# Forum Statistics



## Krummhorn

Thought it would be fun to post some forum statistics:

In 2009:

New Threads Created:


Jan = 183
Feb = 237
Mar = 268
Apr = 301
New Posts


Jan = 1,658
Feb = 2,738
Mar = 3,914
Apr = 5,275
As of April 30, 2009:

The current most replied to thread: "Current Listening" with 1,983 replies

The current most viewed thread: "Identifying Music"

The current most popular forum area: "Classical Music "

We, as a forum community, are growing rapidly -


----------



## marval

Hi Krummhorn,

Thank you for that, it just goes to show that this is a great forum. There are many new members and threads, which isgood to see.


Margaret


----------



## PostMinimalist

I said I wouldn't but now I can't help myself!


----------



## handlebar

How delightful to see such an increase. Even the short time I have been here has proved to be a great enlightenment. Thanks to all of you for such fun!

Jim


----------



## ChamberNut

Good to see Talk Classical is starting to blossom!


----------



## World Violist

I like the looks of those statistics KH.


----------



## MEDIEVAL MIAMI

How old is this forum?


----------



## Krummhorn

MEDIEVAL MIAMI said:


> How old is this forum?


This forum was "born" on July 11, 2004.

Frederik Magle became its new owner on February 17, 2006.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

*Here's a FORUM STATISTIC that made me pretty happy*

Most members ever on-line over a 24-hour period: 110 (!!)

9 September, 11:26 UTC.

w00t!! Gratitude all around, new members, established ones, and those coming back for another look! 
Thanks for your visits to Talk Classical!


----------



## chillowack

Thank you all for such a great forum! Long may it sit at the top of the Google page that comes up when you search for "classical forum".


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

*And again, a new record!*

Most members visiting in a 24-hour period: *111*!!

About 10 minutes ago.

Thanks again for stopping by _Talk Classical_.


----------



## Tapkaara

Chi_town/Philly said:


> Most members visiting in a 24-hour period: *111*!!
> 
> About 10 minutes ago.
> 
> Thanks again for stopping by _Talk Classical_.


It can only continue to get better from here!


----------



## Air

Tapkaara said:


> It can only continue to get better from here!


It sure does!

_Most members visiting in a 24-hour period: *135!!*

A little more than 8 hours ago._


----------



## Andy Loochazee

Air said:


> It sure does!
> 
> _Most members visiting in a 24-hour period: *135!!*
> 
> A little more than 8 hours ago._


An awful lot of the material posted on this Forum over recent weeks has been of poor quality.


----------



## Head_case

Hope that's not my fault. I'm not _that_ prolific


----------



## Krummhorn

Andy Loochazee said:


> An awful lot of the material posted on this Forum over recent weeks has been of poor quality.


With all due respect, I disagree with your statement. IMHO, if we didn't have good quality postings, the numbers overall wouldn't be as high as they are. Read on:

January 2009 new registrations = 168
January 2010 new registrations = 317

January 2009 new threads = 183
January 2010 new threads = 334

January 2009 new posts = 1,658
January 2010 new posts = 3,837


----------



## Andy Loochazee

Krumhorn said:


> With all due respect, I disagree with your statement. IMHO, if we didn't have good quality postings, the numbers overall wouldn't be as high as they are. Read on:
> 
> January 2009 new registrations = 168
> January 2010 new registrations = 317
> 
> January 2009 new threads = 183
> January 2010 new threads = 334
> 
> January 2009 new posts = 1,658
> January 2010 new posts = 3,837


With all due respect, these figures don't say a thing about the quality of postings, which is what I was referring to. Most of the new registrations are from people who either say nothing, push porn/drugs, or merely ask for some piece of music to be identified, and then disappear. The number of quality posters is very small, and I would guess that there's more than a hint of evidence that some of these too are beginning to withdraw.

Many of the more interesting threads are very largely duplicates of previous threads that were started several months, and this phenomenon happens because it's very difficult to find such old threads due to the way this Board is set up.

If the threads are so great, as you allege, why is it that neither the Administrator, nor any of the 3 Mods has much to say. OK, CTP occasionally says something but it's mostly to comment that there is already a pre-existing thread. Rojo says virtually nothing at all. Daniel has completely disappeared. You comment very infrequently. On all other Boards, the Admin/Mod teams play a vital role in maintaining and improving standards, and in generating new interesting threads.

I reckon the main problem here is that the best formers members have all cleared off to pastures new largely because of the plethora of trivial, and often juvenile comments and discussions that are increasingly taking place.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

How does that metaphor about the candle and the darkness go again??


Air said:


> Most members visiting in a 24-hour period: *135!!*


Thanks, *Air*!

Honestly, we had eclipsed the mark previously mentioned on this thread (111) a few times about 3 months ago- but I didn't remark on it because many of the registrations involved involved the flotsam of a successul board, spam attempts. There are places that are free from spam attempts- but then, they're relatively free of posts, too.

