Prioritisation vote: [Theforum] Re: meo

[.jeff]

dan,

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> From: Daniel J. Cody
>
> fwiw, if you go by that logic, only 3% of thelist
> members 'contribute' back to the community, and less
> than %1 of registered weo accounts do.
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

i really don't wanna get in to a data-war with you, like in the past.
however, since i think you missed my point, i'll restate it in more detail
to address your response above.

first, if we're going to talk numbers, then let's put some real ones out on
the table (remember, i said if you're going to challenge my position you
should be prepared with relevant data.  sorry, but percentages aren't
relevant data unless you can show the numbers that create the percentage).
i used jan/1/2002 as the cutoff in determining "active" accounts.  if other
accounts exist that haven't been logged in to before jan/1/2002, evolt.org
isn't out anything for those users where weo is concerned as they aren't
likely visiting weo.

 - 3355 that have logged in since jan/1/2002

 - 113 users have logged in since jan/1/2002 and
   submitted articles that have been approved
   (87 are non-admins).
 - 446 users that have logged in since jan/1/2002
   have posted comments (419 of those were
   non-admins) (350 of these users are users
   that don't have an approved article).
 - 446 users that have logged in since jan/1/2002
   have rated an approved article (419 of those
   were non-admins) (369 of these users are users
   that don't have an approved article)

by my calculations, the numbers above reflect the activity of 634 unique
(non-admin) weo account holders or approximately 18% of our currently active
registered users.

so, actually almost 20% of weo users contribute in some fashion to the
community -- not 1% like you estimated (even if we take the current total
count of registered weo accounts no matter how long they've gone without
being logged into we're at 6% participation [634/10472]).

i couldn't tell you what percentage of subbed thelist members post messages,
but i'd bet it's quite a bit greater than 3% based on your margin of error
for weo account contribution.

the important thing to note with leo/weo is not about how many people are
posting something, but how many people those postings make a difference for.
we don't know how many people are viewing the site that find information
that empowers them as web developers/designers.  the same can't be said for
meo.  sure, there are a buttload of accounts and a good chunk of them are
probably using the space to learn a new skill/language/etc.  however, that
only helps them.  it doesn't help anybody else that might visit meo.  with
rare exception, there isn't content on meo that has the same help to the
visitor as the content of leo/weo.

meo use, for the most part, isn't being used for what it was intended.  i
just don't see very much of the meo "community" participating in the rest of
evolt.org as a way of paying the community back for using its services.  in
fact, i see mostly abuse of meo services.

<rant type="meo account use">

if i go look at the top referrers to meo accounts, the top 100 contain a
disproportionate number of instances where meo space is used for image
hosting (whether or not it's being used for other constructive things should
probably be determined).  i see very few links from top referrer pages going
to meo accounts that are using the space for what it was intended.

here's a *great* example:
http://members.evolt.org/junkmail/

i know the account no longer exists, but it was being used to host a banner
for here (warning for those who don't wanna see some adult/xxx content):
http://slutpost.com/pages/149456.html

another "fantastic" example is this page:
http://download.com.com/3001-2248-5665983.html

WHY THE FUCK are download.com users pulling a file from our servers?  we
can't afford to let meo account holders use however much bandwidth they'd
like.

here's another fine example of a top referrer being a completely useless meo
account.
http://members.evolt.org/dilianch/

why are we hosting someone that offers a crackz/warez/etc. search engine on
their front page?  why are they allowed to link back to us for the purposes
of counting downloads?  just one example from the logs:
http://protokoli.search.bg/2k_sislist.htm

or, what's this?
http://members.evolt.org/peterj/

nice blank homepage.  yet, this account is being used to house some php
stuff for another tutorial site online
(http://internetworld.idg.se/webbskolan/php/4_kod.asp)?  why not with us
(yeah, i know it's in swedish.  we have an article in german, so what's your
point)?

another fine example:
http://members.evolt.org/derillias/

being used as a php blog for here (and there's absolutely *no* mention of
evolt.org anywhere on the page):
http://www.taleris.de/lillinks3.html

yet another fine example:
http://members.evolt.org/wasco/
bs homepage, but internal pages that are used for posting to message boards.

or even better.  absolutely using our services to host a downloadable file
and nothing more:
http://members.evolt.org/jamie7/

apparently we're a free-for-all photo posting service as well.
http://members.evolt.org/pjw/gigs_album/album.php
with a frontdoor that goes straight to a commercial venture:
http://members.evolt.org/pjw/ (http://www.bw3.co.uk/)

there are countless more examples i found by just looking at the april
stats.

unfortunately, this is an aspect of offering a free service that isn't the
bright side of it.  however, i don't think it's fair to say that those
contributing should help fund this sort of abuse of privileges.

i'm not pointing any of these things out to say that we're not doing our
job.  i'm only pointing out the unfortunate side effect of offering the
service we offer.  if it's free, it *will* be abused by some members.

</rant>

.jeff

http://evolt.org/
jeff at members.evolt.org
http://members.evolt.org/jeff/