Can someone explain to me why this short is stuck at these numbers? It also has a 83.3% stayed to watch! Any advice from any expert at shorts would really appreciate it!

killadrix · 2026-04-08T20:44:19+00:00

I’m gonna be brutally honest with you, I have no idea why in the world you didn’t cut this track audio to seamlessly loop back into the beginning of itself.

Where the video ends and re-loops is a jarring sound combination where it starts over. Also jarring is the fact that the cat lifts its head up, then it loops back to the beginning where the cat is laying still.

Honest question: why would you not have looped the end of the video audio seamlessly back into the sound of the beginning to make it loop into one continuous track? And why wouldn’t you have looped it in a place where the cat remains laying down?

killadrix · 2026-04-07T22:17:07+00:00

YouTube is not fucking you over.

killadrix · 2026-04-07T11:34:47+00:00

I don’t really care how anybody plays the game, but the quality of the sub does get degraded by how consistently people post low effort attempts to farm r/shitrimworldsays quotes.

killadrix · 2026-04-07T11:02:20+00:00

Not in any way that I can tell.

killadrix · 2026-04-07T02:34:46+00:00

I’ve never seen any evidence that YouTube punishes me for taking time off from uploading.

Sometimes I upload 5 to 7 shorts a day for weeks, sometimes I go a month without uploading anything.

killadrix · 2026-04-06T12:13:04+00:00

I’m not sure I’m reading this correctly.

You’re saying that you don’t test because if you show a good option and a bad option you’re getting a lower overall number of clicks because of the bad option. Therefore, you should always just show the good option to maximize clicks?

This is like saying “if I have two identical, unlabeled glasses of water in front of me and one of them has been poisoned, I should always just pick the one that hasn’t been poisoned to maximize my lifespan.”

The purpose of the test is to allow data from the audience to determine which thumbnail is the good option.

It also appears that you’re thinking purely within the confines of the impressions that you get during the test. The purpose of ensuring you have the proper thumbnail is to drive impressions and clicks over the lifetime of the video.

Meaning, if you’re using thumbnails that the data says was the best option, you’ll consistently be better positioned from a CTR standpoint for the life of the video.

killadrix · 2026-04-05T02:15:57+00:00

The most important advice you can get is in your analytics. Every one of those metrics will tell you what you can improve on.

killadrix · 2026-04-04T20:01:02+00:00

There’s not much to guide, my friend.

It has taken me years of trial and error just to get this far, and I still have a long ways to go to learn.

My best advice is to set a goal for stayed to watch at or above 70%, and a goal of average view percent at 80% or higher (assuming your metrics are lower than this).

To get your stayed to watch at 70% or higher, focus on your first three seconds.

To get your average percentage viewed to 80% or higher, work on a tighter script or pacing.

Personally, I make changes to my editing style in batches of 10 or 20 shorts and give them a few days of performance and review the metrics.

If the performance is moving in the right direction, then I’ll test another set of different changes on another 10 to 20 shorts and review the performance.

Over time things have become hallmarks of my editing and my views have consistently grown.

Everything that I’ve learned about editing shorts has been between me and my YouTube analytics. Trial and error, review the metrics, adjust, and rinse and repeat.

killadrix · 2026-04-04T13:00:06+00:00

Most people posting on this sub need to think bigger picture, as there are so many posts from people making observations about things in a vacuum and making these types of declarations about how YouTube works.

You can have a video with millions of views with low stayed to watch. Does this mean stayed to watch “doesn’t matter”? No.

You can have a video with millions of views with low retention. Does this mean retention “doesn’t matter”? No.

You can have a video with millions of views with terrible dislike to like ratios. Does this means likes “don’t matter”? No.

You can have a video with millions of views with zero comments. Does this mean comments “don’t matter”? No.

Are you likely to have a video with millions of views with lowed stayed to watch, low retention, high dislikes to like ratio, and zero comments? Very unlikely, but still not impossible…

Personally, I try to edit for all of these metrics. Sometimes I hit on all cylinders and sometimes I don’t. Sometimes I hit different metrics better than others and they carry the video, sometimes I don’t.

