Re: urc and urcm; this be skewed stats territory, do not read if you are of a gentle nature

[JMS]

On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 15:32:29 +0100, "Wm..."
> wrote:

>
>before anyone asks, I haven't posted this to urcm because I know what
>would happen if I did.
>
>let us move on.
>
>prompted by another posting in this group I checked how many people were
>posting to urc and urcm [1]
>
>[1] I keep about 3 months for both and have killed a few threads that
>were too tedious for a person without a mono-maniacal attention span so
>the numbers are indicative rather than absolute. I am about as certain
>as I can be that this actually favours the people mentioned below. If I
>hadn't killed those threads you'd be seeing even more of the same.
>
>Perhaps we should start with how many posts there were in each group?
>
>urc: 10961
>urcm: 3798
>
>ok, how many people made those posts?
>
>urc: 371
>urcm: 218
>
>that surprised me a bit as it has been asserted that there were only
>20-ish people posting to urcm.

I did not say that.

I realise that understanding simple sentences is not your strong point
- your understanding of figures seems to be worse.

Some clues: you have not taken in to account people who have posted
with multiple addresses - your 218 is way out.

What I said was :

"Given that there are only about 20 people post to URCM - ( once you
forget the moderators) more than every couple of days - they are not
going to be large numbers."

Now have a read of that and see what it says again - concentrate on
"every couple of days".


In a typical month there are about 130 different people posting to
URCM (note : different people - not different addresses)

In May there were 125 different people posted to URCM.

32 of those only made one post

Half of those (67) made less than 1 post a week.

There were only 9 people made more than one post a day

If you look at the regular posters - I stand by what I said.

Ignore the moderators and you will see that there about 20 people who
post more than every couple of days (ie more than 15 posts in the
month).

Similarly your analysis of URC is ****e.

If you want a better explanation of those figures - then just ask,

[JMS]

On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 02:33:21 +0100, "Wm..."
> wrote:

>Sat, 5 Jun 2010 17:46:08 >
>uk.net.news.moderation JMS >



<snip the Maggot ****>


>>Some clues: you have not taken in to account people who have posted
>>with multiple addresses - your 218 is way out.
>
>This from the person that thought their posts were being cancelled and
>has admitted to nym shifting. I'm amused. I think JMS is trying to say
>that many more people nym shift because she does so at times.

Oh dear - I knew you were not bright - but I hadn't realised that you
were as bad as you are.

Have a look at the following examples and have a guess at how many
unique *people* there are. Then tell us how many your analysis will
have thought there were

Danny Colyer >
Danny Colyer >

Gwyn Oakley >
Gwyn Oakley >

>>What I said was :
>>
>>"Given that there are only about 20 people post to URCM - ( once you
>>forget the moderators) more than every couple of days - they are not
>>going to be large numbers."
>>
>>Now have a read of that and see what it says again - concentrate on
>>"every couple of days".
>
>I have read it more than once. It remains broken english, I see you
>wrote "more than" even if you choose to ignore the fact that you said
>that now.


I can explain - I cannot give you the brain to understand.

I can see it is quite a long sentence to actually understand - If you
struggle with a sentence - just ask - don't guess - you will most
likely get it wrong given that your English is not good - is it a
second language?

>You seem to have missed which 20 people that is. Is it the same 20 or a
>different 20? It seems ordinary to me that Jane starts a thread and
>posts some follow-ups one month and Fred does the same another month. Is
>the group generally serving them? I'd say yes and expect you'd say no.

Again - you have totally failed to comprehend what I said : I have not
mentioned whether someone makes the first post - or a follow-up. It
does not matter. There are a hard core of about twenty posters is all
that I am saying.

I am sorry that you cannot analyse the figures yourself

I was demonstrating that your analysis was flawed.

The vast majority of the posts to URCM are made by a small number of
people

There are over 100 people who have only ever posted in a single
month. Many post - get the bums rush from the regulars - and bugger
off smartish.

(60 of those made just a single post and then buggered off.)

Let's wait for Wacko to tell us that more than 50% of the posters made
more than 50% of the posts during 50% of the months for which URCM has
been running - and that more than 50% of the users are very happy.

[Wm...]

Sun, 6 Jun 2010 19:37:40 >
uk.net.news.moderation JMS >

>Again - you have totally failed to comprehend what I said : I have not
>mentioned whether someone makes the first post - or a follow-up. It
>does not matter. There are a hard core of about twenty posters is all
>that I am saying.

You are factually incorrect.

--
Wm...
Reply-To: address valid for at least 7 days