Forum » Feedback and Ideas

What the hell happened to all the shoutboxes?

 
  • ^ This. Especially the signature. Yes.

  • Lol Last.fm hasn't replied yet after we called them out.

    • Smirnon sa...
    • Användare
    • 30 maj 2012, 08:31
    i'm with StarCore on his statement that they're dumbing down the social aspect of this site and seem to put all emphasis on mindless data sharing.

    Couldtryharder said:
    As a significant majority (over 90%) of people visiting these pages don't use the shoutboxes at all, we felt it was justifiable to reduce the number of shouts displayed on the first page.


    proof please as i think this is downright ridiculous. and even of the people who visit artist's shoutboxes yet don't actually drop a shout, then they most certainly check and read the shouts. i can't of course voice for everyone here, but the shoutbox is my main reason for visiting an artist's page.

    i also see plenty of accounts that have been last seen months ago yet still scrobble music. if those are included in those 90% then that little fact of yours should be completely neglected. the shoutboxes are for useful for active lastfm users.

    and agreed that many a shoutbox is littered with repeated comments with a number in brackets at the end. that shit is totally lame indeed, but as previously said toning down to 8 will definitely not improve those little text pests.


    it's a pretty goddamn cheap move to tone the amounts of shouts down without any notice in advance to begin with imo. how about ASKING users on their opinion for some possible changes huh. i'm a subscriber for a good 3 years now i think, send you over 100 bucks. think i got the right to have a say in the matters that affect the social aspects of the site. not saying that every change or adjustment needs to be checked with the masses, but some, like this one, could definitely get some user back-up before it's implemented

    Couldtryharder indeed

    excusez-moi if i sound like an ass, but this change pisses me off.

    anime avatar users fuck off
  • Hello again,

    I think I was clear before, but let me re-state the main points one more time:

    1. We reduced the number of shouts because our tests - with over 20,000 people - showed us that the changes benefits the majority on Last.fm. That's the ~90% of people who don't scroll down to the bottom of shoutboxes, and the ~99% who don't leave shouts. There are tens of millions of these people.

    2. Nobody wants to make Last.fm less social, but we have to consider the needs of everyone who uses the site, and balance them against each other.

    3. We are listening to your comments, but we find real data more convincing than opinions. We are keeping a close eye on shoutboxes, and if there's any evidence that people are actually using them less as a result of the changes, we will reconsider.

    4. Some of you are asking for this to be made a user preference. We would only consider that as a last resort, because of the complexity it creates, but it is something that we might look at if we need to (depending on point 3)

    5. And finally, just to keep some perspective, don't forget that you can always see all the shouts by clicking the "See all shouts" link, or adding +Shoutbox to the artist page URL.

  • "We reduced the number of shouts because our tests - with over 20,000 people - showed us that the changes benefits the majority on Last.fm. That's the ~90% of people who don't scroll down to the bottom of shoutboxes, and the ~99% who don't leave shouts. There are tens of millions of these people."

    I wouldn't say that those 90-99% people are benefeting anything to the site, more then just scrobbling their tracks.

    The only reason some people are upset about this change is because people put alot of time on Lastfm. The more time someone put into this site, the more strongly they feel about it.
    Why not having a site poll? Rather then just picking and asking 20,000 random people.

    "See all shouts" link... Doesn't that make so that it takes even longer loading time for the person wanting to read the shouts? More links to already simple things.

    I can tell you that facebook takes up more loading time than lastfm, and how many users do they have? They make no effort for their low bandwith users. As a person who had to use a really outated PC and internet, thought this was quite irritating. But still Lastfm worked fine.

    Even youtube makes it so everything takes more time and they constantly higher their quality. And what did they do with those who have slow internet or bad computers? They have a lower quality option.

    I really want to speak with those people who claim that this is a big issue for the site. A big problem for something that had already been there in the first place? (Or where the shoutboxes added later? I joined in 2008.)

    "We are keeping a close eye on shoutboxes, and if there's any evidence that people are actually using them less as a result of the changes, we will reconsider."

