How influential is the SDMB among non-subscribers?

We often wrangle very seriously over issues and questions in the SDMB – especially in the GD forum, where we often post like we’re shouting to the world – or at least helping to propagate our pet memes through the blogosphere. Are we? The “views” figure for every thread exceeds the “posts” by several orders of magnitude. Does that mean a lot of non-subscribers are looking in? If so, does that make any difference in the world, for ignorance-fighting or any other purposes?

My guess… and just from my history on other message boards… people tend to read several times as often as they post… each time you open the thread you are adding to the view number; but unless you choose to post, the disparity continues…

I would think there is a very small percentage of ‘non-member’ readership… it is difficult to read a lot of these topics without having an opinion and wanting to put your $0.02 in… and in many cases that does not last long…

Didn’t Cecil once say that fighting ignorance was like emptying an ocean, one teaspoon at a time?

I’m sure that’s pretty much the effect this board is having. Negligible.

I’d say very very little. Look at it this way. There are a few thousand active members of the SDMB. Let’s say there are ten lurkers for each poster–an absurdly generous estimate I’d guess. So there are at most–at most–50,000 lurkers. In a nation of 300,000,000, that’s not a lot of people.

Furthermore on the issues people debate about here in GD, most of them are matters of opinion about which people don’t change their minds easily. I haven’t seen anyone here convert from some religion to atheism or vice versa. Nor have I seen any conservatives convert to liberalism or vice versa. I doubt if this is happening among our hypothetical lurkers either. Note that some conservatives may be getting fed up with the current administration, but I’d say that had much more to do with President Bush than with any argument advanced here. Any administration loses support among its ideological backers the longer it continues in office.

Also, for GD, at least, I’m not sure how much of what we’re doing is fighting ignorance or fleshing out opinion.

One area in which GD may be useful is attacking those beliefs that are obviously, objectively wrong: Conspiracy theories, bigotry, and the like. Perhaps some lurker followed our thorough debunking–with links–of that asinine 9/11 conspiracy video that’s been making the rounds lately.

All of the above applies only to GD, IMHO, and the Pit, of course. GQ is a very valuable internet resource. It’s fought my ignorance at least once: My belief that airplanes fly by the Bernoulli principle was put to rest here. Also I’ve had a few questions of my own answered more efficiently than google or Wikipedia would have answered them. CS can also be useful within it’s subject area. I had to re-interpret my understanding of an Elvis Costello song in light of someone else’s posts. But I don’t know how much this affects non-subscribers. The questions asked are often pretty specific.

I also think that the SDMB is pretty negligible in the world at large, but I do find myself wondering about the reverberation factor. Generally when an argument is set out here, it quickly collects all the supporting arguments, as well as all the counterarguments. So that when a poster speaks about an issue in another forum – let’s say in a letter to the newspaper – he/she has potentially been informed by the debate that’s happened here. There’s a ripple effect, small and probably not quantifiable, but it must exist nevertheless.

At this very moment I’m on a guest membership, since I felt the need to open a topic about something I really wanted some advice about. After this month, I’ll propably revert to lurking since I’m not half as intelligent or witty as the average poster here.

However, after this month is done I’ll keep lurking and gaining knowledge, common sense, and citing the IMDB itself on several other sites.

But, but, why would you cite the Internet Movie Database?

I know there are many, many lurkers who read only (mostly) and only post on things they feel they know about.

I know some of them don’t post because this place (GD & the Pit) can get really really nasty sometimes…I try and tell them that even if people bite, they can bite back, but it doesn’t have much effect.

But I know they are reading. But what the heck does that do? For every GD thread there are several different opinions and no answer. And often the same people come down on the same side. I don’t mean to pick on these people but I can almost always accuratelt guess which side of an argument Bricker, Shodan, Guin, DtC, and several others will come down on. Then Left Hand of Dorkness will come in and make his points calmly, cooly, and rationally. Then someone else will start again.

Nothing gets resolved. I only hope that it does make the lurkers think.

Ripples. Like Sal mentioned. I know I have spread knowledge gained here to my students, and used arguments and evidence from this Board in discussions IRL. You can’t save the world, you can only save your little piece of it…maybe. But everybody you talk to, talks to others…

I wonder if Hollywood writers and directors ever look into CS? And if so, do they learn anything valuable?

I have no idea but I do know that George Bush formulates all his policy based on what he reads on the SDMB.

Resign George. Do it now.

Just sowing seeds :smiley:

You really want Rummy that bad?

Do you know something we don’t?

Nope, but Cheney has health issues; Hastert, Stevens and Rice have possible political futures (and wouldn’t want the current issues when they ran); Snow isn’t the Presidental type (no ambition for the job); putting Rummy in a possible position to take it.

Cite? :dubious:

Based on the films opening in the next few months, I’d say not a freaking chance.

Sure, but information from this site spread by 50,000 people offline, can spread like wildfire in a nation of 300,000,000 people.

One of the local radio stations hosts read the SD front page, occasionally discussing an article that they’ve read. I’m not sure if any of them read the message board itself, though.

Yargh. It’s a brainfart I apparently continue to make.