Print

[Kilmor]

After 6 months of joining this site I have noticed what most of the posts and discussions are made of and here are the results.
50% long time members that have stuck with the sites
12.5% people who join make a couple posts then never come back
12.5% people who stick around for a long time and don't log on again or people who rarely get on
25% of old posts no one posts on anymore.
I wanted to make a pie chart (or cake) but I was too lazy. I think this is some interesting results don't you?

[Enchantressa]

Did you really sit down and count everything up to equal about that?

That's how a largescale forum usually equates out though. The smaller forums are usually 4-30 crazy active people, or dead. Smaller ones tend to have less balance, and more heavy weights one side or the other. As with all things, the larger you get, the more general it seems things turn out to be.

[Alastago]

1%: make a few posts, then lurk because of being too shy to post on forums :x

[Enchantressa]

I often think the first 4-5 posts are easy, then about the next 50 are the hardest, and then everything after that is super simple. (Large forum, smaller goes more like, 1-2 easy, 25 harder, after is easy.)

Its a 'newbie luck', 'where do I fit', 'established member' thing, imo.

[Selroth]

I gotta disagree with those stastics.

50% long-time members have stuck with the site?  What defines a long-time member.  If it's what I think you're saying, then we have abour 600 long-time members and we sure don't have 300 of those active right now :)

Most who join never make a post at all, actually.  Our member count was like 1800 or something last year, but then I emptied out all accounts that never made a post or logged in again in 2007, and we just not got back up to a 3rd of where we were.  Members who join the site, and make a post, are very rare.  Those who stick around for more than a week are even more rare.

We have 4285 topics.  Maybe 80 of those have been posted in this month.  That leaves about 4200 old topics that no one posts in anymore.  I think that's much more than 25% =P

Here's a stat's page, but it wont have the criteria Kilmore is saying - wish it did.  I'd have to look at the database and figure things out myself, but I'm too lazy :)

[sillydraco]

sadly, most of the posts here are Chat or Fluff posts :(

[Aurelia]

That's the thing though Draco, people say that it's sad (which it is) but then don't create any threads that they're actually interested in.  You obviously do create threads (yey!) but others on here don't seem to realise that if they want certain topics to be talked about then they need to create those threads themselves, not lurk and wait for someone else to read their mind and create a post for them to take part in.

I've found it really interesting seeing what threads are created here, on a forum completely about dragons and for dragons, and that the majority of new threads don't seem to have anything to do with dragons at all but the dragon community still wants to be talking about those subjects.  Not that it's a bad thing, but it does then make me irate when members say "There aren't any topics I want to take part in right now...." and they don't actually create any of those topics themselves.  I'd love to be able to read people's minds and post topics for dragon subjects that everyone wants to take part in, but I can't so you guys need to do that!

Hmmm ok so that may be a little of topic for this thread at first glance but not really when you think about it because the "older" members will have already talked about awakenings, etc and are less likely to start new topics about those, new members are less likely to start them if they don't know what it is they should be asking, so when you have a long established site like this one then content will tend to gravitate towards whatever the "older" members are chatting about.  If I wasn't planning a wedding and working (I now have a job as of a couple of weeks ago) then I'd go through all of the old posts and re-post the subjects I think are interesting, but again that's only my point of view and others may want to talk about other things.  The old threads are all there though, if anyone sees an interesting topic, instead of posting in the old thread why not create a new one for that subject to be discussed with fresh eyes and new members as well as old?

[Enchantressa]

Aurelia has the right idea - but the problem in her suggestion is either:

1. People don't know what they want to eat talk about, then they can't create it. (I do this with food.)
2. They look at the old topics and see they've already been discussed, and don't want to necro a thread or create one they feel everyone already participated in.

[Selroth]

Here's the nature of the beast, as I understand it.

You have active participation, and passive participation.  Active participation is when the member goes out of his normal routine to contribute to the site.  For example, signing up, starting threads, starting a project in the community, volunteering to be a moderator, etc.  Passive participation would be the routine of responding/replying only - a periodic sweep of the site's recent activity / email subscriptions, and replying to what they see is interesting.  Passive participation only generates activity when provoked.

Most of us are mostly passive - and that's great!  Better than none.  We don't really think about things until we read about it or are somehow inspired to write a post, or sometimes even a new topic (rarely do I think people login to the site with the first objective of creating a thread - most create a thread after being inspired by other posts in some way). 

When people think about it, they'd like to see more meaningful posts.  But the problem is, they don't think about it - if they did they probably would create a thread.  But it's routine to read posts just like you check your emails.

Also, many older members have exhausted things to talk about, or have noticed a few topics that repeat the same subject.  New people may have never discussed it, but old people may be sick of it.  Besides, when does a discussion actually go anywhere or change anyone's perspective?  Do we really learn anything from them?  If we have expectations of our contribution (remember that Online Participation thread I talked about with the wikipedia article), and they are not met, then we're less likely to continue participating.  Fluff threads we have such low expectations they are easier to meet - but more meaningful threads we generally have high expectations and low yeild.

How do we fix this?  Well, it's a rather complicated problem.  It'd be nice to have a wiki that conversations can contribute to - that way whenever the subject comes around again new people can read up on it and old people can review, and and constructive conversation picks up where it left off instead of building the 1st floor of a tower over and over.

How do we get more active participation?  We don't, really.  We make it as easy as possible to passively participate, and try to offer more inspiring content, and a more rewarding experience (such as using the method above).

[Aurelia]

I'd love for us to have a wiki, the idea seemed to get canned though but it would be great to start that up again.  I know Forfaox has one going but there's not really any harm in us having one here too.  A collaboration would be good, that was talked about, but in the mean time we could at least get one of our own going :)

[Kilmor]

 Yay a wiki sounds great!

[sillydraco]

didnt tysha have a wiki? or wuz it jkarrah? or mistral? ...i forget 

[Rossenod]

I think a wiki would be a great idea, also.  I've never personally used one, but only because I don't know how to use one necessarily.  Given proper instruction, I would definitely be using it.

[Rocangus]

Hmm... Well, maybe 50% of the people who have joined since you joined have stayed, Kilmore. Apart from that... Nah, I think you somewhere are wrong as well.

That link to the stats was broken.

I see myself as between active and passive participation. I do check the forum on a daily routine, and I do make new subjects sometimes. Although, I wouldn't say that I am applying for being a moderator; it would be a kinda large responsibility, you know. And being only 15; that could be a bit too much, I think.

About the wiki, I'm not sure about my opinion. I haven't considered the idea, so therefore I cannot comment upon it, in my opinion.