1. 4
  1.  

  2. 5

    UPDATE: Apologies : I was taking Karma for postings/comments but it is NOT a 1-to-1 relationship!

    Please read numbers below with a bit of wriggle room.


    I like to gather evidence for claims. So here we go with some calcs from the data Scott provided.


    Before looking below please note that number of postings, IMHO, is a very inaccurate and limited definition of value.

    I also suggest that the postings contain comments on meta items as well as content.

    • It takes 20 members (of total 237, that is 8.4%) to get to 90% of postings.

    • There are 163 Lurkers with no postings = 71% (N.B. A number of those with only 2 former posts have taken a moment to contribute to the ‘deep six’ question on Friday)


    Looking at the data above and detail below we seem to be doing rather better than the 1/9/90 that Ben mentioned yesterday.


    Top posters with raw number of posts. Cumulative percentage and (last contributor named percentage)

    • 1 Ben 22% (22%)

    • 2 Ben Systemswiki = 38% (16%)

    • 3 Ben Systemswiki ivo = 50% (12%)

    • 4 Ben Systemswiki ivo tomhitchman = 61% (11%)

    • 5 Ben Systemswiki ivo tomhitchman NimbleMonkey = 68% (7%)

    • 6 Ben Systemswiki ivo tomhitchman NimbleMonkey Scottfr = 72% (4%)

    • 7 Ben Systemswiki ivo tomhitchman NimbleMonkey Scottfr HowardS = 75% (3%)

    • 8 Ben Systemswiki ivo tomhitchman NimbleMonkey Scottfr HowardS mikehaber = 77% (2%)


    Analysis of the other end of the spectrum:

    • 163 = No postings. = Lurkers (71%)

    • 20 = 1 Post (8.4%)

    • 5 = 2 Post

    • 14 = 3 Post

    • 4 = 4 Post

    • 12 = 5 -> 10 Posts

    • 6 = 11 -> 20 Posts

    • 4 = 21 -> 30 Posts

    • 2 = 31 -> 39 Posts


    My Questions prompted by the hugely useful feed back from ‘deep six’ are:

    • How many people still do get email alerts?

    • How many people know there is a website, depository, ability to search (now back on stream thx @Scottfr)?

      • Infered from micdonnelly that not many do.
    • How many people know that it is a User Generated Site

    • Can we surface the pageviews to get a sense of traffic rather than postings

    • Can we do some tracking of different things for users like a table with the following which may be able to lead us towards interventions to ‘bring people back’ whom may not have had the chance to learn about the functionality of the site through too poor initial information:

      • username
      • postings
      • email choices
      • last logged in
      • pageviews as user
      • type of device used
    • How many people are struggling with time, priorities, ability to sift information quickly and store a reference to it to come back later. Seems like a few mentioned this, I have my own - inadequate - method.

      • perhaps some clipping service could be useful here.
      • could this may be like the amazon one ‘people who viewed this item also viewed X item’ so we could further help mediate each others choices?

    Perhaps the last Questions could be transferred into a request @scottfr

    Thanks for Reading.

    Tom

    -

    1. 2

      Thanks for the analysis Tom. I like the questions at the end. Given we are here, where may it be useful to go? It may be useful for readers to be able to tag posts with an intended audience, or a subject.

      I’m working back from a users wanting ‘beginners SSM’ pages, or ‘advanced Action Research’ or similar. Perhaps other tags would be more useful? Custom tags may help the required tags emerge, but could get messy? Sorry @Scottfr if I’ve just added to the model.report feature list…..:-)