Comments on 11945

My friend and I were discussing MeFi and came to a point of contention when estimating the number of new users MeFi receives per day. My guess was 5 to 10, his was 25 or more. Perhaps this argument can be laid to rest here. How many new users does MeFi average per day?
posted by c:\awesome to MetaFilter-related at 7:36 PM (53 comments total)

i don't know, but if they all have amazing usernames like yours, BRING 'EM ON.

totally serious. that username rocks.
posted by shmegegge at 7:39 PM on May 23, 2006

I think the average is around 12 per day.
posted by mathowie at 7:43 PM on May 23, 2006

I thought that new user signups were disabled the majority of the time.
posted by Steven C. Den Beste at 7:44 PM on May 23, 2006

Wow! Thanks for the quick reply, mathowie! My estimate was AWESOME!
posted by c:\awesome at 7:46 PM on May 23, 2006

I thought that new user signups were disabled the majority of the time.

Nope, wide open since Nov. 2004. It's five bucks though.
posted by mathowie at 7:50 PM on May 23, 2006

November 18, to be exact. [cough]
posted by cribcage at 7:51 PM on May 23, 2006

"I thought that new user signups were disabled the majority of the time."

and the response

"Nope, wide open since Nov. 2004. It's five bucks though."

He might mean in terms of how it affects the relevance of a supposedly "average" rate. I suspect, though, that you're going by an intuitive number based on your experience of the last year or so. Right?
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 7:59 PM on May 23, 2006

no it was closed from like 2002-2004. Right now, today, I get about 10-12 signups a day. Sometimes there's a news story about ask mefi and 40 people sign up, and then on weekends maybe 4 or 5 people sign up, but the daily average new paid users runs around 10 or so these days. Yesterday 14 people signed up. Today 8 so far. etc.
posted by mathowie at 8:12 PM on May 23, 2006

~~The really important question is how many of them are sock puppets.~~ The really important question is how many of them are dhoyt's sock puppets.
posted by loquacious at 8:13 PM on May 23, 2006

~10 * $5 * 30 days = ~$1500 USD/month.

Well, the bandwidth bill is getting paid, at least.
posted by loquacious at 8:15 PM on May 23, 2006

How was the number of signups affected when you went to the $5 fee?
posted by c:\awesome at 8:20 PM on May 23, 2006

New users to December 2005.
posted by tellurian at 8:25 PM on May 23, 2006

How was the number of signups affected when you went to the $5 fee?

They skyrocketed from zero.
posted by MrZero at 8:32 PM on May 23, 2006

Signups were closed, and then the fee was put in place.
posted by delmoi at 8:42 PM on May 23, 2006

But 40 people signed up during the closed period December 2002 through March 2004. The criteria that allowed the few to enter would make interesting reading.
posted by Cranberry at 10:01 PM on May 23, 2006

After the opening and closing of April 2004 when 160 joined, 47 more joined for free before the $5.00 fee in November 2004.
posted by Cranberry at 10:04 PM on May 23, 2006

Cranberry, how do you know this?
posted by Dunwitty at 10:11 PM on May 23, 2006

mathowie: I assume those are 10-12 paid users? How many never go through with the paypal process?
posted by mullacc at 10:17 PM on May 23, 2006

Dunwitty
Click on the link tellurian provided.
posted by Cranberry at 10:23 PM on May 23, 2006

Oh cool! I was the only person to sign up on July 15th, 2002.

WELL AREN'T I JUST SPECIAL?
posted by Ryvar at 10:43 PM on May 23, 2006

Cranberry, I was letting people have accounts when they'd email a sob story or be a journalist looking to respond to something. I was doing them by hand and getting tired of it so I did the five dollar thing to cover my new hosting fees.
posted by mathowie at 10:57 PM on May 23, 2006

After the opening and closing of April 2004 when 160 joined
Not a planned opening and closing.
posted by tellurian at 11:15 PM on May 23, 2006

♥ mathowie, it is extremely generous of you to put up with all of us. I intended no criticism, I just wanted to make Ryvar feel special.
posted by Cranberry at 12:39 AM on May 24, 2006

btw, I am among those who think the fee should be annual for all mefites. This may be a .
posted by Cranberry at 12:44 AM on May 24, 2006

From the 2004 thread: I realized I don't want new commenting members. We already have too many comments on the site. I'd rather have new posts that are good, and will program a way to allow new users via that route.

Them were the good old days.
posted by bingo at 12:50 AM on May 24, 2006

I pressed the HOT button about 73 times.

Nothing happened. I was disappointed by that.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 12:54 AM on May 24, 2006

I agree with Cranberry and have often considered posting a question about that here. I'd gladly pay $5/year. So many people here apparently think this community is worth something—look at how much money people have contributed, sight unseen/disc unheard, to the Metafilter Compilation Album project. Granted, I expect each of the contributors paid for at least one copy for themselves, but still.
posted by emelenjr at 4:28 AM on May 24, 2006

stav: I get a feeling it should have been pressed just 3 times...
posted by i_cola at 5:24 AM on May 24, 2006

For folks who would "gladly pay $5 a year," you can already do that.
posted by marxchivist at 5:30 AM on May 24, 2006

For folks who would "gladly pay $5 a year," you can already do that.