*We don't have that problem here- and I (for one) am glad of it.*

The most curious aspect of the previous contribution is the following:


Andy Loochazee said:


> ... it's very difficult to find old threads the way the board's set up.


Well, here's one dissenting opinion:


Artemis said:


> The search facility here is good, and worth using.


Bottom line- (in 'air-travel' speak) we recognize you have a choice in Message Boards,
and we're glad for those who have chosen Talk Classical.


----------



## Andy Loochazee

Chi_townPhilly said:


> Bottom line- (in 'air-travel' speak) we recognize you have a choice in Message Boards,
> and we're glad for those who have chosen Talk Classical.


Good for you. I'm glad you feel pleased with things, but your comments don't address the ones I made.

To clarify, this thread was opened by Krummhorn in April 2009 with a very self-congratulatory listing of threads/postings on the Forum, which purport to demonstate how popular this Forum is but which in reality are statistically very dubious claims. That post has been followed up up by one or two rather sycophantic looking posts by others, that merely add to the dubious nature of the claims.

It is interesting that there have been 18 responses in this thread (excluding this one) from a total of 12 other members including me. Of those 12 other members, four have disappeared without trace, and 3 are no longer regular posters. Many of these 12 members were among the more valuable members who had generally something useful to say.

With few exceptions it does seem that most people who join this Forum don't last long. The vast majority have an extremely short-lived experience. There are countless numbers who register and post nothing at all. Statistics for zero posters are not shown but it is quite evident that there are lots of them, and they're not all spammers, drug and porn pushers.

Among those who have posted anything, roughly two-thirds have posted only once or at most three times. The vast majority of these appear to be people who probably have no real interest in classical music and are merely asking for some piece of elevator or game classical music to be identified to satisfy an idle curiosity.

Only 15% of members have made 10 or more posts. Among these, only a very element (perhaps a quarter) made it to "senior members" (100 plus posts), and most of these have completely disappeared, leaving only about 35-40 senior members who are still active. As I remarked earlier, some of these have slowed down their posting considerably of late. I think it's fair to say that most people who evidently thought it was great to start get fed up with it before too long.

As noted by one of the Administrators on another classical music Board, he would far prefer to have a few decent posters who can speak from experience and reasonable knowledge of the subject than a bunch of largely idle posters or ones who know very little and add nothing to the Forum.

All in all, I think that the claims made about how popular this Forum are based on a simplistic presentation of statistics should be treated with more than a little caution. The fact that there may be lots of new members registering conceals the fact that mostly they are not interesting or long-term members, and in fact they could be having crowding out effect on the enthusiasm of the more interested members to wish to stay.


----------



## Air

Andy Loochazee said:


> If the threads are so great, as you allege, why is it that neither the Administrator, nor any of the 3 Mods has much to say. OK, CTP occasionally says something but it's mostly to comment that there is already a pre-existing thread. Rojo says virtually nothing at all. Daniel has completely disappeared. You comment very infrequently. On all other Boards, the Admin/Mod teams play a vital role in maintaining and improving standards, and in generating new interesting threads.


I can definitely agree with this. It would be nice to see the Moderators "direct" the forum, instead of just stepping in whenever there is a thread to close or a new member to invite "onboard". The latter kind of reminds me of a radio station whose job is to attract the visitors for awhile but ultimately do nothing to keep them. A large group of quality posters is what makes a forum useful and interesting, not to say that TalkClassical doesn't have any, but as Andy has said, things can still be improved.

On most classical boards I know of, the Moderators / Administrators are some of the most frequent posters. It is only reasonable for the Moderators / Administrators of a classical music forum to participate in discussions as well. For example, I thought I would get to know Rojo better after she became a moderator, but I don't even know if she even frequents any of the actual threads. CTP has posted less frequently than he had before his pre-moderating days. Daniel has had his share of good posts in the past, but has practically disappeared without a trace, at least in our eyes. If there's any alternative reasons to the above, I apologize in advance. I do not wish to step on anyone's toes with my comments.

Overall, I don't think Laissez-faire is necessary on a Classical music board. In fact, this attitude has the potential for things to get a bit out of hand. Instead of waiting for things to be reported, perhaps it would be wiser to understand what is going on inside the tavern.

There is the other extreme of course, where the Moderator happens to be one of the only members posting. I've seen this on a couple of forums and it really is a pity. I know that TalkClassical will never sink to this low, but as Andy said, there is more to a forum than registrations. I've always envisioned the perfect forum as some sort of community, not a place on the internet where each "member" uses the message boards only for a personal reason.


----------



## Tapkaara

I have to agree with a lot Andy says too.


----------



## rojo

Andy Loochazee said:


> With all due respect, these figures don't say a thing about the quality of postings, which is what I was referring to. Most of the new registrations are from people who either say nothing, push porn/drugs, or merely ask for some piece of music to be identified, and then disappear. The number of quality posters is very small, and I would guess that there's more than a hint of evidence that some of these too are beginning to withdraw.
> 
> Many of the more interesting threads are very largely duplicates of previous threads that were started several months, and this phenomenon happens because it's very difficult to find such old threads due to the way this Board is set up.
> 
> If the threads are so great, as you allege, why is it that neither the Administrator, nor any of the 3 Mods has much to say. OK, CTP occasionally says something but it's mostly to comment that there is already a pre-existing thread. Rojo says virtually nothing at all. Daniel has completely disappeared. You comment very infrequently. On all other Boards, the Admin/Mod teams play a vital role in maintaining and improving standards, and in generating new interesting threads.
> 
> I reckon the main problem here is that the best formers members have all cleared off to pastures new largely because of the plethora of trivial, and often juvenile comments and discussions that are increasingly taking place.





Andy Loochazee said:


> Good for you. I'm glad you feel pleased with things, but your comments don't address the ones I made.
> 
> To clarify, this thread was opened by Krummhorn in April 2009 with a very self-congratulatory listing of threads/postings on the Forum, which purport to demonstate how popular this Forum is but which in reality are statistically very dubious claims. That post has been followed up up by one or two rather sycophantic looking posts by others, that merely add to the dubious nature of the claims.
> 
> It is interesting that there have been 18 responses in this thread (excluding this one) from a total of 12 other members including me. Of those 12 other members, four have disappeared without trace, and 3 are no longer regular posters. Many of these 12 members were among the more valuable members who had generally something useful to say.
> 
> With few exceptions it does seem that most people who join this Forum don't last long. The vast majority have an extremely short-lived experience. There are countless numbers who register and post nothing at all. Statistics for zero posters are not shown but it is quite evident that there are lots of them, and they're not all spammers, drug and porn pushers.
> 
> Among those who have posted anything, roughly two-thirds have posted only once or at most three times. The vast majority of these appear to be people who probably have no real interest in classical music and are merely asking for some piece of elevator or game classical music to be identified to satisfy an idle curiosity.
> 
> Only 15% of members have made 10 or more posts. Among these, only a very element (perhaps a quarter) made it to "senior members" (100 plus posts), and most of these have completely disappeared, leaving only about 35-40 senior members who are still active. As I remarked earlier, some of these have slowed down their posting considerably of late. I think it's fair to say that most people who evidently thought it was great to start get fed up with it before too long.
> 
> As noted by one of the Administrators on another classical music Board, he would far prefer to have a few decent posters who can speak from experience and reasonable knowledge of the subject than a bunch of largely idle posters or ones who know very little and add nothing to the Forum.
> 
> All in all, I think that the claims made about how popular this Forum are based on a simplistic presentation of statistics should be treated with more than a little caution. The fact that there may be lots of new members registering conceals the fact that mostly they are not interesting or long-term members, and in fact they could be having crowding out effect on the enthusiasm of the more interested members to wish to stay.





Air said:


> I can definitely agree with this. It would be nice to see the Moderators "direct" the forum, instead of just stepping in whenever there is a thread to close or a new member to invite "onboard". The latter kind of reminds me of a radio station whose job is to attract the visitors for awhile but ultimately do nothing to keep them. A large group of quality posters is what makes a forum useful and interesting, not to say that TalkClassical doesn't have any, but as Andy has said, things can still be improved.
> 
> On most classical boards I know of, the Moderators / Administrators are some of the most frequent posters. It is only reasonable for the Moderators / Administrators of a classical music forum to participate in discussions as well. For example, I thought I would get to know Rojo better after she became a moderator, but I don't even know if she even frequents any of the actual threads. CTP has posted less frequently than he had before his pre-moderating days. Daniel has had his share of good posts in the past, but has practically disappeared without a trace, at least in our eyes. If there's any alternative reasons to the above, I apologize in advance. I do not wish to step on anyone's toes with my comments.
> 
> Overall, I don't think Laissez-faire is necessary on a Classical music board. In fact, this attitude has the potential for things to get a bit out of hand. Instead of waiting for things to be reported, perhaps it would be wiser to understand what is going on inside the tavern.
> 
> There is the other extreme of course, where the Moderator happens to be one of the only members posting. I've seen this on a couple of forums and it really is a pity. I know that TalkClassical will never sink to this low, but as Andy said, there is more to a forum than registrations. I've always envisioned the perfect forum as some sort of community, not a place on the internet where each "member" uses the message boards only for a personal reason.


