Member Count vs. Post Count

[Cuethelaugh]

This matter proves to be rather tricky for me because I know some potential members judge on the number of members against those who are active ratio.

In order to curb it I attempt activity checks but I don't want to do those so often that people get annoyed and leave. I know of one site in particular that does them every month just to add to post count!

My newfound, and perhaps unpopular, opinion is if an account has gone a month without a post or cbox comment (without some sort of emailed/PMed contact) then you should delete them. If they want to be a part of the site again they'll rejoin.

[ily 'TIL THE end]

What is your take on comparing member and post count?

I don't doubt people look at the member count and/or post count. I suppose it is understandable because not many people want to go to a forum where it doesn't appear things are going on. But a lot of times, a small member count doesn't mean anything. A few people can make a forum active and can last a long time. It just takes dedicated people. So you may see just a few people make a high post count. But I don't think it is right for people to look at those things because really, a forum that is doing it's very best and doesn't have the members or post counts you desire even though you're interested in the subject. But then again, if you care more about how many posts are there as well as how many members, then you really don't care enough about the subject of the forum anyways.

Is it something you consider when looking at other forums to join?

I look at the subject of the forum. If I'm not interested in that, I probably won't join. It slightly affects my decision to join a forum if the post count is low or if the members are low. I give it a try and if I'm not getting anything out of it, I don't stay long and I leave. I give forums a test try. If they pass, I stay. If they fail, I leave.

Likewise, on your forum, do you make an effort to clear out old members to affect the ratio, or do you let them stay to boost member count?

No, I like people to see that there are this # of users interested in the forum and have joined because of it being interested. I think a high member count can contribute to some people deciding to join. But, at the same time, I try to make sure the forum is active so they can see the members are posting. I have my share of members who love my forum, so I guess it helps. But I don't know. I have gotten a survey up for my members to fill out so I can know why they joined, what got them to join, etc. Things like that, so I can better advertise, better provide a forum full of fun and excitement.

[The Dark Knight]

Another factor that would probably feature here would be the last posts made in the forum, people tend to look at that as well.

A healthy ratio between the two would be ideal, but eventually, most people look at the post count rather than the member count and they join in. They also tend to browse the forums as a guest to see the kind of activity taking place and it's very evident how many regular members there are as such.

[Chillay!]

I know for a fact that I don't look at the member count, I look at who has been active, and how active the threads are. If I'm looking to join a forum, I'd rather there be a new thread, or a thread being answered to every day, rather than in a spaced out time period of let's say...two to three days. I also look at the quaility, and length of each post. I do perfer it to be a good length, but I would much rather there be more quaility than quantity.

Aha, I'm starting to get off track, and what I was saying before was I look more at post activity than I do at the members.

[[ saga ]]

I'm not so fussed about the number of members. I look at the total number of posts and the number of people who have been logging in. I think it's more important that there is a solid base of people who are putting much posts into the site, than if you have many, many members. For instance, I know of one site with 300 members [probably not that many] which is currently inactive. There are so many people who have joined, but then never posted. So, I suppose having many members isn't always a garantee that you'll get many posts?

[sampson109]

I think active posts us the only relevant number, it is a good indicator to see if people think your content is relevant enough to keep reading.

[Short of Daybreak]

Interesting subject! ^.^

Well, it's NEVER about the member count (it's especially hard to tell with RPG forums that have one charrie per account), though I do admit, having lots of members is nice, as there is more variety that way. But I think post count is pretty important. It's the post count that shows how active a forum is. You can always login and never post. So if no one has posted for awhile, well, your forum will look dead. The date of a forum post is always important. But yeah, when I go to a site, and if the member count is low, I like to check the boards to see if anyone is even posting. I also check the date to see if it is recent to know the forum is still going.

Sometimes a small community of members posting alot together and having fun is better than being lost in a sea of members and you hardly know anyone. I do, myself, love a community of 10-20 or so members, and as long as we post alot, it doesn't matter. As long as there is activity. Like one time my auntie made a forum where it was just me, her, and my bro. It was active for a long, long time 'cause we posted alot. But one day it died 'cause, well, we slacked off. But that just shows member count isn't what it's all about. In my opinion, it's the overall activity of those members, and so the post count comes into play. Not thread count, but post count.

[el oh el ya *]

Niiiice question!

I think that actually posting is more important. One of the rules on my site is that you can make as many characters as you want, but you have to post once a week with all of them. What is the use of having 238923786 members when they're just hanging around doing nothing? I don't think that a site with 123 accounts is better than one with only 22 accounts, because if those 22 are active, posting and plotting and interacting, I would much rather get involved with that one than one that has a lot of accounts but isn't doing anything.

It should be in some kind of balanced, the people that are resgistered should also actually do something instead of just letting the accounts sit or signing on to just spam the chatbox or whatever and not do a thing. It should be even I think.

I mostly check the most recent posts, how many are actual threads, how many are just adds or games, that also matters.

[KillingJoke]

thanks to spam bots, many boards have more and more members than anything.
yay, spam!

[Streamstrider]

I can't stand having inactive accounts just lying around on the forum. To me it makes it cluttered, and it lies about the actual amount of members who are actually active in the community. I definitely take this into account when I'm joining a forum, but I also take into account whether or not the forum is at the point of resurrection, when the administrator might actually be clearing out the accounts that were previously a part of a very active forum. I want an active community more than a place with tons of accounts that just aren't there.

[endo]

Meh, I look at what the forum offers rather than numbers. I've visited forums that were really nicely laid out and well put together that hardly had any members but the posts were top notch.
On the other side I've been to forums where there were tons of members, but the posting itself sucked and the staff wasn't very good.

I don't look for new forums to join, but if I were, posts that were good would certainly sway me over thousands of users who post crap.

[dazlin]

Mar 4, 2012 14:34:59 GMT -8 endo said:

Meh, I look at what the forum offers rather than numbers. I've visited forums that were really nicely laid out and well put together that hardly had any members but the posts were top notch.
On the other side I've been to forums where there were tons of members, but the posting itself sucked and the staff wasn't very good.

I don't look for new forums to join, but if I were, posts that were good would certainly sway me over thousands of users who post crap.

I'm the same quality over quantity

[dazlin]

Apr 14, 2012 21:31:58 GMT -8 Will Vandom said:

What is your take on comparing member and post count? Is it something you consider when looking at other forums to join? Likewise, on your forum, do you make an effort to clear out old members to affect the ratio, or do you let them stay to boost member count?

Member count isn't important. I prefer an active forum with few members over a dead forum with lots of members.

Yep snap. I opened my forum nearly 3 months ago and have 63 members, between 12 and 15 post regularly and the others just sign on and read, which I don't mind. The regs are very active and we've already reached a post count of 15K in 3 months and I hope that continues lol

[Kenzie!]

Quality over quanity! I would prefer a handfull of members who post regurarly then having several members who never post at all.

[The Technical Wizard @MyTech]

I think the post count matters more. I used to go to this site with 10,000 or so members, but most of the members were inactive. The distance between 2 posts there is usually about 5-10 hours, which is terrible for such a large site. However, I use a small site with only 10 members, but there is activity 24/7. I post on the small site, and I deleted my account on the big site. Suppose the members:posts ratio is 10:2, where for every 10 members, there are 2 posts, I would not join. But a site with a ratio of say, 2:7 would attract me as for every 2 member, there would be 7 posts.