2
0

How to make Patrick.net home page capture new users?


 invite response                
2017 Feb 13, 9:40pm   22,189 views  158 comments

by Patrick   ➕follow (59)   💰tip   ignore  

I put Google Analytics back on the site. Here's a screenshot showing the last week's session durations:

Most new people look at the home page for 0 to 10 seconds, and then just go away. The users who are already into the site hang around much longer.

How can I make the home page more "sticky" so that new users immediately understand the site and want to explore more?

Any insights appreciated.

#patnet

« First        Comments 50 - 89 of 158       Last »     Search these comments

50   anonymous   2017 Feb 14, 11:50am  

Do libel laws, and the inability to yell "fire" in a crowded theater, hinder free speech?

51   Done   2017 Feb 14, 11:54am  

Take the hypocritical "Free Speech Forum" down while you are at it.
Your site absolutely won't deserve those words at the top....

52   zzyzzx   2017 Feb 14, 11:56am  

rando says

I do need to ban direct insults.

Define direct insult.

53   Done   2017 Feb 14, 11:58am  

zzyzzx says

rando says

I do need to ban direct insults.

ridiculous

54   Done   2017 Feb 14, 11:59am  

Make sure you remove the words "Free Speech Forum" first.

55   Done   2017 Feb 14, 12:01pm  

RIP Patrick's "Free Speech Forum"

56   Patrick   2017 Feb 14, 12:04pm  

zzyzzx says

rando says

I do need to ban direct insults.

Define direct insult.

"Listen, you fuckwad ..."

Graybox says

RIP Patrick's "Free Speech Forum"

Not true, you can attack any point you want, just don't make it about the person.

It is a limitation, but perhaps basic civility would add more to the conversation than it takes away.

And we could still designate a thread or set of threads as the Thunderdome where anything goes.

57   MisdemeanorRebel   2017 Feb 14, 12:08pm  

dublin hillz says

I fully support Patrick banning ad-homs. It doesn't matter whether right or left wing engages in this, the ad-homs add absolutely nothing to the conversation. For the record, I would say that the king of all ad-homs was Roberto Barabas and I can't say I miss his presence...

He was a total cunt.

58   Rew   2017 Feb 14, 12:09pm  

zzyzzx says

Define direct insult.

zzyyzzx is an asshole.
Tis my opinion that zzyyzzx appears to hold opinions inline with that of an asshole. (looking down my nose at you, and spreading Grey Poupon from my limo)
zzyyzzx is deplorable.
zzyyzzx is a Trumpthuglican.
CIC likes goats.

rando says

Not true, you can attack any point you want, just don't directly attack the person making it.

I think zzyyzzx's point is a valid one. The arbitration of 'direct insult' might be difficult.

At the very least, it will be a significant change to the culture and discourse on Pnet. I'd settle for seeing the trolliness/ignore and dislike numbers while we ponder this more. :P

59   Rew   2017 Feb 14, 12:11pm  

HEY YOU says

Rew's just showing off! LOL

BANNED! Direct insult. ;)

(fist bump)

60   Done   2017 Feb 14, 12:13pm  

rando says

And we could still designate a thread or set of threads as the Thunderdome where anything goes.

That is a idea, lets see where the numbers go to. I have odds on no holds barred "Thunderdome" 100-1.

61   Patrick   2017 Feb 14, 12:13pm  

Rew says

zzyyzzx is an asshole.

Tis my opinion that zzyyzzx appears to hold opinions inline with that of an asshole. (looking down my nose at you, and spreading Grey Poupon from my limo)

zzyyzzx is deplorable.

zzyyzzx is a Trumpthuglican.

CIC likes goats.

All clearly ad hominem in my book. They attack the person and not the point being made.

Rew says

I think zzyyzzx's point is a valid one. The arbitration of 'direct insult' might be difficult.

True, there could be borderline cases. I hate that. As a spergy programmer type, I prefer clear algorithms for making decisions. But humans are messy.

