Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Top 50 Posters Extrapolated, January 2018

Sorry if I missed the criteria, but was this based on all post counts (sum of all forums) or does it exclude posts from Mac Community (my hope).
 
Gutwrench said:
Sorry if I missed the criteria, but was this based on all post counts (sum of all forums) or does it exclude posts from Mac Community (my hope).
Click to expand...
The post counts I measure are the ones reported by the forum system. Those counts exclude a few specific forums, as listed in the Forums FAQ. The Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum is the one where the majority of those non-counted posts can be found.

I would have measured all posts instead of just counted posts for all of these years if I could, but I don't have a way to get that data. I might also mention that the information I gather is public information (from profile pages or other forum pages) that any member can see, even though I happen to be a forum administrator.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scepticalscribe and Gutwrench
Doctor Q said:
The post counts I measure are the ones reported by the forum system. Those counts exclude a few specific forums, as listed in the Forums FAQ. The Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum is the one where the majority of those non-counted posts can be found.

I would have measured all posts instead of just counted posts for all of these years if I could, but I don't have a way to get that data. I might also mention that the information I gather is public information (from profile pages or other forum pages) that any member can see, even though I happen to be a forum administrator.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your time in doing the statistics and answer. Very much appreciated.
 
Doctor Q said:
...
I would have measured all posts instead of just counted posts for all of these years if I could, but I don't have a way to get that data. I might also mention that the information I gather is public information (from profile pages or other forum pages) that any member can see, even though I happen to be a forum administrator.
Click to expand...
Now I have to ask: What if a member limits who can see their profile page? I can't view their profile, so I can't see how many posts they have, but can you as an admin see their profile page?

Also, if a user has been banned (suspended forever (certain Lazarus cases notwithstanding)), I also can't see their profile page. Again, can you as an admin see their profile page? I realize it's unlikely that such a user would be in the top posters, but it's still technically possible, or for someone who was a prolific posted to get banned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scepticalscribe
Fascinating discussion on 'likes' and 'followers'.

Under the older system, I think that followers (the very word reminds me of Twitter) were called something different. And, some of one's 'followers' (or those whom one in turn follows) may also have gone fishing.


I'm not sorry to see the back of the 'down vote' button; some of the sub-fora where its use was predominant developed a really nasty atmosphere at times.

Re 'likes', I will click on that button for a number of reasons; I agree with the post, I agree with the sentiment, someone has already expressed the point I may have wished to make, I like the way it is phrased, sometimes it may have made me laugh, or I may like the actual poster.

Sometimes, it allows me not to have to make a post in a thread where I would prefer not to get involved, either then, or at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rhett7660 and eyoungren
mobilehaathi said:
Indeed, although there are the occasional threads where one itches for it...
Click to expand...

There are, yes, but I have long thought that the negative effects of that button on the tone of threads far outweighed the positive one of being able to give inarticulate expression to a desire to express dislike or disagreement with a post.

For, pressing the 'like' button can signal 'like', 'agree', or 'both like and agree'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mobilehaathi
Doctor Q said:
NEW COLUMN! A = * for currently active users (at least 1 post over the last 6 months).
Click to expand...
One recommendation I would offer, if i may be so bold. I recommend that you use the inverse, and use the * for inactive members instead of active. I'm no English major (me sp3ak gooder inglish), but the use of askericks tend be used for exceptions not the norm, and so the way my brain is wired, it seems to make sense to see the data exhibited that way in the future.

Thanks for the hard work in putting this together.
 
chown33 said:
Now I have to ask: What if a member limits who can see their profile page? I can't view their profile, so I can't see how many posts they have, but can you as an admin see their profile page?

Also, if a user has been banned (suspended forever (certain Lazarus cases notwithstanding)), I also can't see their profile page. Again, can you as an admin see their profile page? I realize it's unlikely that such a user would be in the top posters, but it's still technically possible, or for someone who was a prolific posted to get banned.
Click to expand...
I haven't tested these situations, but I'll send you details when I have them.
 
High posters by length of membership

Here are the current post count leaders for each year, based on when they registered.

In other words, jefhatfield has the highest post count of all members who joined MacRumors in the year 2000.

In theory, somebody else could eventually take over one of these titles. The later the year, the more contenders there are. By a wonderful coincidence, 2001 new members joined MacRumors in the year 2001. Only those users have a chance to top Mr. Anderson's post count for this list. In 2002 there were 10,693 new members contending for the title. Jump ahead 15 years, and in 2016 there were 53,075 new members, each potentially topping Relentless Power's post count... someday. In 2017 there were a mere 49,620 new members.