    But people who don't use them won't care, even if there's less shouts. The people that are already using the shoutboxes will still use them, untill it gets annoying to have to press "see all shouts". And then become a part of the "community" that only use lastfm for the scrobbles... And besides, why would you care if they use them less? You already said that no one practically uses the shoutboxes.

    Thank you for reading my complaints.

  • I guess i'm the 1%. *Sigh*...always the minority. Always.

    • Schander sa...
    • Användare
    • 30 maj 2012, 22:17
    There is no bleeping way, that 90 to 99% OF ALL last.fm users, aren't using the shoutboxes. Even if that WERE true... most of those people that aren't using the shoutboxes, aren't using last.fm for ANYTHING other than scrobbling their music. In other words, we (the ACTUAL ACTIVE CONTRIBUTING USERS) have to suffer from a shoutbox decimation, in order to "improve loading speed", for those 90 to 99% of people, WHO AREN'T USING THE WEBSITE ANYWAY. Since I have yet to hear from anyone who doesn't like this reduction in shouts, but has experienced a drastic boost in loading speed... and is deeming it to be a willing sacrifice.

    Irony? Anyone?

    • snyde1 sa...
    • Abonnent
    • 31 maj 2012, 03:49
    KillerCLbee said:
    I wouldn't say that those 90-99% people are benefeting anything to the site, more then just scrobbling their tracks.
    I think you mean "contributing to the site" - there are a number of ways which people do contribute to the site, not involving shouts: journals; wikis - artist, track, album; groups' forums; central forums; event reviews; ...

    Or contribute to the community without writing on the website at all. Write a browser utility, or a supporting website, or a standalone java program, or a user script or a user style file that helps someone use the site or their personal statistics.

    I'm not sure that a shout carries the same weight as a full event review, or the creation of an artist wiki description, and certainly not the writing of a style file to make the site more readable to someone with limited vision.

    Why not having a site poll? Rather then just picking and asking 20,000 random people. It is not better than your alternative. Internet polls are manipulated all the time. Random questionnaires are more representative, but Last.fm has the real data. They don't need to poll - they see the realtime voting behaviour.

    "See all shouts" link... Doesn't that make so that it takes even longer loading time for the person wanting to read the shouts? ... but shorter times for the people who don't. See next ...

    I can tell you that facebook takes up more loading time than lastfm, and how many users do they have? They make no effort for their low bandwith users. As a person who had to use a really outated PC and internet, thought this was quite irritating. But still Lastfm worked fine.The slow loading is not from bandwidth restrictions - a shout is a small amount of text. However, each shout displayed requires a database lookup, formatting, and so on. It's not a delay on your computer - it's a delay on the Last.fm servers, which are a shared resource. The extra shouts displayed are slowing other people down. Not just you - everyone.

    I really want to speak with those people who claim that this is a big issue for the site. A big problem for something that had already been there in the first place? (Or where the shoutboxes added later? I joined in 2008.)This isn't 2008 - things have changed, the site is more popular, there are competing functions (e.g. which friends have played this artist). The times are changing, and you can't go back.

    Improve your view of Last.fm - add some User Scripts.
    Did I hear that right? Mondegreens - for the misheard word. Like Odds? Can't get better than Even Odds!

    Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to others, even to the dull and the ignorant; they too have their story.
    • [Raderad användare] sa...
    • Användare
    • 31 maj 2012, 13:55
    ^ what he said. This move makes sense. And come on guys, if you WANT to read all the 'in depth discussions' (as if there are any) on shoutboxes, it's just one extra click, which you guys probably did in the end anyway if you really wanted to read all the comments. This frees up space, makes the layout cleaner and the site faster. They have the statistics that are infinitely more reliable than the suggested polls, and just because many people don't use shoutboxes doesn't mean they don't contribute to the site in other ways. I know many people who just avoid the shoutboxes because they hate what goes on in them, much like many people use and contribute to YouTube but ignore and hate the comments section on that.

  • Well I've said my opinions. I think you've misunderstood me snyde1 at some points or I've failed at english, haha. Well some of my questions got kinda answered, but I'm not going to change my mind quite yet.