62   anonymous   2017 Feb 14, 12:15pm  

errc says

Do libel laws, and the inability to yell "fire" in a crowded theater, hinder free speech?

Why is this such a hard question to answer?

For that matter, why not address the title of the thread?

Is the only thing you Special Snowflakes know how to do is bitch and moan like a woman on her period?

"Waaaah, Patrick is trying to improve hit site. Waaaah I want to stifle Free Speech by discouraging unpopular things from being said with unoriginal, disinteresting personal attacks. Waaaaaaahhh"

63   Patrick   2017 Feb 14, 12:33pm  

Ironman says

your next rape or misogyny thread

If you're saying "you", that's a good clue that you're attacking the person and not the point, which is the definition of ad hominem.

64   Done   2017 Feb 14, 12:36pm  

rando says

Ironman says

your next rape or misogyny thread

If you're saying "you", that's a good clue that you're attacking the person and not the point, which is the definition of ad hominem.

So fucking what.... Some alternative facts for a fake Free Speech Forum

65   Done   2017 Feb 14, 12:56pm  

It's not about worthwhile freeness of speech but rather the #'s.
Patrick may not want to put another stab wound in free speech but damn
if he could just get a few more #'s this wouldn't even be a discussion.

Very pathetic....

66   Patrick   2017 Feb 14, 1:02pm  

The number of readers does seem to suffer when the forum degenerates into ad hominem attacks with little real discussion going on.

What is the value of attacking a person rather than their point? How does that help us understand or resolve any issue?

OK, there's a little bit of entertainment value in attacking a person, but there seems to be a big cost as well.

67   anonymous   2017 Feb 14, 1:10pm  

rando says

The number of readers does seem to suffer when the forum degenerates into ad hominem attacks with little real discussion going on.

What is the value of attacking a person rather than their point? How does that help us understand or resolve any issue?

OK, there's a little bit of entertainment value in attacking a person, but there seems to be a big cost as well.

Don't bother asking "these people " the tough questions, there's one thing that's certain: they will never answer them because the answer destroys their "point"

68   Done   2017 Feb 14, 1:10pm  

Yes...

69   Done   2017 Feb 14, 1:11pm  

errc says

"these people "

lol

70   justme   2017 Feb 14, 1:31pm  

I still think my proposed solution is the simplest. One thread per person per day. Maybe also 20 posts/comments per person per day? We just need to throttle the drivel, not police every comment. It is just too much work, not free speech, and can be abused.

71   Done   2017 Feb 14, 1:36pm  

Just ask the military who are in the ground in part to protect free speech if they think you should CENSOR a
website who claims to be a Free Speech Forum.

72   anonymous   2017 Feb 14, 1:41pm  

So then Graybox, how can Patrick make the homepage capture (and retain) more new users?

73   Done   2017 Feb 14, 1:52pm  

errc says

So then Graybox, how can Patrick make the homepage capture (and retain) more new users?

I don't know plain and simple, but I do believe it's not by censoring a site that claims to be a free speech advocate.

74   Rew   2017 Feb 14, 1:59pm  

Graybox says

censoring a site that claims to be a free speech advocate

www.youtube.com/embed/T3lBaW8VUGQ

Graybox says

You should go back and read your own

And we are learning volumes about you from these current posts. lol

Why isn't Spam all over PNet? FREE SPEECH! OMG! Patrick let the spam in!

LET THE SPAM INNNNNnnnnnnnnn!

75   Done   2017 Feb 14, 2:03pm  

Either Patrick has the balls to keep this a Free Speech forum or he don't...
Very simple....

76   Done   2017 Feb 14, 2:06pm  

Rew says

And we are learning volumes about you from these current posts. lol

You don't come close to understanding...

77   Rew   2017 Feb 14, 2:07pm  

Graybox says

You don't come close to understanding...

I tried to come close to understanding once. Restraining order.

78   Done   2017 Feb 14, 2:16pm  

Ironman says

Why is it this group became such Special Snowflakes and carry on like little children, even though they are on a "FREE SPEECH" forum??

You can't make this shit up.

They bitch but by far and large they are the first to insult....

