What percentage of FPP links get clicked?
posted by Trurl
on Dec 22, 2011 -
I seem to post a lot of FPPs that revolve around podcast or other audio content these days, and It's gotten me curious... how often do you stop and listen to the content in links of that kind? Is it more or less likely than the chances you would watch a video?
posted by Artw
on Dec 17, 2011 -
Where do you people find the things you post to the "blue", and how do you consistently find them before the rest of us? Specifically to those of you who make art or photography posts here on Metafilter, where do you first learn of the things you link here? Reddit? Stumbleupon? Digg? Certain blogs? Where is the bleeding edge of the internet? [more inside]
posted by Pastabagel
on Dec 10, 2009 -
Whenever I preview a post—at least on the front page and MeTa—any
s in my links became
posted by Korou
on Nov 14, 2008 -
I'm confused. What is more important to mefites, actually responding to the content of FPPs, or rating their quality? I see a general (hence, no links in this question) preponderance to the former. It seems that many responses to posts are actually rating the quality of it and/or the poster, rather than the content of the FPP. I've read a lot of the sites about Metafilter and maybe I'm missing a concept or something.
I am truly not trying to be a smartass, I'm genuinely interested in understanding this. Thanks.
posted by Slap Incognito
on Dec 13, 2005 -
The "newer" link at the bottom of FPP #19
leads to #24
(Download Abiword) which doesn't exist. The "older" link from #25
also points to #24
. Shouldn't #19
link to #25
and vice versa?
posted by blue_beetle
on Dec 5, 2005 -
What if instead of being able to post a link every 24 hours, we simply post ever metafilter day? That would take away the need to count down the hours, make posting easier, and still have the same limiting effect.
posted by Citizen Premier
on Aug 26, 2005 -
Without getting specific, I regularly see links on metafilter these days to items which not only have previously been posted to every site on the intarweb and my grandmothers mailing list, but which have usually appeared on my television set some twelve to twenty four hours before they show up here. I fully realise that the intentions of the participants re-shape the intentions of communities over time, and that if I don't like it here I'm free to leave.
However, I first got interested in this site because it was the best filter on the web, not the wittiest discussion forum, so I'll poke my head over the parapet one more time to ask the question: what is the purpose of this site any more as opposed to, say, blogdex? Do we still fulfill a useful function, or as Matt obliquely eludes elsewhere
, are human filters wearing the orange safety reflectors of the web these days, compared to the robots? And if not, how can we raise the bar?
posted by walrus
on Jul 31, 2003 -
Is it just me, or does this FPP
contain so many links on such a variety of issues as to be 'undiscussable'. Thats likely not even a word, but you get my drift.
posted by schlyer
on Oct 17, 2002 -
This is interesting
. Postroad's post had a bad link and other members went searching for an appropriate link. And finally they did
find one which seems to fit perfectly(Good work, Tubes
I had a link too, but hesitated, as I didn't know whether this would be intruding on Postroad's post. How could I tell it was my link he was thinking of? Is it ethical or just Darwinian to provide a FPP's missing link
So - is it right to "find a link" by proxy, based on a post's wording? (FWIW, I think it's acceptable, but strange
We all know people who post to the FP should check that their links work. But shouldn't they also hang around for an hour or so to see if any there are any solvable problems?
posted by MiguelCardoso
on Dec 19, 2001 -