News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why it took a long time to build the tiny link preview on... by panic on Monday April 23, 2018 @05:32AM (#16901873)
> Uhm, no. It just means that people are hovering over links with their mouse. It does not imply any opinion about the previews.

When you evaluate features using engagement metrics, there are only two possibilities. If the metric is high, users love the feature. If the metric is low, users don't know the feature exists, and more alerts or "unread" badges must be added to help them learn.

Re:Why it took a long time to build the tiny link preview on... by samjbobb on Monday April 23, 2018 @09:32AM (#16903218)
Linked from the article is the final A/B test they ran: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Page_Previews/2017-18_A/B_Tes...

They had better metrics than just number of API requests

Re:Why it took a long time to build the tiny link preview on... by mappu on Monday April 23, 2018 @05:41AM (#16901904)
Alternatively, if it's a feature you don't like:

If the metric is high, users are spending too much time on it. Also, it is responsible for every single frustration that users have with your product.

If the metric is low, the feature can be safely removed (see: Windows Start menu).

Re:Why it took a long time to build the tiny link preview on... by chiefalchemist on Monday April 23, 2018 @08:00AM (#16902599)
Yeah. Time on site, for example, might mean they can't find what they need; as opposed to getting what they need and staying for more.

Numbers are helpful, but sometimes they can be misinterpreted to mask the why.

Re:Why it took a long time to build the tiny link preview on... by megaman22 on Monday April 23, 2018 @07:08AM (#16902280)
> If the metric is low, the feature can be safely removed (see: Windows Start menu).

That turned out really well...

Whoever is responsible for putting the touch start screen on Windows Server is responsible for 90% of my frustrations...

Re:Why it took a long time to build the tiny link preview on... by brazzledazzle on Monday April 23, 2018 @09:39AM (#16903278)
The best way to run Windows Server is without a desktop installed, using PowerShell to manage it. Even one-offs. You might know this but it’s worth saying just in case. Also worth noting that some server applications assume/require a desktop during install or operation (usually because they’re trash).
Re:Why it took a long time to build the tiny link preview on... by iofiiiiiiiii on Monday April 23, 2018 @06:02AM (#16901991)
But when the feature only needs you to hover over a link to activate (which people do anyway) you have no basis to claim that this is users "liking" the feature - it might just be noise from everyday regular navigation.
Re:Why it took a long time to build the tiny link preview on... by teddyuk on Monday April 23, 2018 @06:43AM (#16902157)
i was using wikipedia to with my son yesterday for a project and found it really annoying, so i'm in that list of people who hit the api but aren't in the list of people who seem to be "liking it"
Re:Why it took a long time to build the tiny link preview on... by majewsky on Monday April 23, 2018 @05:39AM (#16901894)
My point is that the metric is bad.
Re:Why it took a long time to build the tiny link preview on... by dmitriid on Monday April 23, 2018 @05:45AM (#16901919)
> When you evaluate features using engagement metrics

No-no-no. Stop right there. "Engagement metrics" are the worst kind of metrics. Engagement means next to nothing. It just means that a user interacted with something. Was it good? Was it bad? Was it intentional? Was it by mistake? "Engagement metrics" answer none of that.

And yet... They are the easiest metrics to collect and too many companies use them as if they were meaningful.

Re:Why it took a long time to build the tiny link preview on... by notriddle on Monday April 23, 2018 @09:28AM (#16903198)
I'm case you were curious, WM has done more user testing than just the engagement metrics:

https://m.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Re...

Not sure what it says about them that they're mentioning worthless numbers instead of the way more useful data they got back during this survey.

Re:Why it took a long time to build the tiny link preview on... by mattkrause on Monday April 23, 2018 @08:59AM (#16902982)
If you hadn’t stopped right there, you might have seen the sarcasm in the rest of the post!