    "The slow loading is not from bandwidth restrictions - a shout is a small amount of text. However, each shout displayed requires a database lookup, formatting, and so on. It's not a delay on your computer - it's a delay on the Last.fm servers, which are a shared resource. The extra shouts displayed are slowing other people down. Not just you - everyone."

    Well ofcourse. Just saying that if your server can't handle 20 mini-avatars and some text with each avatar. Maybe it's your server that needs updating. Maybe Lastfm staff is running from the problem...

    "... but shorter times for the people who don't."

    That's so unfair >:|

    "I think you mean "contributing to the site" - there are a number of ways which people do contribute to the site, not involving shouts: journals; wikis - artist, track, album; groups' forums; central forums; event reviews; ..."

    I've yet to see a person here that never given a shout and still writes artistwikis, trackwikis, albumwikis, forums and event reviews.

    "This isn't 2008 - things have changed, the site is more popular, there are competing functions (e.g. which friends have played this artist). The times are changing, and you can't go back."

    Ofcourse the site get's more users, but I've never seen or talked to a person on this site going: "Oh I wish that there were less shouts on these pages". I'm just saying that it's always been there, that's all.

    Internet poll thing, you're right on.

    • Smirnon sa...
    • Användare
    • 1 jun 2012, 08:18
    Couldtryharder said:
    Hello again,

    I think I was clear before, but let me re-state the main points one more time:


    yes, very clear! but that doesn't mean i agree with them or shouldn't question them


    1. [...]. There are tens of millions of these people.

    2. Nobody wants to make Last.fm less social, but we have to consider the needs of everyone who uses the site, and balance them against each other.


    pretty sure that 99% of those TENS OF MILLIONS don't have any particular needs to begin with, and especially not toning down the amount of shouts on the frontpage of an artist's shoutbox


    3. We are listening to your comments, but we find real data more convincing than opinions. We are keeping a close eye on shoutboxes, and if there's any evidence that people are actually using them less as a result of the changes, we will reconsider.

    focusing on real data... pretty much what StarCoreA already coined: this site is becoming a soulless data-processing factory. WHAT FUN THAT IS

    anime avatar users fuck off
  • Just chiming in that the reduced number of shouts is inane (for reasons others have mentioned multiple times). In case my voice counts.

    But if you're so concerned about the loading time, I wonder, have you considered cutting some other features?

    For example, videos and news. Those already have a separate tab. I don't see why they need to be on the artist page. (Plus I don't even understand what they're doing on last.fm, since youtube and band's official pages do a much better job.)

    Or am I to understand that since you're cutting the shoutbox, it means that it is the least used of all the "extra" features? If the social aspect of last.fm has dropped so low that no one cares about it anymore, I suppose I understand the cut (but still think it's incredibly dumb).

    • [Raderad användare] sa...
    • Användare
    • 1 jun 2012, 12:09
    The news feeds are useless anyway, since most of them link to myspace accounts that either no longer exist or don't get updated anymore.

  • I have read the staff reasons for the shout reduction, and believe it asinine to expect users to believe that nonsense. Looking forward to the day, when there is a change that can actually be deemed by users as an improvement, and not a further reduction in the site experience.

    • DFA1979 sa...
    • Abonnent
    • 1 jun 2012, 14:17
    Runmaniac said:
    I have read the staff reasons for the shout reduction, and believe it asinine to expect users to believe that nonsense.
    Which part is 'nonsense', exactly?

  • I agree with cutting the 'news' section...that'd cut a chunk out of the loading time, i imagine.

    • [Raderad användare] sa...
    • Användare
    • 1 jun 2012, 22:30

    [spam]

    [spam]

    Redigerad av Babs_05 den 11 aug 2012, 15:43
    • DFA1979 sa...
    • Abonnent
    • 2 jun 2012, 00:17
    Now, I don't have access to their internal code so this could be wrong, but I'd be surprised:

    The video requires one database lookup, not the 40 (now 16) required to get recent shouts and avatars for the users who posted them. Videos aren't served by last.fm, and since they're embedded objects the rest of the page loads around them, rather than waiting for them.

