Slashdot, a user-generated news, analysis, peer question and professional insight community. Tech professionals moderate the site which averages more than 5,300 comments daily and 3.7 million unique visitors each month.
As I said before, we don't have a really good idea on the number of unique IPIDs visiting the site, but we do have solid numbers for our daily comment counts. Here's the graph as generated by slashcode for a biweekly period:
(due to a quirk in slashcode, the graphs don't update until 48 hours later; our comment count for 04/01 was 712 comments total).
Taking in account averages, we're roughly getting a little less than 10% of Slashdot's comment counts, with a considerably smaller user base. As I said, the OkCupid story made me take notice. Here's the comment counts at various scores between the two sites
| SoylentNews | Slashdot.org | --------------------------------------- Score -1 | 130 | 1017 | Score 0 | 130 | 1005 | Score 1 | 109 | 696 | Score 2 | 74 | 586 | Score 3 | 12 | 96 | Score 4 | 4 | 64 | Score 5 | 1 | 46 | ---------------------------------------Furthermore, I took a look at UIDs on the other site, the vast majority of comments came from 6/7 digit UID posters. Looking at CmdrTaco's Retirement Post as well as posts detailing the history of the other site most of the low UIDs are still around, and are simply in perma-lurk mode.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by VLM on Wednesday April 02 2014, @02:15PM
Let me tell you a story about a former employer from a long time ago (like decade(s) now). They are a legacy media producer and people pay them quite a bit of money to manufacture printed objects in the hope that end user humans will read those printed objects and be influenced. So they get paid piecework, sorta. It seems fair that 50 million physical ad impressions will cost ten times as much as 5 million physical impressions.
One day, again far more than a decade ago, a management MBA got his low paid STEM worker drones to do some math, and it was determined the marginal advertising revenue from printing one additional item considerably exceeded the marginal production cost of that item. Every item produced makes a VERY healthy profit, and its the act of production that contractually makes the revenue. So a dumpster was moved into the building to collect the output of the production line. Right off the line, and directly into the trash. Very Large bonus checks were paid out... for awhile.
Eventually an angry advertiser, curious how supposedly everyone was reading something that independent analysis indicates no one reads, took them to court, and the court took the legacy media producer to the cleaners. Somehow they're still in business, although I can't understand how. Without the dumpster at the output of the assembly line.
Any similarity between my story and any other situation that could exist, including one discussed in this story, is purely coincidental and nothing is being implied by my rambling story.
(Score: 1) by sgleysti on Wednesday April 02 2014, @03:22PM
I read your post because it was a story and marked offtopic. I would love to see where an existentialist/nihilist philosopher could run with that material.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday April 02 2014, @03:41PM
As a meta commentary it says a lot about sensationalism in the community. If I wrote "They charge advertisers based on their numbers and they're fundamentally in charge of their numbers so if the numbers make no sense they're probably fraudulent numbers, based on my past business experiences" I'd probably have hit +5 in a minute, but not going all Fark-Headline or Fox News Breaking Headline gets me a 0 off topic. And making that point was about 50% of the reason behind my peculiarly worded post. I'd actually have been pissed if I hadn't been downvoted because I wanted to make that point.
For the legal record I'm not claiming as fact anything other than the motive and opportunity for fraud exist, which is not controversial in the entire industry and does not prove or explain anything WRT one individual situation.