Jᴀᴄᴜʀᴜᴛᴜ - Tʜᴇ Cᴀsᴛ Oᴜᴛ

A Thing of Eternity wrote:WE BEAT THEM SO FAR FOR NEW MEMBERS, they have only 23 new members.

Yes, but how many of those 23 are actually sockies?

SandChigger wrote:

A Thing of Eternity wrote:WE BEAT THEM SO FAR FOR NEW MEMBERS, they have only 23 new members.

Yes, but how many of those 23 are actually sockies?

At least more than one.

SandChigger wrote:

A Thing of Eternity wrote:WE BEAT THEM SO FAR FOR NEW MEMBERS, they have only 23 new members.

Yes, but how many of those 23 are actually sockies?

I think you should replace that "but" with an "and", as it strengthens my statement, not contradicts it.

How much longer before an update?

I think it's about 2.5 more months, I try to do one every 4.

Ummm, I'm going to need you to go ahead and make that hourly.

Yeah!

A Thing of Eternity wrote:I think you should replace that "but"...

WRONG thread to be talking about my bum!

Another 4 months have passed.

DN is 52 months old, and Jacurutu is 32 months old. Here are the totals:

DN Total:
Posts: 53393
Members: 1548

Jacurutu total:
Posts: 93070
Members: 389

Here are some averages (rough figures of course, and bear in mind that these are averaged over the ENTIRE life of each site):

DN = 34.23 Posts per Day (down 1.9 from last checkup, down 20.14 since first comp EDIT: this is correct)

Jacurutu = 96.95 Posts per Day (down 2.21 from last, EDIT: up 1.71 since first comp, I had originally said we were down, and have been saying so for several comparisons. This was an error. We are UP compared to my first comparison)

Average posts per member:

DN = 34.49 (down 1.39 since last checkup)
Jacurutu = 239.25 (down 6.46 since last checkup) Again, like I said last time, this sounds bad, but this largely due to the new membership we've had. (DN got 98 new members and we got 50. % wise that's a big diff - We had a 15% increase in membership, whereas DN only had a 7%)

Now, remember that since they are so much older than us that their averages are much more stable than ours. SO THE FOLLOWING ARE THE REAL NUMBERS

The last 4 months:

Jacurutu total posts = 9775 (down 0.3% per month)
Jacurutu total posts per day = 81.45 (down 0.2%)

DN total posts = 1365 (up 45% per month)
DN total posts per day = 11.38 (up 4.1 posts)

So, basically the deal is that this four month period saw us gain 15% in new membership and maintain almost exactly the same posting rate as the previous four month period. DN has however gotten themselves some fairly prolific new posters and has seen a very substantial increase in posts as compared to the previous four month period. We're still absolutely slaughtering them for activity, but they do seem to have gotten a tiny bit of life support, slowing down their demise.

We've had 7.16 X as many posts as them in the last 4 months (last check we had 11.25 X as many). Interestingly, I think this is the only time we've seen this ratio go in their favour and had it been entirely due to them getting more active, with us remaining at the same steady pace. It'll be interesting to see if this new group of posters at DN can get the others going again (I kinda doubt it, we're talking about maybe 5 people that have caused almost all of those new posts) or if this will dwindle back down to their usual pace in the next third of a year.

Just as an FYI, the boardware says that this site averages 95.30 posts per day since inception, so our rates actually are pretty stable.

Omphalos wrote:Just as an FYI, the boardware says that this site averages 95.30 posts per day since inception, so our rates actually are pretty stable.

You know what, I'm not sure where, but somewhere along the line I messed up, our posts per day have RISEN in average since my first comparison, not dropped like I had thought.

Everyone please disregard this comparison until I re-check some of my numbers against my first comparison.

EDIT: okay this is fixed now. We are indeed up compared to our humble beginnings in our average posts per day. I don't know how I screwed that up, I must have done it once and then just based every time afterwards on the time before that.

A Thing of Eternity wrote:DN has however gotten themselves some fairly prolific new posters ...

