Active MeFi Members January 2, 2002 3:14 AM   Subscribe

How many of the 13179 metafilter members actively participate (post and read) on a regular basis? Is that number the result of a SELECT MAX(user_identity) type SQL statement or is it calculated somehow based on readership and usage?

How many of these accounts are test accounts? How many are inactive? How many were created and then never used or rarely used to post over the previous 2 or 3 years? How many are not Neale Talbot?

I'd love to see some histograms.
posted by internook to MetaFilter-Related at 3:14 AM (23 comments total)

For the record, I have 2 accounts, one of which is not the second one mentioned above.

I will not disclose which one it is.
posted by Neale at 3:22 AM on January 2, 2002

I sense potential for a whole bunch of ebay auctions....

or is that just my stavro-sense tingling again?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:23 AM on January 2, 2002

I suppose all clever people have at least two accounts in case they'd like to start an argument with themselves or something.
posted by internook at 4:57 AM on January 2, 2002

I hope not. And as seen recently, multiple accounts (for purposes other than the occasional joke) are frowned upon quite emphatically. I've only got the one, but then I'm not as clever as I like to think I am...

Your question is a good one, internook (and a tangential question, but only slightly tangential, is why have you been such a stranger here?). It's something I've often wondered about too.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:13 AM on January 2, 2002

Not that anybody's suggested it, but let's please not get into lists of most-frequent-posters. Can't think of a worse metric than "status points" for how often you speak.

posted by luser at 6:00 AM on January 2, 2002

stavrosthewonderchicken, you mean a stranger to metatalk or metafilter in general? I observe alot, and sometimes start a long winded post. I can't count the number of times I have started to write something here and at MeFi proper and thought better of it. I guess I am like that in real life too. That would be interesting... seeing what people almost post with the preview button, but out of context so you couldn't place it with the person.

Also I tend to be quite abrasive and mean, so sometimes it is better to say nothing than say what is on my mind.

posted by internook at 7:03 AM on January 2, 2002

I just meant that you've been a MeFite for a long time - quite a bit longer than me - and not, well, actively participated much.

Not that there's anything wrong with that, and for once, I mean that seriously. The idea that one measures one's value here by the number of comments one has made is moronic. I just had noticed your username for the first time this evening, and checked your profile, and was surprised how few comments you'd actually made.

Which of course, has absolutely zero correlation with the time you might have spent here reading and thinking about what more garrulous people were saying...

No offense intended.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:08 AM on January 2, 2002

I think something like this would invariably lead to some sort of meaningless, competitive game where people try to out-post others. There's already too much noise here as it is.

And using multiple aliases is a practice of scoundrels.
posted by crunchland at 7:17 AM on January 2, 2002

I think we are missing my original point. I am not suggesting that Matt might assign a value to the number of posts or comments, or even a value to any particular post or comment.

What I'm wondering about is past trends, and the real number of live users (ballpark, since many like myself are quiet participants).

crunchland called you a scoundrel Neale.
posted by internook at 7:50 AM on January 2, 2002

There's already a scriptlet on the front page letting you know how many people requested a new page at MeFi in the past 10 minutes.

One could just log the peak active users and the average number of active users.
posted by riffola at 8:10 AM on January 2, 2002

I have mentioned a check I can do, on the number of people logging in and out of metafilter in the past x days. When I ran it a month or two ago, almost three thousand members had hit the site in the past 7 days, with about 1500 in the past 24 hours. Here are the current numbers I just ran for comparison.

Number of members that logged in:
in the last month: 3056
in in the last 7 days: 2136
in in the last 24 hours: 1426
posted by mathowie (staff) at 10:22 AM on January 2, 2002

That's like 20% of the total per month. Hmm. And HALF that in the last 24 hours. Everyone's safely ensconced back at work, I see :)

Those are discrete, Matt? In that it's not me, you and 8 other guys logging in 300 times each a month?
posted by UncleFes at 11:31 AM on January 2, 2002

Those are discrete, Matt?

They are separate, registered members of the site logging in.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:36 AM on January 2, 2002

Looks like you have quite a substantial absentee namelord population.
posted by UncleFes at 12:27 PM on January 2, 2002

separate, registered members of the site logging in.

does that mean going through the login process, or just getting your cookie checked? since I'm usually on from home, I never log in, unless I have a really compelling reason.
posted by jessamyn at 1:56 PM on January 2, 2002

does that mean going through the login process, or just getting your cookie checked?

It means that many members hit the index page in that time period, which is tracked via cookie, so it's the number getting their cookie checked.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 3:39 PM on January 2, 2002

Sure, all 12,000 don't post, but over 1400 members every 24 hours, plus anybody who would be a member but can't login. MetaFilter is more addictive than crack.

Any stats on the discreet number of comment posters each day, week, month?
posted by willnot at 7:11 PM on January 2, 2002


"getting your cookie checked"
Call me kooky, but wouldn't that be a great geek euphemism for sex?

posted by jonmc at 8:24 PM on January 2, 2002

I miss doublepostguy.
posted by redfoxtail at 8:30 PM on January 2, 2002

I add them to my list of people who don't quite get it

Mea culpa. Consider me enlightened :)

BUT... with the cachet that purports to attach to low member numbers, is it fair that some absentee namelord holds number a >1000 number, when someone else, who posts solid stuff and makes good comments, has a <10000 number?
posted by UncleFes at 6:54 AM on January 3, 2002

Because that is so important.
posted by kv at 8:16 AM on January 3, 2002

Point taken. And yet, someone paid a substantial chunk of change for the priviledge of using member number 8. So it must be important to some people.
posted by UncleFes at 8:28 AM on January 3, 2002

This thread reminded me that I signed up for an account (I think) back when Metafilter opened, looked around, didn't get it, and forgot the account name and password. I tried to find my old user name so I could tell Matt & he could delete it. No luck. But in my search, I did come across SbBall.gif Guy.
posted by jennak at 3:19 PM on January 3, 2002

« Older I love Matt. !   |   Usability is nice Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments