(I realize that the 'tabs' below may now look good in your email
browser, but it's the best I can do since I don't know how to make an HTML
table)
As you can see, just two posters (CR and Peter M) account
for over half of all posts this year (56%). Since the start of the year, only
17 people have sent in even one post. Only a dozen people participate at least
once a month (on average).
> Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 14:28:02 +1000
> From:
[log in to unmask]> Subject: Re: The TSE list and "critical mass"
> To:
[log in to unmask]>
> Hey folks
>
> would a self initiated audit be useful? That is everyone sends in a
> statement of who is on line.
>
> ie maybe just an avatar
> or an email address .....
> depending on how much you want to divulge
> or more
> say
> Peter Dillane, Melbourne Australia, amateur interest, undergraduate degree
> with majors in Eng Lit and Language; Thesis on Marlowe; specific Eliot
> interest - general; favourite single malt ....etc etc
>
> Cheers
Pete
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rickard A. Parker" <
[log in to unmask]>
> To: <
[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2013 10:59 AM
> Subject: Re: The TSE list and "critical mass"
>
>
> >I used to send a command to the listserver once in a while to get the
> >number
> > of list subscribers. A few years ago I started getting messages saying
> > that
> > I was not authorized to use the command. The number has been pretty
> > steady
> > at about 250 members since I joined the list until I was denied access to
> > the information. Maybe it was at
the end of last year that Peter M. was
> > having some trouble with the list. He sent a command and as a side-effect
> > he
> > got the number of members sent back. I remember him writing that the
> > number
> > was about 200.
> >
> > The number of list members would have almost no effect on Missouri's
> > resources. The number of bytes being stored would (number of posts, sizes
> > of
> > the posts, attachments.)
> >
> > Regards,
> > Rick Parker
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 30 Jul 2013 08:58:35 -0400, Ken Armstrong
> > <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>On 7/30/2013 7:09 AM, Tom Colket wrote:
> >>>
>
>>> A discussion list has to have a critical mass of subscribers or it
> >>> dies. For many years there was just such a critical mass on the TSE
> >>> list. Someone would start a topic and others would pick it up and add
> >>> things (and it wasn't always the exact same people, taking predictable
> >>> "sides"). But in recent years the erosion of subscribers has became
> >>> startling. We are now well below critical mass.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Interesting. Are the actual figures available? I believe in the not
> >>too distant past Tim M has referred to restrictions on resources, both
> >>virtual and financial, and has asked for listers to make their
> >>preferences known to MO powers that be. I'm guessing that that hasn't
> >>much happened.
> >>
> >>Ken A
>
>>
> >>
> >