January 16th, 2003, 6:25 pm
I have been monitoring the posting behaviour of the forum for a while. I am using the data of the censored distribution of the top 20 posters without the total number of postings. Lurkers occupy the tail of the distribution, modeled as zero postings. I was expecting to see deviations from the smooth posting frequency near the ‘member’ and ‘senior member’ status transition points if there was criterion based screening, vetting or incentives for status changes. This investigation was prompted by the ‘senior member’ thread. I found a different distribution profile from the one I expected.These comments are based on the observed distributions, Omar’s(1141) comment that senior members get paid and DCFC’s(425) being unaware of it from the ‘senior members’ thread, general comments in the ‘where is Omar?’ thread and postings from NumberSix and others are Ito33.There appear to be two, contiguous behaviour patterns.- Aaron(2842) has only become significantly different from the distribution in the last month and is truly exceptional. - Mobpsycho(1157), Hamilton(1191) and Omar(1141) are expected to post lower than their usual rate for their next 100-150 postings.- I am expecting a ‘burst’ posting rate for Johnny(918).I propose that on Wilmot there is an incentive to have >1000 postings and forum members become aware of this after about 750 postings. Paul, you suggest >1000 are promoted to “unemployed” – perhaps true Plessas – with more data from Wilmot, there are all kinds of behaviours that can be found using the right data, what did the McKinsey people ask you about?The final conclusions from the analysis indicate I have far too much discretionary time and should seriously look for a ‘real’ hobby, perhaps got out and meet people.Cheers to all!There is some overlap with discussion in the 'senior members' thread.