Something suspicious about the view count of this very recent new topic?

[#1]

https://community.plus.net/t5/Mobile/Could-not-activate-mobile-data-network/m-p/1579051#M10777

As per title - over 10,000 views registered in the 17 hours since first posted. 

[#2]

That does seem high but it could be possible.

Especially as I assume it is viewable without a login so all manner of search engines and sites which run scripts could be looking.

I suppose someone like @jaread83 could look into it and see if it is a bug.

EDIT: Corrected spelling of name.

[#3]

@Alex I don't think it's a bug, if you keep your finger on the F5 key it counts these as views as opposed to distinct views, I've just added another 80+ to the count while testing. Maybe the OP's keyboard stuck, but @jaread83 will be able to confirm this via the logs I guess.

[#4]

Ah I see @Anonymous

It sounds plausible that something like that may have happened.

I can't see an easy way around it unless you don't for example count an additional view from the same IP and implement some kind of time limit. So for example if it is the same IP within a small space of time (I mean seconds not minutes) of time then No.

Be interested to hear @jaread83's views on this, and I don't know if implementing something like that would have side effects.

There you go this board is for feedback 

[#5]

I guess it depends on one’s definition of a view. I am sure that one needs to be logged in to view a post so taking that into consideration when a user views a specific post it should only be counted once unless maybe an edit has occurred.

Using the IP is OK but with dynamic IPs still in use it’s maybe not the best approach, there are other options to track this but may simply not be worth the efforts.

[#6]

That might be a better approach @Anonymous, presumably Lithium keeps track of a login session and I am sure it will boot you off it you're idle for too long. So you have to login again.

Is a view related to the session, so if it is the same one and you've already viewed it once and then do it again in the same session the counter doesn't increment again, just by 1. Or something like that.

I thought though you could view posts without logging on though? Or am I wrong? Does that create a session ID behind the scenes even say if you don't have an account or even have and don't want to login?

Hope I am talking a bit of sense here, though knowing me maybe not.

[#7]

As I said above @Alex, it depends on your definition of what constitutes a view. I am of the opinion that once I have read a post then it’s read regardless of how many time I return to it, for me, there should only ever be one count against my name; with the notable exception being an edit to a previously read post maybe.

As to how it works it looks to be the cheapest possible option that Lithium have implemented by recording a strike using the parameters on URL hence the ability to artificially inflate the viewing figures by holding the F5 key.

[#8]

I agree @Anonymous, it should work how you say and the way it does at present is a bit flawed for that reason.

One to add to the enhancement list?

[#9]

Well you have to remember that that is my interpretation of a view, for others it may well be different. As for the to do list, I doubt it, as I suspect no one (at Plusnet or Lithium) even cares how (in) accurate it is.

[#10]

Yep its not exactly a show stopper I know, so I'd think it would be very low on the priority list.

[#11]

My guess is that it is search bots or crawlers that are creating the hits - I used to get this a lot when I ran my own forums.

Occasionally you'd get one that was mis-configured and it would hit the same page again and again.

[#12]

Currently 25,000 views of a very run of the mill topic in little more than a day. Can't wait for the real explanation!

[#13]

Yes, it is very odd. But why that page and why now if it is a mis-configured bot and why haven't we seen this before? Or maybe we've just missed it, all very very odd.

[#14]

We all seem to agree that it's very odd  - the OP (db74) of the unusually popular topic would no doubt prefer an answer to his or her question rather than some modest forum cyberfame!