1177 actually read anything while logged in.

I expect any day now to hear of a script proposal that sounds a whole lot like us.

edit: So there are lurkers who never post, then there's the inexplicable folks who register and never have anything to do with us.

That if 40 people that lurked actually did vote on the poll, that we still only cared about the 60 or 70 regular posters anyway.

First of all, how would we know which opinions belonged to whom?

If I was mistaken about people feeling that way, I apologize, but I don't think I am. I think some people are now backtracking and changing their stance on what they originally were saying.

I haven't seen anyone do that, and I do think you were misinterpreting.

I say we just go on with the poll and hash it out after we see what kind of numbers we're actually looking it.

Agreed.

That if 40 people that lurked actually did vote on the poll, that we still only cared about the 60 or 70 regular posters anyway. If I was mistaken about people feeling that way, I apologize, but I don't think I am. I think some people are now backtracking and changing their stance on what they originally were saying.

This makes me crazy. Why the accusations at unnamed parties? I think I come closest to what you are saying here, and it sounds like you think it's some sort of unsavoriness that I should be ashamed of. I will paraphrase what I said to after Ice posted: if there is an issue where lurkers and posters disagree, posters should trump. This seems elementary to me. Why would we have it another way? Why would a whole bunch of people who don't post want things significantly differently from the way posters want it? The whole point is posting.

These usage numbers are fascinating!

Okay, am I understanding your numbers correctly, ita?

There are 235 people who have posted in any way shape or form in the first seven months of 2007.

That amounts to approximately half of the approximately 500 people who actively logged in and read posts in that same time period.

Which compares to 1500 total registrants who actively clicked on their registration link emails, but about 300 of those people (for reasons beyond comprehension) completed registration and yet never actually read anything while logged in.

Have I summarized correctly?

These usage numbers are fascinating!

Yes, they are! Love that kind of stuff.

even if in some bizarro-land where lurkers would vote opposite the way of posters - Wht the hell would they have spent any significant time reading a board they hated and why would they feel invested enough to vote. I guess it is a possibility, but it is so far off the realm of anything I can even imagine as possible that I am honestly FLOORED that it has occupied time in our collective brains and recieved the amount of attention it has.

Askye is the only person who has volunteered to work with me on the poll. we are starting it now.

maybe we can spend the next 100 posts in Bureaublahblah discussing how many angels can stand on the head of a pin.

Yup, Sean, that's about it.

Some of the registration emails bounce back, because they mistyped--typos may take a larger number than our bouncebacks indicate. Sometimes people registered multiple times, until they got it right, I guess.

And there's no way really to track lurkers who don't log in to read, right? I mean, is there any way of comparing unique hits to the site against logged in readers and gleaning a useful number?

Not that I am demanding or even asking politely for you to do this ita, I'm just trying to understand if it's possible.

maybe we can spend the next 100 posts in Bureaublahblah discussing how many angels can stand on the head of a pin.

Seven. Six if they're fat.

(Where the HELL is that from? As I can't remember the exact numbers, I can't Google it.)