79   Done   2017 Feb 14, 2:19pm  

None of them self righteous mother fuckers can throw the 1st stone.

80   Done   2017 Feb 14, 2:23pm  

I would love to see "Free Speech Forum" loud and clear at the top and Patrick to honor
that phrase and forget about the censorship for ### bull shit.....

81   Patrick   2017 Feb 14, 2:25pm  

OK, most users will now see an "ad hominem" link after "dislike".

To see and use the link, you need to have a certain minimal reputation on the forum as not a new user and someone with likes.

82   Patrick   2017 Feb 14, 2:31pm  

The rules apply equally to everyone, including myself.

If you have to shit on someone personally, please do it in https://patrick.net/1302979/2017-02-14-thunderdome-thread-insult-other-patrick-net-users-with-impunity-here

83   Rew   2017 Feb 14, 2:32pm  

rando says

To see and use the link, you need to have a certain minimal reputation on the forum as not a new user and someone with likes.

And that was the day Patrick armed the community of irrational knuckle draggers with the ability to self police. Since no quality or civility really existed many used their new found powers in vengeance. PNet became a blank page, for one to stare at, and contemplate one's life. (Or at least how they waste time on the internet.)

Seriously, I just made a post that said "you racists f* ..." disappear. Where did it go? LOL.

84   Done   2017 Feb 14, 2:33pm  

Ironman says

rando says

OK, most users will now see an "ad hominem" link after "dislike".

Catering to the "minority" instead of the "majority" again.

Got to have them ###'s at all cost.... Even Freedom of speech and it won't help a bit.
Take down the "Free Speech Forum" text....

85   Patrick   2017 Feb 14, 2:38pm  

You're still free to make any point you want. Even extremely politically incorrect points.

You're even free to directly insult other users in the thunderdome thread. Or threads. Hell, new rule: any post with "thunderdome" in the title will allow direct insults.

But you're right, now there is a restriction on attacking the person instead of the point in all other threads. So you're slightly less free here.

It seems like a valid tradeoff, hopefully will contribute to higher-quality discussion, and more users, yes.

86   Rew   2017 Feb 14, 2:41pm  

rando says

A native descent muslim? What did you shoot forth from the prophet himself? LOL

Can you contest a post flagged as ad-hom?
Some Pnet users are about to test you on this. (see vocal opponents above, and "the usual suspects" ... as ... lol ... the usual suspects.)

87   Patrick   2017 Feb 14, 2:43pm  

Rew says

Seriously, I just made a post that said "you racists f* ..." disappear. Where did it go? LOL.

It went into moderation, I got notified, decided that yes "you racist fuck" is in fact attacking the person and not the point, and I deleted it.

If it were not a true ad hominem attack, I'd approve the comment and it would go right back where it was. That would reduce your credibility in the future.

Rew says

Can you contest a post flagged as ad-hom?

No need. I'll see it in the moderation queue, and as the local emperor-god, will make a determination.

Either I'll approve it to put it back and be more skeptical of that flagger's judgement, or I'll delete it and give the flagger mental credit for being correct.

88   Done   2017 Feb 14, 2:47pm  

Freedom Of Speech... What a lie

89   Rew   2017 Feb 14, 3:07pm  

rando says

No need. I'll see them in the moderation queue, and as the local emperor-god, will make a determination.

Will use sparingly. Sounds reasonable, oh keeper of the way, Patrick.

That said, I think it pays to wear your "ignores" and "your ad-hom score" right on your user line. Patrick, you have a community with no real incentive in civil discourse right now. I'm not interested in handle hoping, hiding, or trying to worm out from under my credibility or mistakes.

You are HARBORING TROLLS! DEPORT THEM or let me see them for what they are. :)

I miss the good old days of being able to see what an ass some people had made of themselves. As a new user, finding my way, it was instructive in making choices about who to interact with, and what to put any sort of faith/effort in discussing. That took over a year, back in the housing bubble days, to sort lunacy from value.

« First        Comments 50 - 89 of 158       Last »     Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions