Top 50 Posters Extrapolated, January 2014

[Scepticalscribe]

Are you referring to this post? If so, the reason we can't do it anymore is the member list has been disabled, so we can no longer perform the searches required to come up with those stats.

Yes, thank you very much, that is exactly the list I had in mind. I remember reading it several years ago, and having been fascinated at the time, not just at the actual numbers themselves, but also at the almost extraordinary halving of the numbers of members at each rank which took place as the 'higher' user titles were climbed. Fascinating.

Thank you for your answer, as well as the link; might I ask why the member list has been disabled, if that is not an impertinent question to ask?

 

[simsaladimbamba]

Thank you for your answer, as well as the link; might I ask why the member list has been disabled, if that is not an impertinent question to ask?

This should answer your question.
I proposed only opening it to registered members, it was a welcome idea, but yet nothing has happened, probably due to more important issues. Basterds. (sarcasm, not an insult)

 

[GGJstudios]

Thank you for your answer, as well as the link; might I ask why the member list has been disabled, if that is not an impertinent question to ask?

Here's an explanation:

When it's enabled it gets traffic from bots, and generating the sorted list takes more than an iota of processor time. So when it's disabled it's to improve overall site performance. I miss it too, but we can still find any user's post count from their user profile.

 

[SkyBell]

I proposed only opening it to registered members, it was a welcome idea, but yet nothing has happened, probably due to more important issues. Basterds. (sarcasm, not an insult)

I remember links to the member list being removed from the links on the site due to some issues it was causing with loading times and such , but it could still be accessed at its URL for a long time after. Some time ago, it was completely disabled and I did wonder why, so thanks for providing that info.

Still, does the member list here really take up that many resources? I can't think of any other forums that have any problems with them. Granted, these forums are by far the largest I regularly frequent, and it could easily very much be related to that.

 

[S.B.G]

Still, does the member list here really take up that many resources?

Yes it did. With well over 800,000 entries in it, just one query by one person took several seconds to load. With it open to everyone, imagine the load on the server when queries are being served to many people at once, all the time. Arn had to disable it for the sake of the forums of MacRumors, and for his other sites like appshopper.com and toucharcade.com. The tax on the system for the member list wasn't worth the performance hit for all else.

 

[HexMonkey]

Are you referring to this post? If so, the reason we can't do it anymore is the member list has been disabled, so we can no longer perform the searches required to come up with those stats.

Here are some updated numbers, along with comparisons to GGJstudios' numbers from Jan 2012. We use different user title thresholds now, but I used the same ranges as his 2012 analysis.

Posts		Members		Members		Percentage	Percentage
		(Jan 2012)	(Feb 2014)	(Jan 2012)	(Feb 2014)
----		----------	----------	----------	----------
30000+		2		5		0.00035%	0.00067%
25000 - 29999	3		4		0.00053%	0.00054%
20000 - 24999	8		7		0.0014%		0.0009%
15000 - 19999	20		27		0.0035%		0.0036%
10000 - 14999	37		41		0.0065%		0.0055%
5000 - 9999	118		149		0.021%		0.020%
3000 - 4999	188		270		0.033%		0.036%
2500 - 2999	118		165		0.021%		0.022%
2005 - 2499	211		290		0.037%		0.039%
2000 - 2004	3		6		0.0005%		0.0008%
1505 - 1999	395		512		0.0692%		0.0689%
1500 - 1504	4		8		0.0007%		0.0011%
1000 - 1499	789		1006		0.138%		0.135%
500 - 999	2298		2995		0.403%		0.403%
250 - 499	3957		5155		0.693%		0.694%
100 - 249	9153		11743		1.60%		1.58%
30 - 99		22880		29090		4.01%		3.92%
0 - 29		530456		691555		92.96%		93.07%
		-------		-------
TOTAL		570640		743028

 

[jamezr]

Thanks Doctor Q for posting all the data. It is very interesting to analyze all the numbers. Maybe someday I'll make the list!

 

[ucfgrad93]

Here are some updated numbers, along with comparisons to GGJstudios' numbers from Jan 2012. We use different user title thresholds now, but I used the same ranges as his 2012 analysis.

