Top 50 Posters Extrapolated, January 2020

[Scepticalscribe]

Well, it's no surprise that people making the noise wouldn't consider it noise. If you're here on this thread, talking about post count stats, you might just be one of them. You might not. But you might be.

Anyway, I'm back from vacation and my position hasn't changed. Far too many prolific posters just don't read the OP before "contributing", and that's noise, any way you slice it.

This thread has been a part of the forum as long as I have been a member, and people who post here tend to post in this thread because they are interested in discussing the posting statistics of the forum, which is the kind of subject matter that many on the forum find interesting.

With respect, that is not "noise".

Rather, it is a discussion that covers matters of mutual interest.

This isn't born out of any actual facts.

Agreed.

I challenge you to find even one of the top 50 posters whose post count is predominately, or even significantly "noise". First, much of the "noise" is in the PRSI forum, which doesn't count toward post counts here. Second, no one accumulates 10,000 posts unless the content is more than just "noise". Frivolous and one-word posts, overposting, and off-topic posts posts that are reported are removed. Yes, there may be some in the forum who set out to try to generate posts for the sole purpose of increasing post count (which violates forum rules), but they soon tire of that effort, or encounter moderation action that alters that activity before they accumulate a large number of posts.

Well said.

Right. Post count skyrockets in conversations. A huge percentage of my posts come from the iPhone Mail Threads where I try to help people navigate the ordering and shipping process. Reason why is because I answer a question, get follow-up, answer again. Suddenly you have 2 hours and 200 posts in a thread.

Excellent point; many exchanges on these threads are neither "noise", nor helpful posts, nor even disagreements, but are simply conversations - dialogues, which imply remark and replies, or responses, or question and answers - that take place in an online setting.

And, sometimes, such exchanges also fulfil a social function - the online equivalent of easy chat - or venting, or giving support, listening and tendering advice - to someone you know, but not necessarily terribly well, over a coffee.

 

[Apple fanboy]

Well, it's no surprise that people making the noise wouldn't consider it noise. If you're here on this thread, talking about post count stats, you might just be one of them. You might not. But you might be.

Anyway, I'm back from vacation and my position hasn't changed. Far too many prolific posters just don't read the OP before "contributing", and that's noise, any way you slice it.
[automerge]1578922596[/automerge]


Notice I didn't say there's anything wrong with posting a lot if you're helping people. But for those who aren't so helpful, don't read the OP and yet still post a lot, the highlighting of post count stats as some big achievement or competition is doing nothing but feeding their noisy tendencies. They'll gravitate toward it and try to win. An unhelpful post counts as much as a helpful one. And I wouldn't be here saying all this if I didn't see it happening every time I'm on the forums, involving some members I see on this thread. It's pretty logical. I hate to spoil the party, but it would be nice if they cared more about being helpful than increasing their post count, and if everyone cared more about making the forums a solid resource for old and new alike. I've been here for 15 years, and I'm pointing it out because I care, vacation bus or no.

I’m not here to increase my post count. Just enjoy conversations with like minded individuals.
Isn’t that the purpose of a forum?

 

[GGJstudios]

Far too many prolific posters just don't read the OP before "contributing", and that's noise, any way you slice it.

The OP, in the case of this thread, is designed to encourage discussion about the stats. By your definition, you may be the one contributing "noise" to this thread, since you're not discussing the stats. The point is, whether or not a post is "noise" is highly subjective. Fortunately, the forum rules are clear about what kinds of posts are allowed. As long as people abide by the rules, they are free to post as much as they like. If a particular thread contains "noise" (by your own definition), it's a simple thing to find another thread that's more to your liking.

 

[AustinIllini]

I’m not here to increase my post count. Just enjoy conversations with like minded individuals.
Isn’t that the purpose of a forum?

Fun fact: I'm actually here to increase @Apple fanboy's post count.

 

[AustinIllini]

I’ll make it helpful so it’s okay!

please add so instead of control c it’s command c to copy on a Mac!

You know, I actually use Magic Utilities on my PC at work. I use my grandfather's magic keyboard (he has an ergo keyboard) and remapped the keys to Command being control on my PC.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

I’ll make it helpful so it’s okay!

please add so instead of control c it’s command c to copy on a Mac!

Actually, I remember when I bought my first Apple - a MBP - I recall that I had to write out a number of these useful instructions, and have them on the desk beside me, as, actually remembering them was a bit of a challenge initially because I was used to a different system.

 

[AustinIllini]

Actually, I remember when I bought my first Apple - a MBP - I recall that I had to write out a number of these useful instructions, and have them on the desk beside me, as, actually remembering them was a bit of a challenge initially because I was used to a different system.

I remember my first Honeycrisp apple, but I digress. I basically can't use Control anymore. I'm a Command guy all the way.

 

[Apple fanboy]

I think if you are posting to try and win, your going to be the loser. Post if you enjoy being here. If not then it’s just pointless. I choose to spend time here because I like the subject material and by enlarge the people here. Yes there are some on here I prefer not to engage with, but they are few and far between.

 

[GGJstudios]

Yes there are some on here I prefer not to engage with, but they are few and far between.

So that explains why you don't talk to me!

 

[Scepticalscribe]

I would argue that this post count thread encourages a discussion about posting, about why people post (or open accounts and choose not to post - the vast majority of MR members have made no post, ever, or have made one post, or between one and five posts), about why people who have engaged extensively with the community continue to do so, or why someone who may have engaged extensively may no longer do so, and may vanish, or choose to disappear, and other such matters.

And, on the subject matter of engaging with the forum, either with threads, topics, or with other posters, (irrespective of post count) the issue very often is not that one chooses whether or not to engage, but rather, how one chooses to engage.

 

[robogobo]

I would argue that post count encourages a discussion about posting, about why people post (or open accounts and choose not to post - the vast majority of MR members have made no post, ever, or have made one post, or between one and five posts), about why people who have engaged extensively with the community continue to do so, or why someone who may have engaged extensively may no longer do so, and may vanish, or choose to disappear, and other such matters.

And, on the subject matter of engaging with the forum, either with threads, topics, or with other posters, (irrespective of post count) the issue very often is not that one chooses whether or not to engage, but rather, how one chooses to engage.

That's exactly what I'm doing here – talking about why the "how one chooses to engage" may cause someone "who may have engaged extensively (to) no longer do so, and (to) vanish, or choose to disappear". Again, they may be few and far between, but there's one or two mentioned around that list who fit the description exactly, and make it up top with zero-substance posts.

 

[millerj123]

I just wish I could tell if we were bantering or not?!?!? (+1 to post count, for those of you keeping track!)

 

[AustinIllini]

Here's a topic changer:

I'm on the fence about changing my user title back to my post count one (MacRumors G3 I think). Yay? Nay?

Thoughts?

 

[millerj123]

Here's a topic changer:

I'm on the fence about changing my user title back to my post count one (MacRumors G3 I think). Yay? Nay?

Thoughts?

I feel like the Grinch on Christmas: Oh, the noise, Noise, NOISE!
(+1 to count?)

And, I vote "nay" for no reason at all.

 

[Clix Pix]

That's exactly what I'm doing here – talking about why the "how one chooses to engage" may cause someone "who may have engaged extensively (to) no longer do so, and (to) vanish, or choose to disappear". Again, they may be few and far between, but there's one or two mentioned around that list who fit the description exactly, and make it up top with zero-substance posts.

An old-timer, eh? Someone who remembers the days of Usenet or even earlier, when bandwidth was a big issue and we all had to be careful about what we posted and how much we posted? On Usenet there were strict policies -- "netiquette" -- about posting. Participants were supposed to be mindful of what they posted, their comments had to be related and relevant to the topic, the remarks had to have substance, and if quoting someone the person posting had to remove all the extraneous bits and only quote the part which had the particular items to which one wanted to respond. Gawd forbid someone should post a one-liner such as "I agree!" with nothing else in their post. A one-word comment was even more severely frowned upon.

At that time, of course, bandwidth was limited and it was costly and not everyone had the same types of opportunities for good access to the internet. This was back in the days of dial-up and then the earliest versions of cable service. One was supposed to be mindful of others' situations and be considerate, and offenders were roundly chastised. Most people did not want to be embarrassed publicly so quickly learned the "netiquette" and fell into line.

Post count was an issue when web-based discussion forums started becoming more and more prevalent and if one was an admin or a moderator on a site it was important to look out for spammers who would jump into a site and post willy-nilly, but also to be mindful of a new member who might not be a spammer per se but who had other reasons for trying to accelerate a post count.

In the early days of MR when we had the limits on who could have an avatar, for example, that undoubtedly was a factor. Someone might join and start posting up a storm so he or she could more quickly attain the coveted privilege of having an avatar. (I think one had to have 500 posts? Can't recall for sure now.). On other sites there were other privileges or other issues which came into play if someone was posting seemingly a little too frequently and rapidly. Some forums also blocked the privilege of PMs until a member had reached a certain number of posts.

A lot depends upon context in a particular subforum and thread as to what is permissible, too. For instance, here at MR, posts in the "community discussion" areas are going to be more open-ended and cover a broader spectrum of topics than a subforum focusing on a particular model of iPhone or iPad, or a discussion around the features of the latest MBPs or a thread where someone is asking for help and suggestions around a particular problem with a device or computer. So there is that to be taken into consideration, too......

 

[Apple fanboy]

Apart from the free MacPro and matching display @arn sends you for being the top poster, there’s no advantages to being number one.
I’m only in the top 10 so I had to make do with an abacus that @chown33 and @Doctor Q sent me.

