Popular Post Titan Arum Posted August 1, 2015 Popular Post Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 (edited) Kipper recently noted that the 17th Shard has over 9000 members...to which Chaos chimed in to say that that number would change if we banned all of the spammers. Well, turns out, there is information on the 17th that leads me to assume that I can calculate the total number of banned Sharders and thus determine the total number of non-banned Sharders. The front page of the forum tells us that we have, as of this writing, 9521 members of the 17th Shard; however if you look at the data behind the "Overall Top Posters", we only have 7606 members, including those who have never posted before. Thus, we have a grand total of 1915 banned users. The following pie chart shows this break down in percentages: Percent of Banned Users This chart implies that our mods here at the 17th deserve a HUGE shout out for the work that they do on our behalf. If we assume that the vast majority of these banned users are spammers and that each of these spammers have created at least 2 spam threads…then our mods are working tirelessly to ensure that our corner of the internet is extremely user friendly for active users. So: With that said, the sort/search function within the “Overall Top Posters” is actually quite rich, and as a result I am able to determine even more user statistics. Of the 7606 non-banned users, 49.6% have NEVER posted a topic. That means that roughly half of our users are lurkers!o Lurkers who see this, please feel free to contribute to the community, or at least introduce yourselves! We don’t bite, but some of us do spike a lot. Since WOR was released, 56.1% of our user base, or 4265 users, have been active on the 17tho Active is defined as simply logging on and viewing the forum o Thus 43.9% of users have not been active or could have abandoned the 17th Shard since the release of arguably Brandon’s biggest book to date! o 36.5% of Sharders have posted at least 1 time somewhere on the forum since WOR was released In 2015, only 1887 users have been active on the 17tho Roughly only 24.8% of our total user base o 17.1% of Sharders have posted at least 1 time in 2015 During the month of July, 2015 only 737 Sharders were activeo This is roughly 9.7% of or total user base o Of these active users, 519 have made at least 1 post, or roughly 6.8% of our user base [Note: While I wrote this, we had two new Spammers join the 17th! This means we’ll get to increase the percent of banned Sharders soon!] Edited August 1, 2015 by Titan Arum 18 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curious Anamaximder Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 This is so cool! Upvotes to you! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kestrel Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 Honestly, I think this is pretty awesome, especially the banned user statistics. Most are probably bots too. Compared to the other forums I've been on, that's amazing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxal Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 Wow this is great. It would be interesting to define different level of active during a given time frame... One post is not what I would qualify a significant contribution... How about trying to partake those who are one time posters and those who actively post on the forum? I'd be curious to read the statistic for this... I keep seeing the same names on the forum. I wager the active poster base is quite smaller. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titan Arum Posted August 2, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 2, 2015 Wow this is great. It would be interesting to define different level of active during a given time frame... One post is not what I would qualify a significant contribution... How about trying to partake those who are one time posters and those who actively post on the forum? I'd be curious to read the statistic for this... I keep seeing the same names on the forum. I wager the active poster base is quite smaller. Thanks for the feedback maxal! The reason why I chose 1 post as a form of activity other than viewing the forum is because any number greater than 1 is arbitrary. Who defines what a significant contribution is? As a statistician, anything that deviates from 0 has major implications, hence why I did a simple 0 vs. 1+. I really was interested in the opposite number: the total who didn't post. That says a lot more in my opinion. We more or less know that a very small fraction of users post relatively frequently, but we didn't know what percentage don't post at all. However, it would be very easy for me to go back and do new queries on the data with simple comparisons limited to larger numbers of posts vs. those who post less. But again, it comes back to what number should we consider a significant contribution? Is it 10? 20? 50 a month? Also, I cannot just compare the 1 time posters vs. the multiple posters. The data query search only allows me to specify greater than or less than a certain number of posts. I cannot exclude all the 0 posters. Unless the mods want to provide a spreadsheet of all of the data...then I would be in heaven! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxal Posted August 2, 2015 Report Share Posted August 2, 2015 Thanks for the feedback maxal! The reason why I chose 1 post as a form of activity other than viewing the forum is because any number greater than 1 is arbitrary. Who defines what a significant contribution is? As a statistician, anything that deviates from 0 has major implications, hence why I did a simple 0 vs. 1+. I really was interested in the opposite number: the total who didn't post. That says a lot more in my opinion. We more or less know that a very small fraction of users post relatively frequently, but we didn't know what percentage don't post at all. However, it would be very easy for me to go back and do new queries on the data with simple comparisons limited to larger numbers of posts vs. those who post less. But again, it comes back to what number should we consider a significant contribution? Is it 10? 20? 50 a month? Also, I cannot just compare the 1 time posters vs. the multiple posters. The data query search only allows me to specify greater than or less than a certain number of posts. I cannot exclude all the 0 posters. Unless the mods want to provide a spreadsheet of all of the data...then I would be in heaven! I think you could make a break down, such as those who posted between 1 and 10 posts, between 10 and 25 posts, between 25 and a 100 posts and a 100 and more posts. Of course, the numbers would have to do be adjusted to the time frame under evaluation: if you put up statistic for a month, then you number of posts are different then if you do the same for a year... You could name the categories such as one time posters, occasional posters, average posters, intensive posters or something along those lines. Or you could simply add a line to account for the one time posters, 17.1% of sharders posted once in the month of July. 10.0% of them poster only once or 7.1% poster more than once. Something like that. It would be great to see the great statistic spreadsheet 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
little wilson Posted August 2, 2015 Report Share Posted August 2, 2015 Another thing to consider with collecting the stats past those who've posted once is that high post count doesn't necessarily say that one is a significant contributor, just like a somewhat lower post count doesn't mean that someone is an insignificant contributor. That's all subjective by what we define as significant contributions. For example, the high level posters like Twi and Kobold would obviously fall into the "significant contributions" area, but there are plenty of active posters who may not post frequently, but when they do, they say a lot. Then there are other active posters who post a lot but say very little. So who defines what a "significant contribution" is? And as for getting the stats on that after coming to a definition everyone can agree on.... That would be even more difficult, since to my knowledge, you can't search by post word count, so it would require checking each individual post and marking it as significant or insignificant and that's just unrealistic. I think if you want different stats, you could do them based on forums and what percentage of users frequent certain boards and such. That could be interesting. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxal Posted August 2, 2015 Report Share Posted August 2, 2015 Oh I did not mean to imply individuals with lower posts count cannot be significant contributors, though one could argue you need to post more than once to contribute (one post in a year time frame cannot be accounted as a significant contribution unless it was a hugely memorable post). I simply meant to separate the individuals who posted once then disappear from those who post on a regular basis. Now what defines a regular basis is up for grab, but that's the idea. It is just I have often notice people who would make their first post only to never to be seen again. These should be a category on their own. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.