Posts		Members		Members		Percentage	Percentage
		(Jan 2012)	(Feb 2014)	(Jan 2012)	(Feb 2014)
----		----------	----------	----------	----------
30000+		2		5		0.00035%	0.00067%
25000 - 29999	3		4		0.00053%	0.00054%
20000 - 24999	8		7		0.0014%		0.0009%
15000 - 19999	20		27		0.0035%		0.0036%
10000 - 14999	37		41		0.0065%		0.0055%
5000 - 9999	118		149		0.021%		0.020%
3000 - 4999	188		270		0.033%		0.036%
2500 - 2999	118		165		0.021%		0.022%
2005 - 2499	211		290		0.037%		0.039%
2000 - 2004	3		6		0.0005%		0.0008%
1505 - 1999	395		512		0.0692%		0.0689%
1500 - 1504	4		8		0.0007%		0.0011%
1000 - 1499	789		1006		0.138%		0.135%
500 - 999	2298		2995		0.403%		0.403%
250 - 499	3957		5155		0.693%		0.694%
100 - 249	9153		11743		1.60%		1.58%
30 - 99		22880		29090		4.01%		3.92%
0 - 29		530456		691555		92.96%		93.07%
		-------		-------
TOTAL		570640		743028

Thanks for posting this. I find it pretty amazing that 93% of the registered users have less than 30 posts.

 

[rhett7660]

Here are some updated numbers, along with comparisons to GGJstudios' numbers from Jan 2012. We use different user title thresholds now, but I used the same ranges as his 2012 analysis.

Posts		Members		Members		Percentage	Percentage
		(Jan 2012)	(Feb 2014)	(Jan 2012)	(Feb 2014)
----		----------	----------	----------	----------
30000+		2		5		0.00035%	0.00067%
25000 - 29999	3		4		0.00053%	0.00054%
20000 - 24999	8		7		0.0014%		0.0009%
15000 - 19999	20		27		0.0035%		0.0036%
10000 - 14999	37		41		0.0065%		0.0055%
5000 - 9999	118		149		0.021%		0.020%
3000 - 4999	188		270		0.033%		0.036%
2500 - 2999	118		165		0.021%		0.022%
2005 - 2499	211		290		0.037%		0.039%
2000 - 2004	3		6		0.0005%		0.0008%
1505 - 1999	395		512		0.0692%		0.0689%
1500 - 1504	4		8		0.0007%		0.0011%
1000 - 1499	789		1006		0.138%		0.135%
500 - 999	2298		2995		0.403%		0.403%
250 - 499	3957		5155		0.693%		0.694%
100 - 249	9153		11743		1.60%		1.58%
30 - 99		22880		29090		4.01%		3.92%
0 - 29		530456		691555		92.96%		93.07%
		-------		-------
TOTAL		570640		743028

Good lord 30,000+ posts!

----------

Thanks for posting this. I find it pretty amazing that 93% of the registered users have less than 30 posts.

I am wondering if a good chunk of these are:

1) I have a single problem, needed to start a thread and once answered they are gone

2) Spam!

 

[GGJstudios]

Here are some updated numbers, along with comparisons to GGJstudios' numbers from Jan 2012. We use different user title thresholds now, but I used the same ranges as his 2012 analysis.

Thank you for posting this! There's another bit of information that might be interesting, if you can provide it.

Years ago, I did some analysis and determined that roughly a third of members had zero posts, a third had only one post, and a third had more than one post. These were rough estimates, but I'm wondering if that still holds true. Based on those numbers, there was roughly a 60 to 70% chance that a first time poster would never post again.

I am wondering if a good chunk of these are:

1) I have a single problem, needed to start a thread and once answered they are gone

2) Spam!

Number one is definitely the case for a large number of posters. When I checked in the past, those with one post represented about one third of all members. I don't recall if spammers were included in those numbers, but there were a great number of posters who had zero posts, possibly due to the fact that their first post was deleted by moderators, even though it wasn't spam.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Here are some updated numbers, along with comparisons to GGJstudios' numbers from Jan 2012. We use different user title thresholds now, but I used the same ranges as his 2012 analysis.