Most of whom are complete tools. It would be awesome if you could figure that into the forumla (like maybe a tool only counts as three-fifths of a person? )

TheDukester wrote:

A Thing of Eternity wrote:DN has however gotten themselves some fairly prolific new posters ...

Most of whom are complete tools. It would be awesome if you could figure that into the forumla (like maybe a tool only counts as three-fifths of a person? )

Didn't the constitution used to say that?

Love the stats, ATOE, as always.

The fact that we still average over 80 posts a day - over 7 times DN - when there's no significant Dune news, is significant, I think.

HBJ

Plus, I personally think there membership number is skewed. After all, how many of those 'members' are like StarGazer... still counted on the roll but not able to post nor access their account to delete their names?

Omphalos wrote:Didn't the constitution used to say that?

Yeah, I remember that from school:

A tool was counted as three-fifths of a person; an asshat was two-fifths.

And preeks were specifically prohibited from voting.

Man, history can be cool!

Eyes High wrote:Plus, I personally think there membership number is skewed. After all, how many of those 'members' are like StarGazer... still counted on the roll but not able to post nor access their account to delete their names?

"Tleszer" is still there. On occasion I get email notifications for new posts in threads.

Eyes High wrote:Plus, I personally think there membership number is skewed. After all, how many of those 'members' are like StarGazer... still counted on the roll but not able to post nor access their account to delete their names?

Five or six of those are me.

Sandchigger and his sock puppets acount for at least 30% of the members at dung novels

Rob

Yes, um, well, there is that...

And as far as I know, Spaceman Spiff never got his second activation email so even though he is listed as a member he hasn't been able to sign-in. I'll ask him when he gets home tonight if that is still the case.

And you know Chig doesn't have sock-puppets....
well then again it has been said that we all are his sock-puppets so...
nah

the increase in posts Over There can only be attributed to Freak's actually responding to posts that
would otherwise be ignored .... then the OP comes back with something else and Freak either
points out the errors in their thinking, or says something that just confuses them, and the
thread dies ....

take out Freak's post, and the "Gee, I nevah though boutit thatta way" responses,
and you'll have a more real number ....

in fact, take out ALL the OH sockpuppet posts and it's just Arnoldo & the occasion content-void
comment from Merritt ....

take out all the Freakbanned from the memberlist, and the less than 3 post members,
and the core membership is still Arnie, Hyppo, & Byron ....

Omph was talking about clearing out our memberlist awhile back;
I'm for that - anybody with less than 5 posts should be kicked out ...

fuck lurkers ... post or GTFO ...


[edit]
which reminds me, it's time for another series of nasty emails to Bryon's personal inbox;
he's either got to active the SandRider account that been sitting there for over two years
now, or take my name off his fucking list .... everyone that's been Freakbanned should
do the same - if fact, between now and Christmas, I declare a Special Jihad on Merritt
and the Official Corporate Dune Board on this issue ... that means a flood of daily emails
and public complaints until the shitheel complies ....

also, kickban that bitch out of our sietch - "SpiceGrandson" has had a PM setting my outbox
for over a year - if he is still lurking (which I doubt) he's not logging on and checking
his mail here - post or GTFO ....
[/edit]

SandRider wrote:
Omph was talking about clearing out our memberlist awhile back;
I'm for that - anybody with less than 5 posts should be kicked out ...

fuck lurkers ... post or GTFO ...

Nah, if any house cleaning is done it should be based on logins. There's absolutely nothing wrong with people lurking and reading posts, using their login capabilities to sort the new posts from old. It would be moronic to boot people for that.

Also, purely from an attracting new people perspective - activity is good, but if we cut our membership count down to maybe a third I don't think that does anything positive for the site or the image of the site.

counterpoint #1: fuck lurkers.

