure.

'How can community democracy be strengthened in your local area?', as of 7:42 AM AEDST Thursday 25 March now tops both 'most popular' OLO lists. See screenshot: http://twitpic.com/1aola2

Where can the hits that have kept advancing this article be coming from?

Could it be, for example, that OLO userID 'Romany', who teaches in China, has set this article as an assignment for her students? There are many students, and computers, in China. Surely the article would not be considered subversive in China, and have access blocked in consequence, any more than it would be classed as 'unwanted content' under the Australian internet censorship rules, as it clearly seems not to be.

This leads me to ask whether the article in question ever topped the OLO popularity lists at around the time of its publication? Is there any way OLO users could access an archive of past 'Most popular' displays? I would see this as being analogous to being able to view progressive updates to the Australian Electoral Commission's Virtual Tallyroom at an electoral event, which, of course, the mug public cannot do.

Manually taking screenshots is such a cluncky and limited way of recording these ratings.

Wouldn't it be embarrassing for the AEC and the Australian government if lowly, humble OLO showed how easily in this digital age (presuming it is easy, of course) such a progressing archive could be made available to public, or user, scrutiny, respectively. Scrutiny. Now there's a word! I know, I can but dream.

Isn't this all rivettingly fascinating!

The phenomenon continues. Here is a screenshot as of 8:30 AM AEDST Friday 26 March of the 'Today's most popular' display:
http://twitpic.com/1avxbp

The article 'How can community democracy be strengthened in your local area?' is still topping both 'Today's most popular', and 'This week's most popular' displays.



Speaking of popularity, here is a list of OLO articles, from the last month only, that have failed to attract a single comment.



A submarine-led recovery for the Hunter Valley? Lee Rhiannon. Published Friday, February 26, 2010
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=9998

Google’s lesson: innovation has to be accompanied by reliability. Published Monday, March 1, 2010
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=10106

Time to move: Reserve Bank must get interest rates back to normal soon. Henry Thornton. Published Tuesday, March 2, 2010
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=10124

Haiti: cursed or brave? Adele Webb. Published Thursday, March 4, 2010
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=10126

Westrac, Seven merger needs communicating beyond the financial. Richard Stanton. Published Monday, March 8, 2010
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=10143

Biomed analysis: keep traditional knowledge open but safe. Priya Shetty. Published Tuesday, March 9, 2010
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=10142

‘Twittering’ politics: the case of the fakes. Nicholas Hookway. Published Monday, March 22, 2010
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=10201

"Isn't this all rivetingly fascinating!"

Hi Forrest. Well yes, it is - that's why I keep dropping in to see the latest update.

I can't offer any explanation as it's completely out of my league. However, I would be surprised if OLO can't explain some of the queries you raise - have you emailed them directly?

Had to chuckle about Romany's students hijacking the thread, but then again ... why not?

With respect to coming to an understanding as to how this article has won its 'Veronicas' award for being so pop pop popular, qanda suggests:

"..., I would be surprised if OLO can't explain
some of the queries you raise - have you emailed
them directly?"

No, I haven't emailed OLO directly.

I tend not to be an email-active sort of person. Besides which, my purpose here has been to provoke thought, not provoke, or impose a workload upon, the OLO administration. I figured that if OLO wasn't happy as to where it thought this question might lead, then all it had to do was not approve the topic.



However, OLO did approve the topic, and clearly the amount of discussion the opening post has engendered has got right out of hand.



I genuinely don't know what degree of interest OLO may have in this phenomenon: it may be something that happens far more frequently than I imagine, and that I am but showing my ignorance of something quite commonplace. All I can say is that the topic is not a 'Dorothy Dix' designed to help OLO fly any kite, nor am I seeking inside information on OLO site statistics. OLO is free to explain, or refrain from explanation, as it wishes. Perhaps the enabling of the degree of user access envisaged, although technically achievable, may be unreasonably intrusive upon the legitimate proprietory interests of OLO. I am simply curious, as I have already said, as to how OLO really works.

Anyway, I am thankful for qanda's suggestion, and take this opportunity of directing his attention to an outstanding query which it appears he may have missed, here: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3480#82724

OLO couldn't be just using 'How can community democracy be strengthened in your local area?' as a non-dynamic place-holder in the display, effectively reducing the first two displays to one of only four dynamic places, could it? What would there be to be gained by doing something like that?

Rivet, rivet, rivet.

Rivet, rivet, rivet.

Rivet.

Forrest, you “provoke thought, not provoke ...” nevertheless, provocative just the same. Anyway, why this thread isn’t the most popular is most perplexing. As to your link, I’ll have a squiz.

