|The Number of Google + Active Users Is....|
| 4:08 pm on Nov 1, 2013 (gmt 0)|
It's always a topic of discussion: How many users are there of google +
I see people posting to Google+ but I don't see a great deal of interaction, relative to other services.
One way to build users is to push people into G+, and i'm not sure that's the best way. If people are reluctant, they won't use it, but, to use Google's services, if they are being pushed into using it, they may have to accept G+ and use it.
What's your take on G+ activity?
|Since its inception, it has been tough to tell just how well Google’s social network, Google+, is doing. Every time Google+ releases a new set of user number statistics, their accuracy and methods are almost immediately called into question. |
According to information released on Thursday, it seems that skepticism was well warranted. The Number of Google + Active Users Is.... [allthingsd.com]
|“Yes, clicking on the notifications bell does count in our monthly actives metric for the Stream. If you click anywhere which leads to the Stream being loaded and displayed, we count you as viewing the Stream. The Stream is rendered on mobile (Android and iOS), on the Web at plus.google.com, and when you click and open a notification view of the Stream on desktop properties.” |
| 7:48 pm on Nov 1, 2013 (gmt 0)|
I got tricked/forced into signing up to G+ due to my YouTube activity. I don't like it, didn't want it, and don't want to be counted as an active user regardless of what G says. So, I'm not.
| 5:39 am on Nov 4, 2013 (gmt 0)|
Pushing users to G+ may be one of the Google's marketing strategy to get more users to sign up through YouTube or any other site. But I think Google did the right things because authenticity is also something. Earlier the comments on YouTube use to be with a name which may or may not exist, in-fact several comments I have comments I have seen which doesn't have a profile links and so you would never know that who is that. Not just just that earlier YouTube comments can be posted with username, but now real name will be used with your G+ account which is really good.
I think it was important with user authenticity.
@Swanny: I do not know why you don't like g+ but believe me presently it is the social platform I strongly recommend. For me 100 Likes on FaceBook is equal to 10 PlusOnes on Google+. However, that's my personal opinion.
I shall look forward to opinion from other users.
| 2:10 pm on Nov 4, 2013 (gmt 0)|
|Not just just that earlier YouTube comments can be posted with username, but now real name will be used with your G+ account which is really good. |
For many decades in main stream media prior to the arrival of the internet, radio talk shows in particular, it has always been permitted to share opinions anonymously.
That has always worked very well because it allows unpopular views to be expressed without one having to be concerned about backlash from the walking dead.
This is simply another case of google wanting to mould the world according to their needs.
Google Plus is also going to be another case of a misrepresentation of the real number of actual active users versus those who must roll into it due to a need to use one of the many family of services associated with it.
Though I'm not positive I think by association of having a separate WMT account for many of the sites I presently manage I account for about 12 users? Yet, I am neither 12 nor even one.
| 10:11 pm on Nov 11, 2013 (gmt 0)|
Some months ago on my tablet I accidentally somehow clicked a link that took me to a GooglePlus signup page. It had a terms of service with an "I accept" click box at the bottom. I wanted to click "I refuse", but there was no box for that. The only way I could find to escape without signing up was to kill the screen.
| 9:19 am on Nov 12, 2013 (gmt 0)|
I think the way to resolve this issue would be to look at the Twitter/Facebook correlation data. The more popular networks are going to be more likely to have a greater quantity of social shares as a result of higher rankings but are much less likely to influence rankings. If the correlation data for Facebook and/or Twitter is similar, this probably should be rethought.