Show two love counts

Here is my avatar, if I click on it, I see the lower figure but if I hover over it, I see the higher figure.  

Edited by bad john

I raised this a long time ago. The explanation I got was something like: 

• When you look in image manager or hover that is the total number of loves ever given. 
• When you at the image with avatars of people who loved it anyone who has deactivated (or been kicked off site)

This would suggest that about 1/4 of the people who ever loved that image have gone 

And the image sorter uses one, and the default display shows another. Also the % of loves to views goes completely awry when people love an image from within a group (which doesn't increment the view count) which messes up sorting too. I wish there was just one way of counting stuff, and it was consistent across the site., would make some of the tools like imaging ordering more useful..... I have raised before but was told the current set of behaviours are as designed.

JonC said

Also the % of loves to views goes completely awry when people love an image from within a group (which doesn't increment the view count) which messes up sorting too.

The view count also does not go up if I:

• Go to an album or other collection
• View an image (the view count for this one will go up)
• Go full screen (keyboard F)
• Navigate right to the next or left to the previous (the view count for this image will not go up)
• Close the window or navigate left or right.

I agree with all the above who are saying that the inconsistency is now at the point where "working as designed" tells me that it needs to be redesigned.  The OP's suggestion of showing both numbers would certainly go some way to reducing the confusion, but some processes (such as sorting by numbers of views, or the view/love ratio) could become problematic in terms of server performance.  Maybe an overnight (or hourly) process could recalculate the "current" number and cache that?

I have no interest in the view count and never look at it. 

Should I be pleased if it is high even though the love count is low?  Maybe it means that lots of people have checked to see who took that terrible image.  

Should I be pleased if it is low?  Maybe it means that I have posted at a bad time and few people saw it so that it is why did not get many loves.  

I would quite like to see both love counts.  Maybe the Image Manager would be a good place to do this so that the more commonly used screens did not get more cluttered.  Ideally, all of the other locations would use the same count.  

bad john I find the ratio of loves to views (as opposed to just views per se) helpful, as it is an indication of how ‘popular’ an image is (for images that have not had their views boosted, by virtue of being an FPI for example). Indeed I often have my portfolio sorted so those with a high love to view ratio at the top (another ‘bug’ is that in albums the sort order is opposite to the sort order in the main portfolio).

I don’t find the love count on its own to be useful - it could have high loves because a lot of people viewed it (FPI, or featured in a blog, in a group post etc), but a low percentage of those that did actually liked it. But each person will use the data in different ways - the important thing is that is accurate.

I see that the ratio might be useful but I still don't bother to look at views.  I keep telling myself that what is important is whether I like the image but I often forget that and wish for loves.  I don't mind how I get them, certainly not because it was an FPI (I have very few) and not because something else brought people's attention to it.  

JonC said

And the image sorter uses one, and the default display shows another. Also the % of loves to views goes completely awry when people love an image from within a group (which doesn't increment the view count) which messes up sorting too. I wish there was just one way of counting stuff, and it was consistent across the site., would make some of the tools like imaging ordering more useful..... I have raised before but was told the current set of behaviours are as designed.

I think the view discrepancy is it counts visits to the picture's page and doesn't increment the counter for each picture show on a group page - otherwise as a share a shoot page and some games pages might do a lot of database updates.  If you post to a popular game thread lots of people might be served the picture but are really only interested in posting their own. Counting the people who clicked through to the page is better in some senses but it counts bots and people who just scroll through the whole port.  

JonC said

bad john I find the ratio of loves to views (as opposed to just views per se) helpful, as it is an indication of how ‘popular’ an image is (for images that have not had their views boosted, by virtue of being an FPI for example). Indeed I often have my portfolio sorted so those with a high love to view ratio at the top (another ‘bug’ is that in albums the sort order is opposite to the sort order in the main portfolio).

I don’t find the love count on its own to be useful - it could have high loves because a lot of people viewed it (FPI, or featured in a blog, in a group post etc), but a low percentage of those that did actually liked it. But each person will use the data in different ways - the important thing is that is accurate.

Ditto - I screen scrape the numbers and watch how the percentage declines with time and total views. I've got Loves / views / ratio / comments , and my own take on over / under performing. Sadly it suggests that anything SFW I posts gets significantly less love than NSFW, which means either I do a better job photographing breasts than faces, or that's what the population of PP likes more.