I've been a member of several forums, been a moderator at some, and have browsed regularly at others. From what I have seen, people come and go. It's just the nature of forums. I have seen members come back to a forum after many months of being away. People's lives sometimes get busy, that's natural. I have been a member of this forum for years now, and have witnessed it grow from a tiny, quiet place with barely any posters, to a bustling and lively community. Even without doing an analysis of who is here when, for how long, and so on, this place would not have become what it has without a healthy dose of solid posts, in my opinion. Also, there are juvenile posts at pretty much every forum, from what I have seen. That said, there is always room for more quality posts, of course.

I think the purpose of this thread was one of celebrating the posters in this community for their contributions. I don't know why it has become a complaints department. *shrug*

I too have seen forums where the Admins/mods don't participate at all, and some where they do all the posting. It seems to me that it is a symbiotic relationship where everyone benefits. The staff here can't please everyone all the time, that would not be possible given that everyone has their own opinions on how things should be run.

What can I say except that we do the best that we can, we are here every day (or in my case, almost,) and only wish to help keep this community a pleasant place to be. It pains me to see such prolific and knowledgeable posters such as Lars and Eric reprimanded in this way; I know firsthand how hard they work behind the scenes, and how little time they have for posting. As the place has grown, there has been even more work to be done. Perhaps I am the one worthy if criticism in terms of lack of posting; I will try to be a more active participant in the future. I don't know that being "pushed" to post in this manner is the most pleasant way of convincing me, but I guess I'll have to try, as I seem to be so interesting to you all.  By the way, I'm more of a reader than a poster, and I do read through many threads, although not all of them.

As to the point regarding new posters "crowding out" old ones, I don't think there is any way to prove that is fact, and this board will remain free and open to anyone who wants to contribute. Also, although a general consensus on what constitutes a quality post could possibly be given, there is way too much room for subjectivity on that issue to start giving out labels as to who is a "quality poster" and who is not.

There is absolutely nothing stopping anyone from starting their own thread, on whichever subject is of interest to them, and making fascinating posts. The members here make this place into what it is; make it what you want it to be. One only has the fun one makes oneself. 

Edit- Forgot to add; don't blame me if my posts are not "quality"; I can be quite juvenile at times. Hehe.


----------



## Tapkaara

Why shouldn't there be a complaints here?


----------



## rojo

Well, it's off-topic for one thing, as this is a thread about forum statistics.


----------



## Tapkaara

Far be it from me to stray off topic. So, I have created this thread here: http://www.talkclassical.com/8155-talk-classical-complaints-department.html#post86626


----------



## rojo

Gee, thanks a lot. 

(I guess I saw that coming...)


----------



## rojo

I see we broke a record yesterday, for the most members online over 24 hours; 141 beautiful people.  Ok, a couple of those people were less-than-beautiful spammers, but still.. I believe the old record was 135. Man, this joint is jumping! Congrats, folks! *applause*


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

*Hey, HERE's another milestone!*

Earlier this week, we welcomed our 100000th post!

The post cited is from *World Violist*, which seems appropriate, since he's on his way to becoming our top poster. It's also appropriate that the thread was "Current Listening," which is our highest-volume thread.

Really, though, it's a testament to the energetic activity from the whole of the community.

It's been busy... but this kind of busy, we like!


----------



## sospiro

Good news!!

But my page says this

*Classical Music Forums - Talk Classical Statistics

Threads: 7,575, Posts: 95,850, Members: 5,968, Active Members: 668
Welcome to our newest member, martist
*


----------



## Weston

Congratulations to World Violist and to Magle International Music for this milestone.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

sospiro said:


> Posts: 95,850...


I think there's a reason for this- 
(and if I'm wrong about this, I'm sure that one of our helpful Assistant Administrators will issue an erratum!):

Every post made is assigned a post number. This includes posts like yours & mine, double-posts that are later deleted by their authors, as well as posts that have been entered, and then deleted upon the writer's more careful reflection (hey, _I've_ done that!). However, post numbers are also assigned to violative posts that are deleted as irredeemable, as well as (most significantly) deleted spam posts and responses to spam posts. 
_Of this much, I am certain._

(Now for the theoretical part) I believe that the "95,980" number refers to the number of _universally viewable_ posts- and that (I think) is why the two numbers differ.


----------



## Krummhorn

This is quite true, afaik.

Every post has a "permalink" number ... this one is #32 in this particular thread ... but if I click on the word "permalink", a number (100329 at this moment) appears in the search bar of the browser. That number is the physical assignment of the actual total post count for the forum.

The difference between the number that _sospiro _mentions, represents those that are no longer viewable by regular members. We only soft-delete spam postings ... they are still quite intact on the server and remain viewable only by the forum staff.


----------



## Krummhorn

Have you all noticed the increase in activity here lately? Now at 871 active members, up from around 500 a couple months ago. 

Our sister forum, MIMF has 106,664 posts and TC has 106,646!! We are growing by leaps and bounds and that is super!!  Just 19 more posts here to jump ahead of MIMF.


----------

