Evaluating threads without looking at them

[glee]

Thanks to the new format of the board, we can tell not only how many posts have been made, but also how many times the thread's been viewed.

Here is my theory (which is mine):

If there are few posts and few views, you've got a poor thread title.

If there are few posts and many views, you've got a sexy title, but a boring thread.

If there are many posts and few views, you've got a mathematical impossibility (assuming each post counts as a view)

If there are many posts and many views, you've got a winner! *

*these tend to be
1) something we can all contribute to e.g. 'what is the view from your window'
2) something many of us can relate to e.g. 'Guy stuff'
3) listen, if I knew any more reasons, I'd start more threads, OK!

[lswote]

glee said:
If there are many posts and few views, you've got a mathematical impossibility (assuming each post counts as a view)

I am not sure if you post that it counts against the view count. I have not seen anything definative about this. But also any threads started before the converstion to the new format had only a post count and no view count so if they get bumped back into active status this can explain high post, low view counts.

[KP]

Perhaps a high view / low post item means a "boring thread", but sometimes a boring thread is simply one that says it all, so well, that it leaves little more to say, especially since we usually post in spare moments, without time for a thoroughly composed reply. I've seen a few of those in the past while doing research on specific topics

DISCLAIMER: All *my* threads thus far *have* been boring