[Debate] Member Count v/s Post Count

[varas]

well, both are equaly important. if you had 5 members and 500 posts, that may make members think you are all friends in real life, and just like to talk to each other all the time. on the opposite spectrum, if you have 500 members and 5 posts, that definatly looks bad. You can't have 1 without the other, but i'll have to vote on post count. Cause i found boards with less members (way less) then other forums i was members of, and way more post counts, and the one with less was really like a fun family. It was the best forum i'd ever been too.

I'm gonna say post counts.

[Bubzzzy]

varas said:

well, both are equaly important. if you had 5 members and 500 posts, that may make members think you are all friends in real life, and just like to talk to each other all the time. on the opposite spectrum, if you have 500 members and 5 posts, that definatly looks bad. You can't have 1 without the other, but i'll have to vote on post count. Cause i found boards with less members (way less) then other forums i was members of, and way more post counts, and the one with less was really like a fun family. It was the best forum i'd ever been too.

I'm gonna say post counts.

Good point, I never thought of that. I think that it's better to have several active members and several posts. It mixes it up, so the same members arent just posting over and over.

[kelendria]

For me I like to see people posting but as it gradually gets less & less active, I wait in anticipation for people to join.
Either way they both look good in your info centre!
But then there's the other debate of clearing inactive members... but that's another topic!

[lordparadise]

varas said:

...that may make members think you are all friends in real life, and just like to talk to each other all the time...

Well, that's kind of board that I belong to, actually. (In fact, the ratio's actually 4,000 posts per member, on average). But, that doesn't mean we aren't a good, structured board, because we are. We're a self-sufficient, contained community subsisting on only 7-12 active members at a time, and we've been expanding slowly since we started, so our member count will continue to improve. The point is, don't think that few members will break your board. Instead, it might help improve the community feel and enable the members to know each other well enough to have better discussion.

[rivenriver]

I was on *** for ages, which has the member count at the top. So I still always glace at the member count first, but then compare it with the post count. Frequently you see boards with a few hundred members, but very few posts. I stay away from those. I think a board should have AT LEAST ten times more posts than members. The higher the ratio of posts to members, the better, I think.

I hate inactive acounts - I think they look messy and make the board look like it's not well looked after. I also think it gives me as the admin an inacurate picture of how my board is doing. If a person is lurking, logging in every so often, that's fine. But if they have never logged in, I delete them after about a month. I like keeping things tidy.

[Beatle Aimee]

I believe it;s better to have post count. If you have lots of members but few posts, it makes it look like new members join but find the forum bad and never come back. Few members and lots of posts make it look like its a good board and the members keep coming back.

That's all I can think of for now, I have a nasty cold and if I think of more I'll just edit it

[carry]

I have this problem right now.. well not really but I am not sure if I do the right thing here, so any advice is welcome...
I run a board about the Death Penalty (we also have a general crime section and a Anything At All section) and I have gained 460 members in not even 3 months...
But looking at it... only like 180 ever posted, the rest has signed up and never returned. And like 30 - 40 members are active - and I have about 800 topics and nearly 8750 posts (actually about 2300 topics but about 1300 of the topics are news articles as I want my board to be informative as well - not much debate on that, people read mostly). After 2,5 month I am not unhappy with this
I was thinking about removing people that sign up and have not posted within 60 days... and also to make it a rule that new members have to start posting within 14 days.
I have not made that at first because I thought that I need a nice member count, which I think is important too, but at 460 it will not hurt the forum to delete like 150 inactive ones.
I also sent out a reminder that they are on this forum and left them a one month period to come back and post... but with new members I would like to make it a rule that they have to start posting within 2 weeks.
Does that sound ok?
Also what should I do with posters that have like 10 - 1 post and never show up again? Any ideas?

[Vicky]

Hmm, well it is generally quite good to see a forum that has a lot of members, but when it's a RP site it's often quite hard to get involved into a site that has a lot of members and has been running for a while, well that's what I find anyway. In forums like that I look for less members, but a lot of good quality posts.

A lot of posts can show that the forum is active, or it can just show that a couple of members are active and they are the only ones posting, and because they know each other it would be hard to get involved in the forum.

[Kaythara]

I say the either/or of Member vs. Post count is a false dichotomy.

Both as an admin and as a member, I do not see either post count or member count as more important than the other. Both numbers have to work together to result in a good forum (for RPGs, at least). If there are 20 members and 3 posts, it's obvious that the members are not very active. Conversely, if there are 3 members and 20 posts, that could say that the posts might not be of high quality. Also, it's hard to be creative when role-playing with very few people no matter how much or how well they post.

Quality is important, but so is quantity. Neither very few excellent posts or many, many poor ones are a good thing. The post count needs to show that most of the members are active enough to carry on a conversation or action sequence or whatnot.

[monbade]

i agree, i moved my stories to my own site, and roughly 200 ppl followed me, but then i still post on the orginal site i was on. If the orginal site folds, i am sure they will follow

Monbade

[kaylee2000]

Ah this topic reminds me of a friend's forum....He has 17,000 memebrs but about only 1 or 2 actually post. My forum on the other hand has 150 or so members and a hell of alot more post. My forum even tops his in posts and topics. So there is one example of how members don't really count. It's how many posts and activity you have. If the members don't post what's the point in having them?

[Blaze]

I always have gone for the quality posts and post count. My forum runs actually on a few active members and we are having a great time together. I don't care about deleting the inactive accounts. Maybe when my forum hits 1000 members I might start doing it.

When I go join a forum, I look at both, but more to the quality of posts than the number of members. I just recently joined a forum with only 20 members when I signed up, but I'm having the time of my life on that forum, and it is growing bigger. I'm now even a staff member there. I really don't care about the number of members, though I'm tempted to join forums with many members because then the chance is higher that it is more active.

[Gamoc]

Personally, I look at both of them. I like to have a high member count and a high post count. They both are good signs, but I do have to say that more posts is probably better. It shows that your forum is quite active if you have a rising post count every day, while if you have a high member count, and a low post count, it shows that the forum has a low activity level. That is never a good thing.

Post count is probably better, even if you have two members on your forum, but ten thousand posts(just an example), you would still have a better forum than the person with 1000 members but only 200 posts.

[WilburyMania!]

I prefer a few members with big post counts. If you have lots of members with 100 posts or less, it looks like they didn't like something and left...

[Blaze the Blaziken]

I usually NEVER look at the post count as an admin OR as a member about to join. I don't especially like huge sites and look at member count more then anything. I usually won't join any sites with MORE then 20-30 member and I'll usually quit if they exceed that limit, sad isn't it?