SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Recently, I have been using Fullstory to view how my visitors behave on my landing page - and boy does it make a huge difference when that visitor comes from Google or Facebook ads.
Regular visitors from an email that I send out, or from a mailing list, reddit, forums, among others - actually read the content on the landing page. You can see the mouse move across the text as they read in some instances. You can see how they scroll, the breaks they take to digest. Though the clip is 3X faster than usual, below you can see how the scrolling and mouse movements make sense. [Ed. note: Clips are on source page.]
This visitor is very different - it feels like its a paid slave somewhere, or a bot that has clumsy intelligence, or a person that does not read. The mouse rarely moves, it does scroll - though mostly in one direction, and the pace is as if the visitor is not reading the content. Mobile users just scroll and scroll until the bottom and then they leave.
As a result I have stopped all my Google and Facebook campaigns and have focused on growing the service more organically via social sharing and friends. Has anyone else experienced this as well? I'd be happy to share videos or more details, but the difference is clearly noticeable. I'd be interested to see if Fullstory has any high-level analysis of this or if they can verify this behavior.
[...] I am not sure if this is true, but does anyone else experience very, very, very, different click-through and conversion rates on Google and Facebook relative to other organic means?
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 3, Informative) by canopic jug on Wednesday January 18 2017, @06:26PM
A good demo of some of the javascript tracking that is possible is found at clickclickclick.click [clickclickclick.click]. It obviously needs javascript for the demo and works best with the sound on.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Wednesday January 18 2017, @07:37PM
Interesting but I smell fertilizer. Some things worked, but most of it seemed canned, did not actually follow what I did with mouse, etc., or was very slow. It's a little entertaining.
On Old Opera (11.xx) nothing happens, even with javascript on, and looking at "view source" it did not pull in any of the external scripts, which is why I will continue to use Old Opera for most web browsing.
Old Opera has per-site control, including complete blocking, cookies both 1st and 3rd party, javascript, style sheets, etc. I've never understood why it did not catch on with 99% of the tech community.
(Score: 3, Funny) by jdavidb on Wednesday January 18 2017, @08:04PM
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 3, Touché) by RS3 on Wednesday January 18 2017, @08:47PM
ASCII Art!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 18 2017, @09:25PM
Old Opera died because it was inflexible. It had excellent ideas, but the few annoyances couldn't be removed. Meanwhile, Phoenix/Firefox was barely serviceable, but extremely flexible due to the ability to use addons. In very short order, users learned that Opera was by far superior to bare Firefox, but that with a bit of effort, Firefox could be tweaked almost perfectly to your own personal liking (even if it took three dozen addons to do it).
Once all the tabbed-browsing addons hit Firefox, I switched over to it and never looked back. (Well, until the devs went insane, but now there's Pale Moon [palemoon.org]...)