Forrest, I drafted 264 words for the linked topic but apparently it is an "archived discussion" and new posts "are no longer allowed". Thems da rules.

As to your query, qanda is softer on the keyboard and softer on the page (although challenging and provocative as always) ... besides, I'm just a softie at heart :)

Amusing actually, Graham thought something so benign was so sinister - threatened deletion until I informed him that Q&A deleted self prior to registering a new self, on the same URL with the new name Itshot Wot :)

Well, after several days at the top of the 'Today's most popular' list, the article 'How can community democracy be strengthened in your local area?' has been pushed down to the number three spot on that list as of 6:30 AM AEDST Saturday 27 March. Here is the screenshot I know you have all been waiting for that confirms it: http://twitpic.com/1b41za

Not only has Kellie Tranter's article been pushed down in the first display (it still tops the 'This week's most popular' list), but there has been relative movement between other articles' popularity between 6:30 AM and 9:30 AM, as this screenshot shows: http://twitpic.com/1b43r5

Looks like most of Romany's students must have completed their downloads of the article, or whatever. I guess we are none the wiser as to what made this article so pop pop popular again. But it would be nice to know.

Surely somebody can come up with some other original explanation.

Could it portend the beginning of a grass-roots revolution against the over-blown aspirations of local government in Australia?

Is it, on the other hand, a 'littering-up' of Street Stewards preparatory to a membership drive for the Block Wardens Association?

What explains it all? We have to know. What's the name of the game?

It seems I may have spoken too soon in the third paragraph of my previous post, if that is the real reason for 'How can community democracy be strengthened in your local area?' having become so belatedly popular.

This article has had yet another resurgence. It's top of the pops again. See: http://twitpic.com/1b6l4j

Checking back with twitpic.com at 3:40 PM, I see that the linked twitpic of my screenshot has already attracted 21 views in just 14 minutes. The very first screenshot, posted here: http://twitpic.com/1a4ib6 , has attracted only 27 views in all the time since it was posted on Monday, 22 March 2010. Clearly interest in this phenomenon is gaining momentum.

Somebody tell us all (or at least qanda and me) what is going on, please!

Well, I'm stumped Forrest. Thought I'd check myself the top of the pops and all I get is this (going to The National Forum) -

"error occurred on the server when processing the URL. Please contact the system administrator. If you are the system administrator please click here to find out more about this error."

I have absolutely no idea what is going on, and absolutely no idea which piece is the most this or that. The plot thickens hey what?

Oh bum!
Went to "online Opinion" (7pm) scrolled down and ... you wouldn't have guessed it (except maybe Forrest) -

Kellie Tranter's "How can community democracy be strengthened in your local area?" is the most popular article this week, and 3rd most popular today!

mwahahaha :(

Please excuse me Forrest, I wouldn't have a clue how to do a screen shot.

Returning to OLO after several days interruption to my Telstra landline service for reasons as yet undisclosed, I see this seeming anomaly with respect to the popularity of Kellie Tranter's article persists.

Screenshot as at 4:40 PM AEDST Tuesday 30 March: http://www.twitpic.com/1c093o

Screenshot as at 5:24 AM AEDST Wednesday 31 March: http://www.twitpic.com/1c0aab

As can be seen, other articles have changed relative positions within the lists during this interval.

Indeed qanda is correct that if you click the 'The National Forum' button (which is this URL: http://portal.nationalforum.com.au/ ) you get that message. (Here is a screenshot of it: http://www.twitpic.com/1c0iqh ) However, that is not the button to click. One needs to click the 'On Line Opinion' button to be delivered to the page on which one can scroll to the popularity lists.

I use the online application Twitpic to post screenshots on Twitter. One has to have signed up for a Twitter account to be able to use this free application. As GrahamY has a Twitter account, and lists me, 'ForrestGumpp', as someone he 'follows' on Twitter, this provides a means of communication if OLO is suffering problems with its server or local internet connection. A screenshot provides proof and full information to OLO staff in determining the precise nature of any problem that users may be experiencing, and a link to the twitpic of the screenshot will come up in GrahamY's Twitter display together with my (Twitter) userID and any message I may have added. (Screenshots actually live on your own hard drive, filed wherever your operating system files such stuff. Twitpic lets you browse and select the .png image file that is your screenshot, and upload it.)

There is more about Twitter in this old OLO topic: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2646&page=0

For those who use a Micro$oft operating system, which I don't, I think you take a screenshot by pressing the 'print screen' button on your keyboard. Then something happens, but I'm not sure what.