Yup. Give Matt as much money as you want. I don't see why it's important to you to make sure everybody else does so as well. If Matt needs it, he'll ask for it.
posted by languagehat at 6:20 AM on May 24, 2006

"I pressed the HOT button about 73 times.

Nothing happened"

Dammit, I wondered why my lights were flickering.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 6:24 AM on May 24, 2006

Yearly fees just mean that old members who have drifted away don't bother renewing, which is a bad thing. Lurkers always pop up at the most interesting times.

OTOH, excessive banning and paying to rejoin... there's an idea that works.
posted by smackfu at 6:33 AM on May 24, 2006

I don't see why it's important to you to make sure everybody else does so as well.

The free rider problem.
posted by Mid at 6:33 AM on May 24, 2006

The figure is really closer to 6, the others are merely members of my growing sock puppet army.
posted by drezdn at 7:13 AM on May 24, 2006

The criteria that allowed the few to enter would make interesting reading.

1.) Must email mathowie the word 'banana'.

Thanks, Matt!
posted by moift at 7:24 AM on May 24, 2006

posted by blue_beetle at 8:40 AM on May 24, 2006

I pressed the HOT button about 73 times.

Nothing happened. I was disappointed by that.

I pressed it twice, and PayPal sucked two five dollar payments from my bank account. :(
posted by oneirodynia at 9:03 AM on May 24, 2006

I pressed the NOT HOT button and got your ten bucks!

The free rider problem.

There is no problem. If Matt has a problem, he'll let us know. Otherwise the only problem is your feeling like everybody else should give Matt whatever you're giving Matt. That's not a problem for anyone but you.
posted by languagehat at 9:10 AM on May 24, 2006

There is a "problem" in the sense that support for Matt/the site is inequitably distributed among users of the site. If Matt and everyone else is cool with that, fine.

Otherwise the only problem is your feeling like everybody else should give Matt whatever you're giving Matt.

This is strangely personal and vehement. I don't feel like everyone should give Matt what I give. In fact, I don't think I have given anything at all. The issue is whether a subscription based model (based on a price decided by someone other than me) would make sense. I think the model is at least worth considering, rather than shooting down with "you're not the boss!"
posted by Mid at 9:32 AM on May 24, 2006

By "you" I don't mean "you, Mid," so please don't take it personally (and I don't see what you mean by "vehement"). "You" is just shorthand for "anyone other than Matt who insists that everyone should pay a yearly fee." I was responding to Cranberry and emelenjr; I don't even know if you agree with them. You were just providing an explanation, and I was responding to it. Hope that helps.
posted by languagehat at 11:33 AM on May 24, 2006

"This is strangely personal and vehement."

Yeah, I think you're being kind of acerbic, languagehat. (As loathe as I am to be critical in any way after having you praise me in several recent threads.) I think that "everyone should pay" sentiment is a reasonable one. I also think the "if you're so eager to pay Matt, there's nothing stopping you" sentiment is also a reasonable one.

Of those of we 160 who made it in on April 1 and 2, I can say that I did nothing more than wait for exactly 12 noon and hit that page and entered the info.

Well, actually, at that moment I did so, got that page, and then opened another browser window and tried it again because I had a friend I really wanted to join. Nothing came of that because I didn't hear back from him in time; but I completed my info.

It was only later after seeing the other users that got in, that I realized I was about 65 users too late to have legitimately managed it. Which was kind of a bummer. I think all 80 of us or so hit that page right at noon.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 11:41 AM on May 24, 2006

"Acerbic" is fine. I'm frequently acerbic, and I like the tingly aftertaste it leaves on my tongue.
posted by languagehat at 11:44 AM on May 24, 2006

OK. I just think that Matt would not be insane to charge a measly $5 subscription.
posted by Mid at 11:45 AM on May 24, 2006

Not insane, maybe. Shooting the MeFi community in the ass, probably. As smackfu said: "Yearly fees just mean that old members who have drifted away don't bother renewing, which is a bad thing. Lurkers always pop up at the most interesting times."

A smart man from an awesome town.
posted by Plutor at 12:16 PM on May 24, 2006

I'll throw in that I'd still like to see Matt code a method for gift memberships to be given. Some method for me to credit Matt with the $5 but allowing the recipient to come in and choose their name and password independent of the giver.
/pony request
posted by geekyguy at 4:06 PM on May 24, 2006

Acutally, I thought languagehat was being Aramaic. After reviewing his response, I realize he was actually being balsamic.
posted by Dunwitty at 4:09 PM on May 24, 2006

As long as he's not Aromatic...
posted by Dunwitty at 4:09 PM on May 24, 2006

I took a shower just an hour ago, I'll have you know.
posted by languagehat at 5:02 PM on May 24, 2006

Yeah, we know. But a shower of what? Anchovy paste?
posted by loquacious at 6:30 PM on May 24, 2006

i don't know, but if they all have amazing usernames like yours, BRING 'EM ON.
totally serious. that username rocks.
I thought so too, but then wondered "I wonder how many of these young whipper-snappers even know what that is". The command prompt (or "DOS prompt" as we called it in the old days) is something the majority of computer users these days have never seen.
posted by dg at 8:46 PM on May 24, 2006

May 23, 2006 7:36 PM Subscribe

May 23, 2006
7:36 PM Subscribe