Do bot visits count as views?

[JuanSeiszFitzHall]

Sorry if this has been stated elsewhere, but I don’t recall seeing it. If a bot ‘clicks’ on a story at Literotica, does that click count as a view? Or is something done by the site to exclude this click from the story’s view count? I’m curious about whether the number of views corresponds to a number of humans, or if the view count is inflated by bots. (Yes, holders of multiple accounts might also inflate a view count, but I’ll consider that a separate issue.)

 

[MillieDynamite]

I don't know if it does or not. If it opens the story, I'd suspect it counts, but how does the site know if it's a remote open by a human or software fishing for an entry somewhere?

 

[OverconfidentSarcasm]

I'd be surprised if anyone ever tested this. But I'd be even more surprised if bots DIDN'T count.
I mean, not only would it be counterproductive for them, someone would have to sit down and write a counting-script with explicit exclusions for all the bots' useragents in existence. Which would be ridiculous.

I'd say, the "view"-count is simply the amount of times the story was requested through the CDN, and that's it. It doesn't check whether you actually finish reading the story before setting a +1 to the view-count, it doesn't check if you requested the story before to exclude you (it's a view-count, not a read-count), so it probably doesn't differentiate between useragents either.

 

[NotWise]

Someone a few years commented about the low viewing rate on a story and either Laurel or Manu replied that they may have found out how much traffic was generated by bots, so I think bot views do count.

Or did at that time. Things can change.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

The view count increases whenever the first page of any story is opened. Only the first page counts, and the count goes up every time you refresh that first page.

I don't see the need for the website to disallow bot views. The extra traffic goes to their benefit, after all.

 

[alohadave]

I'd be surprised if anyone ever tested this. But I'd be even more surprised if bots DIDN'T count.
I mean, not only would it be counterproductive for them, someone would have to sit down and write a counting-script with explicit exclusions for all the bots' useragents in existence. Which would be ridiculous.

I'd say, the "view"-count is simply the amount of times the story was requested through the CDN, and that's it. It doesn't check whether you actually finish reading the story before setting a +1 to the view-count, it doesn't check if you requested the story before to exclude you (it's a view-count, not a read-count), so it probably doesn't differentiate between useragents either.

The view count simply the number of times that the first page of the story was loaded.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Actually, I have tested the reload function a few times, and no, the count doesn't go up when you refresh the first page. If you go back to the page and an hour later from your control panel (without closing the browser) it doesn't count that one either.

The view count increases whenever the first page of any story is opened. Only the first page counts, and the count goes up every time you refresh that first page.

I don't see the need for the website to disallow bot views. The extra traffic goes to their benefit, after all.

 

[SimonDoom]

I think so. On two occasions, I had bizarre and very large upticks in view counts on a story over a 24 hour or similar period for no obvious reason. I suspect it was bot activity. The number of views was so out of whack my normal numbers that I don't see how it could have resulted from human activity. This was several years ago, so maybe things have changed since then.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Actually, I have tested the reload function a few times, and no, the count doesn't go up when you refresh the first page. If you go back to the page and an hour later from your control panel (without closing the browser) it doesn't count that one either.

Huh, I swear refreshing used to increase the view count. I remember testing it like two years ago or so, and the view count in my Control panel would increase every time I reloaded the first page. I tested it just now, and it doesn't work anymore. They must have changed it at some point. Good to know, I guess.

 

[MillieDynamite]

I found this out last year. It was about midyear, I believe. I don't know what made me test it. I think a story was getting a lot of attention. it was an older story, and it shouldn't have been so active. So I tested it to see if someone was refreshing the page or if it was unique views. I was glad to see it wasn't page refreshes.

Huh, I swear refreshing used to increase the view count. I remember testing it like two years ago or so, and the view count in my Control panel would increase every time I reloaded the first page. I tested it just now, and it doesn't work anymore. They must have changed it at some point. Good to know, I guess.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I found this out last year. It was about midyear, I believe. I don't know what made me test it. I think a story was getting a lot of attention. it was an older story, and it shouldn't have been so active. So I tested it to see if someone was refreshing the page or if it was unique views. I was glad to see it wasn't page refreshes.

Maybe it hasn't changed at all, but the update isn't instant, even in the Control Panel. Maybe they put a significant delay to discourage abuse or it was done for technical reasons. Either way, it's not really possible to do a reliable test anymore.

 

[alohadave]

Actually, I have tested the reload function a few times, and no, the count doesn't go up when you refresh the first page. If you go back to the page and an hour later from your control panel (without closing the browser) it doesn't count that one either.

I have tested it, and it does work.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I don't know if it does or not. If it opens the story, I'd suspect it counts, but how does the site know if it's a remote open by a human or software fishing for an entry somewhere?

Translation: I am not Hungarian.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Actually, I'm Afro-American and damn proud of it.

Translation: I am not Hungarian.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Then it works for you, differently than it works for me.

I have tested it, and it does work.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Actually, I'm Afro-American and damn proud of it.

Someone else care to explain it to her?

 

[MillieDynamite]

That's all right, I don't care what you are saying. As in, it makes no difference to me. But you seem to care enough that I care, so I suspect you care enough for the both of us. Be content with the knowledge that in your mind, you're right and I'm wrong and move on.

Someone else care to explain it to her?

 

[Bamagan]

I think they might be excluding bots like Google and Amazon; basically anything that's on the 'Robots' list of site traffic on the Members page. Those are clearly identifiable, at least in principle, so it shouldn't be too complicated to correct view counts for their activities. There might well be other bots operating that aren't as unambiguously defined, though.

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

Not sure about bots, but I definitely think this counts as a view...

 

[MillieDynamite]

Your eyes have it! I don't know what it is, but I know it when I see it, and you definitely have IT with a capital I and captial T.

Not sure about bots, but I definitely think this counts as a view...

View attachment 2506531

 

[RejectReality]

The view number has always filtered out known bots that act legitimately, such as search engines. Long, long ago Laurel posted about this shortly after the views numbers were implemented, showing the difference in a few stories with and without filtering. The filter list has been updated over the years to account for new crawlers. I suspect the site also filters some less than scrupulous crawlers from the number, and that is reflected by sudden reduction in the number of average views. Most notably, that's happened twice since 2010 where the number of views for the same number of votes/comments/favorites even a week before no longer meshes up, sitewide. That level then becomes the new norm.

It's the sort of thing I'd expect from upgrading to a new malicious bot filter list.

On a basic level, the view number undoubtedly contains some non-human crawlers. It's impossible to track every bot and spider crawling around the internet. The times I've done a comparison across the same stories here and on a site that requires membership to register a download, the number I've come up with is somewhere between 15-25% are non-human. It was a lot higher before those two events I mention above.

 

[JuanSeiszFitzHall]

Thanks, Folks.