Posts		Members		Members		Percentage	Percentage
		(Jan 2012)	(Feb 2014)	(Jan 2012)	(Feb 2014)
----		----------	----------	----------	----------
30000+		2		5		0.00035%	0.00067%
25000 - 29999	3		4		0.00053%	0.00054%
20000 - 24999	8		7		0.0014%		0.0009%
15000 - 19999	20		27		0.0035%		0.0036%
10000 - 14999	37		41		0.0065%		0.0055%
5000 - 9999	118		149		0.021%		0.020%
3000 - 4999	188		270		0.033%		0.036%
2500 - 2999	118		165		0.021%		0.022%
2005 - 2499	211		290		0.037%		0.039%
2000 - 2004	3		6		0.0005%		0.0008%
1505 - 1999	395		512		0.0692%		0.0689%
1500 - 1504	4		8		0.0007%		0.0011%
1000 - 1499	789		1006		0.138%		0.135%
500 - 999	2298		2995		0.403%		0.403%
250 - 499	3957		5155		0.693%		0.694%
100 - 249	9153		11743		1.60%		1.58%
30 - 99		22880		29090		4.01%		3.92%
0 - 29		530456		691555		92.96%		93.07%
		-------		-------
TOTAL		570640		743028

Thank you for posting this! There's another bit of information that might be interesting, if you can provide it.

Years ago, I did some analysis and determined that roughly a third of members had zero posts, a third had only one post, and a third had more than one post. These were rough estimates, but I'm wondering if that still holds true. Based on those numbers, there was roughly a 60 to 70% chance that a first time poster would never post again.



Number one is definitely the case for a large number of posters. When I checked in the past, those with one post represented about one third of all members. I don't recall if spammers were included in those numbers, but there were a great number of posters who had zero posts, possibly due to the fact that their first post was deleted by moderators, even though it wasn't spam.

Fascinating. Thank you very much for taking the time and trouble to put this together and post it. This is extremely interesting reading.

I recall reading the original set of statistics which had been posted some years ago and being amazed at the fact that over 90% of members were in the 'newbie' category.

Your suggested explanations for this make an awful lot of sense.

 

[mobilehaathi]

Fascinating. Thank you very much for taking the time and trouble to put this together and post it. This is extremely interesting reading.

I recall reading the original set of statistics which had been posted some years ago and being amazed at the fact that over 90% of members were in the 'newbie' category.

Your suggested explanations for this make an awful lot of sense.

Wait until you notice that the numbers imply ~226 new registrants/day over the past 25 months!

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Wait until you notice that the numbers imply ~226 new registrants/day over the past 25 months!

Hm. I hadn't noticed that. Fascinating. And extraordinary.

Of course, apart from the many members who have created an account in order to post a problem, and, when the problem is resolved, then choose to disappear, I imagine that spammers also make up a significant percentage of single post accounts.

Indeed, I suspect that quite a number of the more active members may well have started out that way, too. In my case, I was a lurker for a while (as I had just bought a MBP and it was a useful place to find out stuff), and created an account to ask a question; then, as I found it an interesting community, I decided to stay a little longer…….

 

[mobilehaathi]

Hm. I hadn't noticed that. Fascinating. And extraordinary.

Of course, apart from the many members who have created an account in order to post a problem, and, when the problem is resolved, then choose to disappear, I imagine that spammers also make up a significant percentage of single post accounts.

Indeed, I suspect that quite a number of the more active members may well have started out that way, too. In my case, I was a lurker for a while (as I had just bought a MBP and it was a useful place to find out stuff), and created an account to ask a question; then, as I found it an interesting community, I decided to stay a little longer…….

Spammers, good point. I wonder, are spammers' accounts simply disabled and still showing up in these stats or are they 'fully deleted?'

 

[Apple fanboy]

Good lord 30,000+ posts!

----------



I am wondering if a good chunk of these are:

1) I have a single problem, needed to start a thread and once answered they are gone

2) Spam!

Yes I would like to know what % of the 0-29 group are actually just one post.

Makes for fascinating reading.

 

[HexMonkey]

Years ago, I did some analysis and determined that roughly a third of members had zero posts, a third had only one post, and a third had more than one post. These were rough estimates, but I'm wondering if that still holds true. Based on those numbers, there was roughly a 60 to 70% chance that a first time poster would never post again.

Yes I would like to know what % of the 0-29 group are actually just one post.

Here you go:

Posts		Members		Members		Percentage	Percentage
		(Jan 2012)	(Feb 2014)	(Jan 2012)	(Feb 2014)
----		----------	----------	----------	----------
0		193741		251348		33.95%		33.82%
1		142925		190620		25.05%		25.65%
2		58572		76194		10.26%		10.25%
3		31477		40825		5.52%		5.49%
4		20032		25786		3.51%		3.47%
5		14209		18121		2.49%		2.44%
6 - 10		34773		44761		6.09%		6.02%
11 - 30		34729		44020		6.09%		5.92%

I am wondering if a good chunk of these are:

...

2) Spam!

Banned members are excluded from these counts.

