Updated Mefi stats through December 2005

December 29, 2005 4:32 PM

Andy at waxy.org has updated his Mefi stats through December 2005.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken to MetaFilter-Related at 4:32 PM (23 comments total)

Wow, almost half of the most active threads were in 2005 alone.
posted by DakotaPaul at 4:41 PM on December 29, 2005

We're getting 30-odd threads a day? No wonder I can't keep up to this place.

I think part of the success of MeFi is going to be in naturally restricting the number of FPPs.

I suspect that the 30-a-day number is already a natural limitation: it seems to be fairly constant over time, and may indicate that when the front page is already filled with new threads, people tend to wait for another opportunity to share.

I think we (well, Matt and Jessamyn) can leverage that natural selection process by becoming more active in removing FPPs. I suspect the nature of the front page listing has a very strong influence on the type and quality of links and discussions, and I think it is their responsibility to guide this process.

As an extreme example, imagine there were no tolerance for political posts. I think the number of political links submitted would plummet, and we'd see a lot more Fark-like "weird shit of the web" links, and we'd see a lot more silly-assed conversation in the threads.
posted by five fresh fish at 5:27 PM on December 29, 2005

And just because this seems like as appropriate a place as any to talk about it:

The way Citadel handled this problem of too many FPPs was to create the idea of "rooms" and "floors." Floors provided the thematic guide for a collection of rooms. Rooms provided a thematic or topical guide for a single discussion.

In this structure, the MetaFilter network is divided into four floors: MeFi, AskMe, Projects, and MeTa; and each floor contains a limitless number of rooms, each one an FPP "containing" a bunch of people talking about more or less the same thing. (Note, too, that not everyone in our home takes time to live on every floor: some people restrict themselves to one or two floors; and likely none of us visits or talks in every room.)

I propose - yet again - that there are so many rooms added to MeFi every day that it makes good sense to divide them in two types of room, and put those types on separate floors. Those of us who tend to live on several floors would likely visit both the new MeFi A and MeFi B floors, so no skin off our asses.

I bet cash money that there is a significant population of our home who would choose to inhabit one or the other MeFi floor, given an appropriate distinction between the two. I'll bet they will welcome relief from 30-odd new FPPs a day, half of which they don't care about.
posted by five fresh fish at 5:44 PM on December 29, 2005

I'd have to disagree, fff. I really think the data-topological 'flatness' of Metafilter, at every level, is one of its main attractions. As I've militated for before, though, I think a delicious-esque tagging engine, a real one, underneath, would not compromise that structure, and allow some rich feature-growth in the future.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:46 PM on December 29, 2005

Or: Fork! Spoon!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:47 PM on December 29, 2005

Well, who knows. It's going okay right now. I don't think it needs to change too much yet.
posted by delmoi at 5:59 PM on December 29, 2005

I'll bet they will welcome relief from 30-odd new FPPs a day, half of which they don't care about.

Not if it's about the links. If it's about the links, they'll keep a separate window open for each floor, or two separate feeds. In fact, within a week someone would make an aggregated feed of both floors available.
posted by lodurr at 6:15 PM on December 29, 2005

what if there was no tolerance for political posts and fark-ish posters got castrated? would metafilter finally become..... perfect?
posted by soma lkzx at 6:29 PM on December 29, 2005

That spike looks like a mushroom.
posted by terrapin at 6:54 PM on December 29, 2005

Mushroom thread? Nooo!!! browser . . . freezing . . . not responding . . .
posted by JeffK at 7:33 PM on December 29, 2005

must buy mefi stocks immediately!
posted by ori at 12:14 AM on December 30, 2005

Just FYI, that's a thread every 55 minutes and a comment every 81 seconds in November, the latest full month of data.
posted by planetkyoto at 2:36 AM on December 30, 2005

Wow. This site has so jumped the shark.
posted by eyeballkid at 3:10 AM on December 30, 2005

Saying things have 'jumped the shark' has so jumped the shark.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:16 AM on December 30, 2005

stavrosthewonderchicken: "I'd have to disagree, fff. I really think the data-topological 'flatness' of Metafilter, at every level, is one of its main attractions."

Citadel : MetaFilter :: Taxonomies : Folksonomies
posted by Plutor at 4:39 AM on December 30, 2005

Everyone went to the home page of waxy.org and watched the dog-eyed-welders' version of "My Humps," right?

NOW. DO IT NOW.
posted by mzurer at 7:10 AM on December 30, 2005

The mushroom thread stopped short one measly comment of equalling the infamous BlogStop thread.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 8:14 AM on December 30, 2005

QUICK! DON'T WATCH THE MY HUMPS VIDEO!

IT BLINDS YOUR EYES WHILE IT STEALS YOUR SOUL!
posted by cyphill at 8:19 AM on December 30, 2005

Citadel : MetaFilter :: Taxonomies : Folksonomies

Excellent.

The advantage of taxonomies is that they make it easier for anyone to find the things other people have filed.

The advantage of folksonomies is that they make it easier for you to find the things you have filed. That other people may find your folksonomy useful is only a side-effect (see: 'craptacular' tag).

The ideal situation, IMO, is a cross-breed: taxonomic classification with folksonomic tagging.

AKA, the Twenty Questions game's first question: animal, vegetable, mineral. In MeFi-land, that's something like: "web link, question, or beef" (MeFi, AskMe, MeTa).
posted by five fresh fish at 2:01 PM on December 30, 2005

The advantage of folksonomies is that they make it easier for you to find the things you have filed.

Well, to be fair, that "you" should be understood to be plural -- to refer to the members of the community within which the folksonomy is defined. Though I admit that's a side effect of the fact that folksonomies are defined in a community context.

Also, I'd distinguish between "folksonomy" and "tagging". I don't think it's really a folksonomy if it's just a bunch of tags defined by one person. That's just an ad hoc taxonomy. (And probably a bad one.) To me, "folksonomy" denotes something that results from aggregated tagging. It's de facto, but no ad hoc. I haven't had enough coffee to come up with any more latinisms, sorry.
posted by lodurr at 5:26 AM on December 31, 2005

Other than the batshitinsane tag, we don't have a folksonomy, then.
posted by five fresh fish at 11:02 AM on December 31, 2005

I wouldn't argue with that. Remember, though, those are my criteria; you may tag it differently. [g /]
posted by lodurr at 11:15 AM on December 31, 2005

When I said "folksonomies", I used it in the slightly broader "we have tags OMG" sense. But I do look forward to the day that there's some sort of community tagging apparatus on MeFi. Whether it's contacts-only, or majority-rules, or whatever, I think it would be an improvement over the current system.
posted by Plutor at 6:13 AM on January 1, 2006