 

[44267547]

Thanks Chown for your dedication to this. All the graphical data and mathematics behind all of the compiled stats doesn’t go unappreciated.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Here's a topic changer:

I'm on the fence about changing my user title back to my post count one (MacRumors G3 I think). Yay? Nay?

Thoughts?

It is entirely up to you.

For what it is worth, I held the 'contributor' title for around six years, but last year, (I think), requested a change to the more standard MR one, based on post count, but derived from processors that have been (historically) used in Apple computers.

 

[Clix Pix]

I always got kind of a kick out of the title "demigoddess," so have just stuck with that. It's a little different and I don't mind people knowing that I am a contributor to this very worthwhile site.

 

[chown33]

I’m only in the top 10 so I had to make do with an abacus that @chown33 and @Doctor Q sent me.

I kept the dividers for myself. They're very nice (see photos). And the slide rule (not pictured).

 

[eyoungren]

Yes, there may be some in the forum who set out to try to generate posts for the sole purpose of increasing post count (which violates forum rules), but they soon tire of that effort, or encounter moderation action that alters that activity before they accumulate a large number of posts.

I agree with your post, particularly the above section.

Let's all assume for the moment that there's no moderation and that post counts are allowed to be driven up by noise. On almost any other forum that would put this type of person into a top poster position fairly quickly or within a decent amount of time. But this forum has been going for 19 years and the top posters are closing in on 50K posts.

I've been a member of a different forum since 2004 and over the course of 15 years managed to generate around 3000 posts there. I've been a member here and have managed to generate close to 22k. That took me slightly over 8 years to do. If we extrapolate that it means it's another 8+ years before I hit 44k.

If I pad my post count for noise, then this puts me where? Bottom of the top 15? And that's assuming I'm generating noise on a regular basis.

Now, of course, we are all moderated so doing this is not going to be allowed. But if you assume that every post I've ever made was designed to inflate a post count here, then in eight years plus the best I've managed to do is make it less than halfway to the post count of the top poster. No one doing this is going to consider this worth their time because it just takes too damn long based on the post counts of the top posters.

Just no f*ing way.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

I agree with your post, particularly the above section.

Let's all assume for the moment that there's no moderation and that post counts are allowed to be driven up by noise. On almost any other forum that would put this type of person into a top poster position fairly quickly or within a decent amount of time. But this forum has been going for 19 years and the top posters are closing in on 50K posts.

I've been a member of a different forum since 2004 and over the course of 15 years managed to generate around 3000 posts there. I've been a member here and have managed to generate close to 22k. That took me slightly over 8 years to do. If we extrapolate that it means it's another 8+ years before I hit 44k.

If I pad my post count for noise, then this puts me where? Bottom of the top 15? And that's assuming I'm generating noise on a regular basis.

Now, of course, we are all moderated so doing this is not going to be allowed. But if you assume that every post I've ever made was designed to inflate a post count here, then in eight years plus the best I've managed to do is make it less than halfway to the post count of the top poster. No one doing this is going to consider this worth their time because it just takes too damn long based on the post counts of the top posters.

Just no f*ing way.

Very good post and very well said.

And I think you will find that certain specific circumstances (often domestic) have to arise - in some cases - before some people are in a position to post as frequently as their post counts suggest.

For myself, - and the stats bear this out - over the past decade there have been two variables in particular which have influenced my posting habits.

The first was whether or not I was working abroad; anytime I have been abroad (observing elections, or working in a similar capacity) for any length of time, my posts drop; I simply don't have the time, and am otherwise occupied, sometimes in countries where access online is limited or less than ideal.

The other variable, was, of course, my own personal domestic circumstances, and to do with the fact that - until last year - whenever I have been home for the past decade, I have been responsible for ordering and organising my mother's life, as she had dementia.

The upshot of that - because we cared for her at home - was that she needed 24 hour care, and that, in turn, meant that I was at home a lot, thus, any sort of standard social life was out of reach. And that meant a lot of time was spent online.

 

[Apple fanboy]

Also if you are not on FB, Twitter and the like (like me), it’s natural you will post more.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Also if you are not on FB, Twitter and the like (like me), it’s natural you will post more.

Actually, I'm on Twitter, - more for access to stuff that I need to keep abreast of than because I wish to actively participate - but, at most, post one or two tweets a day.

However, agreed, re FaceBook. I think that you all find that many of those who post quite a bit here, on this forum, do not have (or do not use) other online fora, such as FB.

 

[GGJstudios]

However, agreed, re FaceBook. I think that you all find that many of those who post quite a bit here, on this forum, do not have (or do not use) other online fora, such as FB.

That's true for me. No FB, Twitter, IG or others. This is the only forum I've ever participated in.