    (I don't think the section's very useful, personally, I'm far more interested in the charts and would rather not see the videos section or at least have it moved lower down where I can more easily ignore it - but it shouldn't have anywhere near the effect on page loading times that you might naively assume on the basis that 'videos are big files')

    • [Raderad användare] sa...
    • Användare
    • 7 jun 2012, 12:46
    They aren't interested in discussing this further then, obviously.

    • Babs_05 sa...
    • Moderator
    • 7 jun 2012, 15:46
    4 day Diamond Jubilee weekend. The office was closed.

  • Hello Everyone

    Yep, we had a four-day weekend here in the UK (thanks Babs_05), and since we've been back things have been a bit hectic (have you changed your passwords yet? Good, thanks). However, I promised to report back when we could see the effects of the shoutbox changes we made on 21 May.

    We've now got two weeks of data, and I'm happy to report that there's no indication that people are posting fewer shouts. In fact, on events pages, more shouts were posted last week than in any of the past six weeks (as a percentage of people who visited the page). On artist pages the picture is not so clear, but the number of shouts left last week was the same as the week of 7-13 May, before we made the change.

    These figures vary quite a lot week-on-week so it's not always easy to spot patterns straight away. I will continue to check the data until I'm 100% confident in the result, and I'll report back from time to time. As I've said before, if there's any indication that people are using shoutboxes less, we'll reconsider the change.

    We did of course consider cutting other elements from the page, and we have removed a few things, mostly from the logged-out version of the page. But we didn't approach this by weighing up different changes against each other - we made as many improvements as we could, and considered each one on its own merits.

    We know that the News section isn't always very useful at the moment, and we've done some work to get rid of out of date items, while keeping the option to show news that's current and useful. That should be released any day now.

    Some of you are saying you don't care about video, but we know videos are popular with a lot of people. Video pages are our eighth most-visited page type. The intention behind the new video section is to make high-quality videos more accessible, when they're available. We think this is an improvement on how things were done before.

    Regarding the speculation and discussion about page load times, I'm not an expert on this side of things, but DFA1979 and snyde1 have explained things pretty well. The only thing they didn't mention is that we have different ways of storing and retrieving data, which make some things quicker to load than others. Unfortunately, at the moment, shoutboxes are one of the things that are slow to load.

    Finally, some of you are saying that we shouldn't care about people with low bandwidth, or about the 90-99% who don't use shoutboxes. I'm afraid I have to flat-out disagree with you there. Obviously, we value the contribution made by loyal users like yourselves, who post shouts and edit wikis, and put in so much energy and effort to help keep Last.fm going. You are what makes Last.fm special, and we would not survive without you. But we are a global service with millions of users, and we have a responsibility to make the site work as well as we can for everyone. As I've said before, this sometimes means we have to make difficult choices.

    Thank you for reading, if you've got this far, and thanks for caring about Last.fm.

  • Thank you for replying, i am glad you'll continue to monitor the data...some sites wouldn't even bother to do that. I appreciate that, i appreciate you and the work Last.fm does.
    Please, please, please don't rid us of shoutboxes completely...but otherwise, thank you for at least listening.

    • [Raderad användare] sa...
    • Användare
    • 13 jul 2012, 13:01
    Most of the shoutboxes I used to read have died a death. I'm sure your data won't back that up, though.

    • boomman sa...
    • Användare
    • 15 aug 2012, 13:14
    @Staff
    What do you mean by "Use shoutbox"?
    Is it only "post shout"?
    So if I don't feel the need to write another message like "IT'S A SUPER TRACK" because shoutbox already has a hundred of them, then I "don't use" shoutbox?

    What about people like me that just like to see that there are people loving a track as much as they do?
    Just wanted to make that clear, is the amount of shoutbox spamming the only point of data that lead you to make this change?

    I think you'd rather consider moving that huge "Listening trend" section back to the right column, as it contains redundant and unhelpful information.

Anonyma användare kan inte skriva inlägg. Vänligen logga in eller skapa ett konto för att göra inlägg i forumen.