I’m curious.
The SDMB population just recently hit 8000. I’m wondering if this includes names that have been banned, like the seemingly-hundreds of sock puppets/duplicate names that plagued the boards for a few weeks? What about people that have been removed, like Notthemama?
In short… is 8000 the number of names that were ever assigned the designation “member” at some point?
It’s the number of “new registrations”, if that helps.
I’d guess there are hundreds who never posted and perhaps several hundred who posted one question, got the answer, or not, and never posted again.
And, of course people who signed up lately and haven’t started yet.
I know my old name and NTM’s are still there, plus everyone banned. Since I was banned twice, once my problem, once by accident, I’m glad they didn’t “recycle” numbers, because I could never see my old posts.
Like all “milestone’s”, it has no exact value as a measurement. The number “active” is in flux daily, a dozen ways. Like the post count parties, and the 500000th post, the number has been passed before most people see the celebration.
Yes, it includes people who had two names registered separately, and one abandoned, people like NTM that started fresh with a new post count, banned, sock puppets, and many who ended up with “Guest” status due to the UBB to vB conversion months ago.
Here’s a link that refers to those with 2 names and how it happens.
Do you know any posters with 2 current legal usernames?
Oh, yeah, Anna, YOU started that thread! Wondered where I remembered your name from… thanks for the link, got to remember old times… (I remember So Sue Me!)
Anyway… if all names that ever came across the SDMB are still part of the 8000+, it begs the question… how many of them are “Banned” or otherwise “Unable To Post”? After all, we had a huge influx of puppets several weeks back, so I’d have to guess close to a hundred, at least.
[hijack]
I apologize for being pedantic, but you’ve pushed one of my “pet peeve” buttons. To “beg the question” does not mean to “imply the further query.” It means to “assume the conclusion of one’s argument to be true.” I’ve recently started seeing professional writers, newspaper columnists and the like (who ought to know better) misusing this phrase, so maybe we’re headed for a re-definition, but as of now this alternate usage is incorrect.
Again, sorry for the pedantry. Carry on.
[/hijack]
Good point, Zut.
Because axioms underly all deductive arguments, the entire foundation of deductive reason is weaker than we like to admit; that is, we merely assume (and conclude) that reason is a dependable epistemology.
In other words, there is no way to use reason to prove reason works, not without begging the question.
I’m new here. Why was Notthemama banned?
And HEY! Oops. Never mind.
Notthemama wasn’t banned, but he had imposters that were, with the same name but a space in front. I think there were a couple of NTM’s too, which were trolls based on his nickname.
He quit at one point on his own, because as I recall, he wanted to spend more time with family. Then he came back as a “disguised” and more relaxed Duck Duck Goose, who eventually ended the guessing and admitted the connection.