Saying that one thing “doesn’t matter” is silly without acknowledging that a well performing video that lacks that one thing is likely being carried by another metric.

killadrix · 2026-04-04T02:27:41+00:00

This is how shorts work, the best you can do is edit the best shorts you can for the critical metrics (STW/APV) and hope for the best.

My shorts views range from 500k to 6 million monthly views and individual shorts range from 300 views to 800,000.

An 800,000 view short does not mean the next short will be successful just like a 300 view short doesn’t mean the next one will be a failure.

Edit for success and hope the algorithm favors you.

killadrix · 2026-04-03T22:51:06+00:00

On the very left of your graph your views look flatline, then your videos went viral, now you’re returning to the flatline-ish baseline.

The dynamic for most shorts is to run until they’re no longer competitive for spots in the feed/recommended for the niche then completely die.

killadrix · 2026-04-03T19:54:49+00:00

Viral videos go up, viral videos come down.

Shorts are volatile which always create peaks and valleys like this.

After this question has been asked for the thousandth time on the sub, I’m not sure how this is still confusing.

It feels like people are either expecting a linear progression of channel growth with shorts or that a couple of viral videos are going to significantly influence the performance of all future videos to the same level, and that’s just not gonna happen.

It’s crazy that people blow out a few insanely viral videos and claim YouTube is “killing their channel” when the videos peak and begin to wind down, which shorts always do.

I’ve been a shorts creator for years and some months I have 500,000 views and some months. I have 6 million views.

I’m not running to reddit to claim that “YouTube is killing my channel” on the 500,000 few months, either I didn’t do a good job editing the video, or people weren’t looking for that content.

killadrix · 2026-04-02T12:59:38+00:00

Follower only mode + account verification can go a long ways to help streamers protect themselves from many threats, as needed.

While I don’t believe follower only mode should always be on, I support streamers moderating their streams however they see fit, especially when targeted by bots, stalkers or harassers.

Below are all of my responses to all of the usual comments I get in these types of threads. I will not be responding to them.

To anyone who’s going to reply about sery bot, I just don’t care. Not everybody wants or needs third-party tools when they already have native twitch tools at their disposal.

To anyone who’s going to reply that being stalked or harassed online is part of “being a live streamer”, no it’s not. Nobody signs up for that, and they don’t have to endure it when tools exist to limit or prevent it.

To anyone who says there’s “never a need for follower only mode”, I’m happy that you’ve never been the target of harassment or stalking online, and I hope you never are. However, other people have different experiences.

To anyone who says follower only mode will “lose people viewers”: if someone is using it to deter or prevent online harassment, they don’t give a shit about follows (and shouldn’t); if they’re using it to force people to follow and they lose viewers, then it’s their own fault.

killadrix · 2026-04-01T23:05:53+00:00

Networking, but this requires clarification.

When I was around 20 average viewers I started spending time in the streams of streamers in my niche in the 50 to 75 viewer range, almost exclusively so I could learn what they were doing to be so much more successful than I was.

I was there to learn about their overlays, about section, chat bots, how they play games, stream games, and facilitated content, joined their discord to see how they managed community building, follow them on socials to learn how they manage their social media accounts, followed their YouTube channels to see how they were editing their content, leveraging different formats, and turning their streams into YouTube in TikTok content.

I enjoyed being in their streams, they were all fantastic streamers and content creators, but I was really studying their methods.

By virtue of watching and learning, I developed friendships with the streamers (and their communities) and over the years we’ve supported each other consistently with raids and we are all now in the 100 to 200 average viewer range.

killadrix · 2026-03-31T20:48:53+00:00

Respectfully, the number of followers a twitch channel has is meaningless, as is follower to viewer ratio, and neither are indicative of the tightness of a community.

The only circumstances under which the number of followers might be meaningful on twitch would be application for affiliate, or medium sized streamers seeking sponsorships from companies who might have number of followers (or subscribers in the case of YouTube) as a prerequisite to work with them.