I really doubt there's that many people that log-on for the convenience of the "new post" button;
{I could, of course, be completely wrong about this}
if someone is lurking enough to be keeping up with posts, they should atleast post a little bit;
god knows there are enough ghafla threads; everybody's got a yewtube they wanna share,
or just a post to say "I am not a shill for the McDune Corporation; I am not looking for mean trolls
saying bad things about Spanky McDune, waiting to run & tell it in secret PMs to other McDunies
and daily, updated, never-opened emails to tehKJA" ...

but I really don't think those pretards are doing that; I think they would fear logging onto an account
that can be IP traced by The Tidwell and their Win95/Pentium2s are already ate up with Russian
Mafia spyware ... The Tidwell could just give those machines a stern look and they'd explode ...

I think the vast,vast majority of dead accounts on the memberlist are just that: dead ...
somebody signed up for a minute, either got bored or offended, or weren't really all that
interested in Frank ...in other words, not Dune Fans, and certainly not OH ...

counterpoint #2: Merritt has 1553 members - still a pathetically small number for the "official"
forum for a title like "Dune" ... 525 of them have zero posts ... 209 have one post ... only
77 members have over 100 posts - and a whole lot of them are Freakbans - going on
what? two years now? in fact, five of the top ten posters are, I believe, Freakbanned ...

my point here is that even at it's stupidly low memberlist count for such a widely read set of
old books, movies, & McDune, the REAL membership of Merritt's board is what, maybe
15 or 20 times smaller ?

it's just like Keith and his wordcount - the numbers don't mean anything if the content is shit ...

so we have 390 registered users - of those, 111 have zero posts, 25 have one post ...
in my eyes, that's keeping a membership list that's padded by about 25% ... not anywhere
near as bad as Merritt, but if I'm gonna ride his ass about it, I want my own boots to be clean ...

I'd rather have the membership list reflect the truth .... true, we're a small handful or regular
posters, and a little bigger handful of occasional posters, and some of the members with
really low counts, like around 20, obviously don't check in daily, or weekly, or even monthly,
but have been members for a long time, and when they do post, it's usually quality ....

but a member with Zero posts is a waste of moisture ....





just my opinion, now, I ain't real het-up about it either way -

SandRider wrote:...

... not anywhere
near as bad as Merritt, but if I'm gonna ride his ass about it, I want my own boots to be clean ...

I'd rather have the membership list reflect the truth .... true, we're a small handful or regular
posters, and a little bigger handful of occasional posters, and some of the members with
really low counts, like around 20, obviously don't check in daily, or weekly, or even monthly,
but have been members for a long time, and when they do post, it's usually quality ....

but a member with Zero posts is a waste of moisture ....


just my opinion, now, I ain't real het-up about it either way -

One point I would make though. The members on here who have zero posts or low posts are still here by their own choice. They still have access to their accounts. (I only know of two or three that have been banned from here with legitimate reasons and after several warnings.

Byron on the other hand has many that he has banned but not removed their names from the membership lists. It is those numbers that I have a problem with. I keep bringing up StarGazer because that was my account and feel like I have a right to talk about her. I did nothing wrong over there and received no warnings, yet my user name is still listed as a member, boosting his numbers. If he's not going to allow access to those accounts then he should remove them.

True I don't see why someone would register on a board and not post but it's not Freak is fluffing his numbers by leaving them on the list. There are members. Members who don't post, but still members just the same.

Those who have been freakbanned over there are not members any more. They had no choice (except for those who intentionally got banned)

StarGazer wrote:One point I would make though. The members on here who have zero posts or low posts are still here by their own choice. They still have access to their accounts. (I only know of two or three that have been banned from here with legitimate reasons and after several warnings.

Byron on the other hand has many that he has banned but not removed their names from the membership lists. It is those numbers that I have a problem with. I keep bringing up StarGazer because that was my account and feel like I have a right to talk about her. I did nothing wrong over there and received no warnings, yet my user name is still listed as a member, boosting his numbers. If he's not going to allow access to those accounts then he should remove them.

True I don't see why someone would register on a board and not post but it's not Freak is fluffing his numbers by leaving them on the list. There are members. Members who don't post, but still members just the same.

Those who have been freakbanned over there are not members any more. They had no choice (except for those who intentionally got banned)

Well, how about it Red bug? You stand accused of fraud and being a jerk. How do you defend your actions?