Highest current post count by year joined (and their post count)
  • 2000: jefhatfield (8,803)
  • 2001: Mr. Anderson (22,409)
  • 2002: Doctor Q (34,464)
  • 2003: rdowns (27,324)
  • 2004: mad jew (32,194)
  • 2005: GoCubsGo (35,731)
  • 2006: miles01110 (19,264)
  • 2007: DoFoT9 (17,486)
  • 2008: GGJstudios (43,943)
  • 2009: maflynn (56,340)
  • 2010: SandboxGeneral (23,251)
  • 2011: C DM (41,430)
  • 2012: Apple fanboy (20,207)
  • 2013: I7guy (13,435)
  • 2014: Newtons Apple (16,644)
  • 2015: pat500000 (7,666)
  • 2016: Relentless Power (17,346)
  • 2017: ZapNZs (2,269)
Notable achievement: Three members who joined in 2001 have made at least 5000 posts and are still active:
  • arn (founded MacRumors, post count 13,724)
  • Makosuke (joined August 2001, post count 6,124)
  • Rocketman (joined December 2001, post count 6,011)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mobilehaathi
Doctor Q said:
High posters by length of membership

Here are the current post count leaders for each year, based on when they registered.

In other words, jefhatfield has the highest post count of all members who joined MacRumors in the year 2000.

In theory, somebody else could eventually take over one of these titles. The later the year, the more contenders there are. By a wonderful coincidence, 2001 new members joined MacRumors in the year 2001. Only those users have a chance to top jefhatfield's post count for this list.
Click to expand...
If this is a list of the users with the highest post rate among users that joined in the same year, how does someone who joined in 2001 top someone who joined in 2000? Shouldn’t they be in different bins?
 
Doctor Q said:
High posters by length of membership

Here are the current post count leaders for each year, based on when they registered.

In other words, jefhatfield has the highest post count of all members who joined MacRumors in the year 2000.

In theory, somebody else could eventually take over one of these titles. The later the year, the more contenders there are. By a wonderful coincidence, 2001 new members joined MacRumors in the year 2001. Only those users have a chance to top jefhatfield's post count for this list. In 2002 there were 10,693 new members contending for the title. Jump ahead 15 years, and in 2016 there were 53,075 new members, each potentially topping Relentless Power's post count... someday. In 2017 there were a mere 49,620 new members.

Highest current post count by year joined (and their post count)
  • 2000: jefhatfield (8,803)
  • 2001: Mr. Anderson (22,409)
  • 2002: Doctor Q (34,464)
  • 2003: rdowns (27,324)
  • 2004: mad jew (32,194)
  • 2005: GoCubsGo (35,731)
  • 2006: miles01110 (19,264)
  • 2007: DoFoT9 (17,486)
  • 2008: GGJstudios (43,943)
  • 2009: maflynn (56,340)
  • 2010: SandboxGeneral (23,251)
  • 2011: C DM (41,430)
  • 2012: Apple fanboy (20,207)
  • 2013: I7guy (13,435)
  • 2014: Newtons Apple (16,644)
  • 2015: pat500000 (7,666)
  • 2016: Relentless Power (17,346)
  • 2017: ZapNZs (2,269)
Notable achievement: Three members who joined in 2001 have made at least 5000 posts and are still active:
  • arn (founded MacRumors, post count 13,724)
  • Makosuke (joined August 2001, post count 6,124)
  • Rocketman (joined December 2001, post count 6,011)
Click to expand...
I see all the best members joined in a year ending in a two! It must mean something!
 
maflynn said:
One recommendation I would offer, if i may be so bold. I recommend that you use the inverse, and use the * for inactive members instead of active. I'm no English major (me sp3ak gooder inglish), but the use of askericks tend be used for exceptions not the norm, and so the way my brain is wired, it seems to make sense to see the data exhibited that way in the future.
Click to expand...
Your reasoning makes sense. I originally had letter A in that column, for "active," but that made it harder to read. You'd look like A mayflynn (which is misleading since you are THE mayflynn, not A mayflynn - tee tee).

Next I considered using Unicode character to mean active, ( e.g., ). Then I got lazy and stuck in asterisks. And what I really wanted was for Xenforo to let me put active user names in bold within the CODE tags.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back