Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Do we really want better stats?
Better Adsense stats sound like a no brainer, but is it?
Sure having stats available on a per site basis would be nice, and from what I've read here that's probably something we'll get sooner or later.
But anything beyond that may have some negatives associated with it that will eventually affect all publishers, some more than others.
It seems to me that about the last thing we really need is per page stats. I think that's just asking for trouble.
My guess is that with-in minutes of page stats being available Adsense abusers would have their automated systems changing page content on-the-fly to reap greater payouts.
To think Google, and advertisers, would not react negatively to this is wishful thinking at best.
Maybe Google will begin to review pages that are frequently, or dramatically, changed to help detect and prevent abuse. Since Google seems to like automated systems, that review may become automated as well.
Automating the review/abuse system could lead to a good number of innocent webmasters getting penalized by mistake. That's just a function of trying to automate a one-size-fits-all policy.
High quality advertisers are likely to react by opting out of content syndication if they percieve the system is being abused to their disadvantage.
It's apparently true (see the adsense stats scripts posted about in this forum) that their are other ways to achieve better stats than Google supplies at the moment. And it seems that Google doesn't object to at least some of these methods.
I'm sure no one here would want to abuse the system, but it's fairly safe to assume that if the scripts posted on this forum could be built by members here, others with perhaps less noble intent could build them too.
So I suppose it's likely that someone somewhere could already be manipulating the system through stats analysis to their advantage.
Do we really want Google to make it easier?
Stats per site, yes.
Beyond that, I'm not sure.
I'm not even sure that they shouldn't cut back on publishing our stats to one time per day. Hey, that would at least give some of us more time to actually work on our sites more.
Statistics by site would be a great addition, however.
By page would be very useful for some. Better to have the option, I say.
I agree with you, but how do you put the genie back in the bottle?
I agree with you, but how do you put the genie back in the bottle?
I'm not sure. Maybe not opening the bottle to much farther is the best we can hope for at this point.
If stats per page are provided, we need the ability to summarize by site if we so desire. Some sites have so many pages, it would severely clutter the reports.
How come everything suddenly comes up to date at midnight PST after the delays during the day?
<conspiracy theory>Are the stats delays introduced intentionally?</conspiracy theory>
...or has no-one else noticed this?
[edited by: shakers at 9:10 am (utc) on Mar. 16, 2004]
How come everything suddenly comes up to date at midnight PST after the delays during the day?
Even though the date of the next day is displayed, doesn't mean the reports are completely updated for the day before. I use some Excel statistics to keep track of my earnings, so I noticed that final earnings for a day display when the first impressions are registered for the next day, and not when the date for the next day is displayed.
hope that makes sense ;-)
I noticed that final earnings for a day display when the first impressions are registered for the next day, and not when the date for the next day is displayed
Certainly makes sense, I've just never noticed that there's any difference between the final figure for the day and the next day's appearing.
Either it's only pennies and I've overlooked them, or I'm too pleased to see the next day's figures appearing I've not noticed! :)
Site stats and update daily would be fine by me. I spend way too much time checking Adense stats as it is.
BZ
I agree, that per page stats might lead to an abuse of site optimisation to increase revenue.
Why abuse? There are perfectly legitmate ways in which being able to analyse how different pages perform can help drive up revenue generated.
There are perfectly legitmate ways in which being able to analyse how different pages perform can help drive up revenue generated.
There may be legimate uses for per page stats.
That doesn't mean there won't be those who will abuse the option if it is a readily available.
And abuse of the system negatively affects all publishers. So why open the system up to wider abuse.
With the current "add-sites-at-will" policy of Adsense the system is ripe for abuse as it is.
Adding per page stats without tightening or eliminating the ability to add sites at will is just asking for trouble.
I do support eliminating the "add-sites-at-will" policy. Every site should be reviewed by Google before the publisher is allowed to place Adsense on the site.
Should we then say AdSense shouldn't be available to anyone because there are those that will abuse the system?
I don't see the logic.
With the current "add-sites-at-will" policy of Adsense the system is ripe for abuse as it is.
Maybe ripe is a bit strong for me, I would use "open for abuse", but so are most businesses. It is how you keep the abusers from taking over the network that hurts the most.
Sure, it's nice to think we shouldn't need them.
But we do it anyhow, as a safeguard.
Whether Google provides those stats or not, access to the information, and the ability to exploit it already exists.
<conspiracy theory>Are the stats delays introduced intentionally?</conspiracy theory>
I think Google are onto me ... it's now 16:20 GMT and yesterday's totals are still updating!
It's not exactly the same thing, of course, but to say that Google shouldn't disclose more detailed stats because that would give some abusers more tools to commit abuse is like saying that software developers shouldn't open the source code because then malicious people can find and exploit the bugs.
My general feeling is that whether you open the code (or give out the information) or not, someone's probably going to figure it out anyway, so why not go ahead and give it out?
I don't want to start a debate over disclosure (or not) of proprietary and trade secret information, and I'm definitely not trying to say that Google should disclose everything about everything. I guess I'm just trying to say that on the one point of detailed reporting leading to possible abuse, the cat's kind of out of the bag with some of the third-party tools.
Definitely a tricky question, though. I would love more detailed (by domain or even by page) stats, but I can also see the potential for the whole thing going south very quickly.
JK
GoogleGuy
In my own personal view--note me distancing this post from being official ;)--security through obscurity is a bad idea.
...
My takehome message is: Security through obscurity == bad.