 

[GGJstudios]

Here you go:

Thank you!

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Here you go:

Posts		Members		Members		Percentage	Percentage
		(Jan 2012)	(Feb 2014)	(Jan 2012)	(Feb 2014)
----		----------	----------	----------	----------
0		193741		251348		33.95%		33.82%
1		142925		190620		25.05%		25.65%
2		58572		76194		10.26%		10.25%
3		31477		40825		5.52%		5.49%
4		20032		25786		3.51%		3.47%
5		14209		18121		2.49%		2.44%
6 - 10		34773		44761		6.09%		6.02%
11 - 30		34729		44020		6.09%		5.92%

Banned members are excluded from these counts.

Bravo, very well done and thank you very much for taking the time and trouble to put all of this together.

 

[rhett7660]

Banned members are excluded from these counts.

That is good to know! Then I am going to go with my number one then.

 

[Apple fanboy]

Here you go:

Posts		Members		Members		Percentage	Percentage
		(Jan 2012)	(Feb 2014)	(Jan 2012)	(Feb 2014)
----		----------	----------	----------	----------
0		193741		251348		33.95%		33.82%
1		142925		190620		25.05%		25.65%
2		58572		76194		10.26%		10.25%
3		31477		40825		5.52%		5.49%
4		20032		25786		3.51%		3.47%
5		14209		18121		2.49%		2.44%
6 - 10		34773		44761		6.09%		6.02%
11 - 30		34729		44020		6.09%		5.92%

Banned members are excluded from these counts.

Thank you. Interesting that 34% join but never post. What's the point in that? I used to read a lot on here before becoming a member. Can't really see the point of doing it the other way round.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Thank you. Interesting that 34% join but never post. What's the point in that? I used to read a lot on here before becoming a member. Can't really see the point of doing it the other way round.

Very often you join because you have bought a Mac computer, want to know more, or solve a problem, and a google search throws up a MR thread which discusses it. Curious, you read a bit, read what goes on on the forum, and then join, to read, as a lurker.

I was a lurker for a few months before I joined the forum - my first foray onto an online community - and I joined because I had a question which needed an answer. Then, in common with some others, I decided to stick around, and occasionally make a post or two.

 

[Apple fanboy]

Very often you join because you have bought a Mac computer, want to know more, or solve a problem, and a boodle search throws up a MR thread which discusses it. Curious, you read a bit, read what goes on on the forum, and then join, to read, as a lurker.

I was a lurker for a few months before I joined the forum - my first foray onto an online community - and I joined because I had a question which needed an answer. Then, in common with some others, I decided to stick around, and occasionally make a post or two.

Yes same here. I lurked for quite a while after searching on the web for 'when will the next iPhone be released?'
Then I joined because the thread was both fun and informative. Like you I had never joined a forum before (not even Facebook or Twitter). Glad I did. It's become a part of my daily routine now. I've learnt loads about Macs and now have my own loverly iMac.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Yes same here. I lurked for quite a while after searching on the web for 'when will the next iPhone be released?'
Then I joined because the thread was both fun and informative. Like you I had never joined a forum before (not even Facebook or Twitter). Glad I did. It's become a part of my daily routine now. I've learnt loads about Macs and now have my own loverly iMac.

That pretty much sums up my position, too.

Most days I drop in, and I'm glad to be able to report that my first foray into the online world has been such an interesting and rewarding experience.

 

[S.B.G]

I was a lurker for a few months before I joined the forum - my first foray onto an online community - and I joined because I had a question which needed an answer. Then, in common with some others, I decided to stick around, and occasionally make a post or two.

That was pretty much the same way it happened for me as well. I had a Mac question, received some help and decided to stay around.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Actually, I am beginning to suspect that most join trip over the forums - or take a look at what is happening - after they buy a Mac computer, and need an answer to a question, rather than as part of the research necessary before you buy a Mac and/or switch.

I know that is the way it was for me. I bought a Mac computer in April 2008, as a belated birthday present to myself, and, as I was what is termed in the parlance 'a switcher' there was a lot I didn't know. Hence, googling (I didn't want to bombard the very professional, helpful and kind chap in the Apple shop who had sold it to me, and who was, in fairness, very patient & helpful in answering questions) to find out more, and then stumbling across this forum.

In any case, most days, a drop in visit, is part of my daily routine now……

And, when MR is down, or inexplicably inaccessible (as it was during the hack attack a few months ago), I feel a strange sense of deprivation, and loss.