Yes. The weekends have a slightly lower hit rate. Feb 1 was a Monday, and the two "jags" in the dip to the left of it are therefore Sat and Sun. You can count the jags to reveal a periodicity of 7 days. Previous stat porn has shown that as well. We could probably do some test to show that this weekend lull is statistically significant to "p < something".
The highest peaks are when we all got our shipments of Beaker Ben's latest cook of meth.
A couple thousand a day doesn't sound like very much probably to the former mods, but that's a pretty good audience. I'd never guess anywhere near that many. Why do people read here but not comment? It's always the same five names.
I think it's a good number too. This was being discussed on another blog I frequent. Most blogs attract at least 10x more readers than commenters, and many of the lurkers said they don't want to repeat what's already been said, or they are reading on a device that makes commenting difficult.
2500/day is where AWC began, if I remember correctly. It declined slowly each month. I talked to Fab about this and he told me once that each change from RYS to CM to AWC cost a big chunk of readers who never returned. I was disappointed that AWC couldn't grow an audience but most of the time I didn't care. The people (including me) who did read the page really needed it. Being needed is more important to me than being popular.
I truly felt like if there really was only 100 (or four!) of us, that's ok. After all, I have about six friends who I talk with about work and I'm not depressed about that number.
Having said that, Crystal deserves a ton of credit for doing whatever it is that grows this site. Not only are the same people still reading and contributing but there are new people posting and commenting. That's fantastic.
The down dips seem to come at regular intervals. Are they the weekends or something?
ReplyDeleteYes. The weekends have a slightly lower hit rate. Feb 1 was a Monday, and the two "jags" in the dip to the left of it are therefore Sat and Sun. You can count the jags to reveal a periodicity of 7 days. Previous stat porn has shown that as well. We could probably do some test to show that this weekend lull is statistically significant to "p < something".
DeleteThe highest peaks are when we all got our shipments of Beaker Ben's latest cook of meth.
A couple thousand a day doesn't sound like very much probably to the former mods, but that's a pretty good audience. I'd never guess anywhere near that many. Why do people read here but not comment? It's always the same five names.
ReplyDeleteI think it's a good number too. This was being discussed on another blog I frequent. Most blogs attract at least 10x more readers than commenters, and many of the lurkers said they don't want to repeat what's already been said, or they are reading on a device that makes commenting difficult.
DeleteGood for you, Crystal, and thanks to Terry P for the stat update.
ReplyDelete2500/day is where AWC began, if I remember correctly. It declined slowly each month. I talked to Fab about this and he told me once that each change from RYS to CM to AWC cost a big chunk of readers who never returned. I was disappointed that AWC couldn't grow an audience but most of the time I didn't care. The people (including me) who did read the page really needed it. Being needed is more important to me than being popular.
ReplyDeleteI truly felt like if there really was only 100 (or four!) of us, that's ok. After all, I have about six friends who I talk with about work and I'm not depressed about that number.
Having said that, Crystal deserves a ton of credit for doing whatever it is that grows this site. Not only are the same people still reading and contributing but there are new people posting and commenting. That's fantastic.
I concur. In all the important ways of measuring growth, the site has grown tremendously.
DeleteI think it says a lot that older posters, such as yourself, have started filtering back in.