jump to last post 1-6 of 6 discussions (16 posts)

Idle Status with Hubs

  1. carol7777 profile image85
    carol7777posted 4 years ago

    I have one Idle status for a brand new hub.  It is performing well for two days with lots of comments.  Many of the other hubs are not nearly as successfu. I am wondering why this is happening.

    1. janderson99 profile image87
      janderson99posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      It appears that the "idle" filter incorporates a "quality" filter as well, not just traffic. Every new hub will be examined by the Grim Reaper. I would look at making some changes to see if a kiss from the Prince can awaken the sleeping beauty. I think that the new hopper assessment that was to be applied to every new hub, showcases the assessment even if its done via software. It appears to be error prone - so just may some changes and see what happens.

      1. Hollie Thomas profile image60
        Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I don't think so. One of my hubs which now appears to be on the idle mode (although in reality it has never received any traffic) once had the highest hub score. I suspect it's about how much traffic, or otherwise, the hub receives. Not about the quality.

        1. janderson99 profile image87
          janderson99posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          From the main forum
          "Yes, there is a quality component to this.  Most of that happens during the 24 hr pending period.  You won't necessarily see your Hub in the Z state because we try and be a bit more helpful with new and updated Hubs with the explanations.  This isn't new.  We've been enforcing quality for a long time.  There is more focus on new Hubs now as we get caught up with the backlog."

          1. Hollie Thomas profile image60
            Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            "Yes, there is a quality component to this.

            There might be, but I doubt that it's all encompassing. What HP may have rated as a quality hub is not necessarily what Google has rated as a quality hub. Under the new profiles there is no hot, best or latest anymore. My point being (sorry, a bit long winded) HP now appear to rate a hub as quality or not using organic traffic as the indicator. So, I don't think writers should necessarily feel that there hub is considered sub standard, per se, just that HP are now viewing our work through a Google lens, if that makes sense?

            1. janderson99 profile image87
              janderson99posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              I think the quality score is basic stuff and has a low threshold like the new hopper but done by software. I think it is really designed to say "this hub bub has a chance of being liked and valued out there, and will probably get traffic".

    2. 0
      summerberrieposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      This little guy of mine went to sleep.....


      1. Horatio Plot profile image85
        Horatio Plotposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Me! I want to go prowling!

        1. 0
          summerberrieposted 4 years ago in reply to this


    3. Dale Hyde profile image87
      Dale Hydeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I have searched and found no explanation. Hopefully the "glitches" are worked out once it becomes live tomorrow.

  2. relache profile image88
    relacheposted 4 years ago

    I suggest that since the idle hub feature hasn't actually gone "live" yet and is still just in an informational mode that you wait and see what happens over the next few days.

  3. psycheskinner profile image82
    psycheskinnerposted 4 years ago

    I suspect it sums data over x number of days, and so may under-estimate traffic on new hubs.

  4. 2besure profile image82
    2besureposted 4 years ago

    I have a few stinkers that never got any traffic.  I often unpublish those.  If you have a one year old hub with 160 views, nobody cares.  Dump it and try something else.

    1. paradigmsearch profile image90
      paradigmsearchposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      At which point I then blog mine. Nothing to lose. big_smile

  5. brakel2 profile image87
    brakel2posted 4 years ago via iphone

    I think the important test is quality and at least some traffic. If it has potential, that seems to be the key.

  6. Lisa HW profile image83
    Lisa HWposted 4 years ago

    With 34 Zz's to go by (and compare to 200-plus Hubs that haven't yet been Zz'd), I think I have a rough idea about what I shouldn't do on here any longer....  (I've always known that I shouldn't have been doing some types/styles of Hubs, but the flexibility of the site meant I went ahead and didn't worry a whole lot about how crisp/professional presentation was.)  Hope the following may be a little helpful to someone who only has a couple of Zz's and doesn't have enough to go by, in terms of getting a reading of what gets "Zz'd" (or at least what got Zz'd with the first found of Zz'ing).

    I didn't really do much more than look at the ones that got Zz's and get a feel for what kind they are, but I got - I think - 34 out the 300-plus Hubs I have (published or unpublished).   For now (at least until the Zz's things really gets going), it looks to me very much like past traffic isn't particularly the MAIN factor.  Neither is quality of writing in the Hub, as far as I can see.   I have a couple of decent-quality-writing Hubs that got Zz's, and a bunch of OK-enough-writing (but really "low level" worth, in terms of reading experience) that didn't. 

    The ones I have that got Zz's tend to things people aren't likely to be searching for and/or Hubs that have titles that tend to doom them, traffic-wise.  Most of the Zz'd Hubs deserve it.  A couple that didn't are a matter of not-too-bad reading experience but reflection-type pieces.  I don't know if more Zz's are to come; but oddly, I have three similar reflection-type Hubs - all on season things.  Only one of those got Zz'd (so far).  They're all the same quality of writing.  Oddly, to me, the one that got Zz'd is the one that has the most meaningful writing.  The other two are just "puppy-dogs-and-daisies" type, "Whoopy - it's Spring" type of things.  Another season/holiday one was "meaningful" (and maybe even nice enough), but fairly personal.    So "meaningful" apparently doesn't help some Hubs.   smile

    Of the others, a bunch were Hubs about writing Hubs and writing on the Internet.  They deserved the Zz's, mostly, I think, because they were first-hand observation/experience/concerns type of things; rather than "professional" advice/information. 

    A few others are Hubs I wrote in reply to questions on the "Answers" section.  I wrote them as if I was talking to the person who had the problem/dilemma,and they're very individualized in flavor (even though I've always given it my best shot to include what I think is helpful/legitimate information/insight.  So I won't do that kind of thing any more.  I think they made good enough answers - just bad Hubs.

    Two were attempts at humor.  Some people have said they found them funny.  I think their main problems are a) really bad titles that nobody is ever going to be looking for, and b) they're pure foolishness and not the most crisp form of presentation (humor or not). 

    The majority of Zz'd Hubs have low scores (but a couple don't).  On the whole, and out of mine, it looks like the "reflections-on" type, Hubs-about-Hub-writing, and (particularly) Hubs written as if I was talking to the person who asked the question; were the biggest (or least most immediate) problems. 

    The vast majority of my Hubs don't get a whole lot of traffic on their own in any given month. They just combine with others non-traffic-dynamo Hubs, and any Hubs I have that do a little better with traffic, to make up my monthly earnings.  I don't know if this has anything to do with the Zz's thing or not, but my daily AS earnings have been up a couple of dollars since the Zz's thing happened.