zlacker

Sounds like they take it more serious than Google does likes on Youtube. A competitor had a video that rapidly had over 100k likes - but if you looked at the total time played, each view averaged to just a couple of seconds on a video over 10 minutes. Reported it, but nothing came of it. (No, not something we regularly do. I think it may be the only video I've ever reported; just want a fair playing field)

>>bdcrav+(OP)
youtube competitor. that's just funny to me. kind of even comes across as petty. you took however much time to investigate average viewed time of a competitor and then cried to daddy about the perceived slight in "advantage" instead of taking that time to improve your competing product to make it better.

>>dylan6+41
Umm…

I think you have it backwards, the other video was using fake likes to avoid having to improve their quality to get an equal number of eyeballs.

>>bdcrav+(OP)
> if you looked at the total time played, each view averaged to just a couple of seconds on a video over 10 minutes.

That makes no sense to me. Speaking as someone who has been using YouTube Data API v3 and YouTube Analytics API v2 for many years, estimated minutes watched of a video shouldn’t be public info. So how can you “look at the total time played” on a competitor’s video?

>>dylan6+41
No, we had someone show up out the blue, with no established presence in the space, with a video with hundreds of thousands of views. Was curious how they were so viral so fast.

Overall, it's bad for everyone if someone can create fraudulent views: us, other companies, and most importantly, consumers.

> taking that time to improve your competing product to make it better.

Took less than 3 minutes to do the math and send the report. I'm a fast developer, but I can't improve our product that fast :-)

>>oefrha+Lk
Been a few years; I don't recall the how. Maybe I'm thinking of a different platform?

>>UncleE+Q2
Truth rises to the occasion. All these years later, they're sitting at 2.3 stars on Google, even though they charge less, and we are sitting on 5 :-)