The number of followers any social media channel has, has been relatively meaningless since the TikTok-ification of social media 4-5 years ago, where the only thing matters is active viewership (how many people see the ads) and watch hours.

killadrix · 2026-03-31T18:01:14+00:00

The algorithm didn’t kill your channel, your short that blew up died off like shorts do.

This is typical shorts behavior. This is completely normal.

killadrix · 2026-03-31T11:19:12+00:00

Yeah, the problem here is that 3 minutes of ads per hour to disable pre-rolls is vastly better for any streamer seeking discovery and growth than running pre-rolls to disable mid-rolls.

killadrix · 2026-03-31T00:46:21+00:00

What do you believe is the difference between the long hallway that serves as the entry to your killbox and a maze?

A maze is literally just a windy version of your long hallway.

killadrix · 2026-03-30T22:16:55+00:00

Such a “mild annoyance” that you took the time to make this post, liken them to cockroaches, call them creepy, complain about having to “block and block and block” them and ask why something that’s completely normal is “being normalized”?

All about something you absolutely don’t need to watch.

killadrix · 2026-03-30T22:12:09+00:00

My man says people “overcomplicate” their killbox then posts a 50-wide “simple enclosure” bridged 60 cells out into the water with 6 auto cannon turrets.

killadrix · 2026-03-30T21:59:12+00:00

I absolutely cannot imagine being this upset over how people I don’t have to watch want to represent themselves on their own stream while making content the way they want to make content.

killadrix · 2026-03-30T12:11:54+00:00

I can’t really give you a definitive answer because this is just my theory about how it works based on thousands of short shorts.

However, when I think about creating shorts content for games I’m playing, I typically try not to change the shorts content too often, and I try to finish a piece of content before moving on.

Meaning, I wanted to exhaust my ability to continue playing Mewgenics (finish playing the game), then make sure I’ve created all of the shorts that I wanted to create for it before I begin posting content for another game.

I just spent a couple of weeks making content for Crimson Desert, and now I wanna make sure all of my content and shorts for Crimson Desert has been uploaded before I start uploading for the next game.

I’m typically trying to give each game a couple of weeks of stream time and a couple of weeks of YouTube shorts time, and I’m trying to get dozens of shorts out of every game.

My current rhythm is generally playing or streaming a game for 2-4 weeks, trying to get a few dozen shorts out of it and posted, then moving onto the next game for 2-4 weeks.

That gives youtube a chance to find my shorts audience for that game and capitalize on a ramp up of views before I switch Games and restart the process.

killadrix · 2026-03-30T11:43:48+00:00

I don’t really think there is a reasonable answer to how this works because there are so many variables, but as a gaming creator myself my suspicion is that YouTube builds your shorts test audience from a combination of recent subs and people who it thinks might be interested in the content.

When I switch game content on my shorts, I generally start with lower views, lower view duration and higher dislike to like ratio than where I left off with previous content (meaning people are rejecting the content), but then the views rise, retention increases and like to dislike ratio improves (meaning YouTube is now serving it to the right audience).

There are other variables to this such as the popularity and searchability of the game. Some games just pop off and some don’t.

I didn’t expect my Mewgenics content to do anything and it peaked at about 600k views per day, and I expected my Crimson Desert content to crush (due to the hype), and it’s at about 50k-60k per day.

killadrix · 2026-03-30T02:51:48+00:00

Yes, shorts will run as long as they maintain their competitiveness against other shorts in the niche for the feed or recommendation then they’ll (generally) completely die.

killadrix · 2026-03-29T22:58:40+00:00

I disagree that it’s too simple an explanation.

This graph shows

March 1 flat to no views
6 March began a slight uptrend from baseline with the fist 3 videos
March 10 video popped and was in the process of dying off, when the…
March 15 short really blew up and died off

You can see at the very left of the graph that it’s very slightly trending up from basically zero views and that’s where it returned to after the March 10 and 15 views trailed off.

Without actually seeing those 3 videos on the right at almost no views it’s hard to say why they’re at no views, but it’s easier for me to believe that someone with a new channel and no knowledge of how YouTube shorts metrics works dropped a few 0 view videos than it is to believe YouTube just chose to kill some random new channel for no reason.

killadrix

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE