# Standard curve of views/replies for SDMB threads?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/standard-curve-of-views-replies-for-sdmb-threads/471458
**Category:** About This Message Board
**Created:** [November 6, 2008, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/standard-curve-of-views-replies-for-sdmb-threads/471458 "2008-11-06T15:48:56Z")
**Posts on this page:** 13
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Sapo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sapo)
#### Post date: [November 6, 2008, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/standard-curve-of-views-replies-for-sdmb-threads/471458/1 "2008-11-06T15:48:56Z")
This is borderline ATMB, but since I am not expecting an official answer, I figured this is the place for it.
Has anyone bothered to estimate a standard curve of views/replies on the threads here? Would it vary by forum? What would you make of threads significantly over or below the curve?
Is this of any interest?
---
### Author:  [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)
#### Post date: [November 6, 2008, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/standard-curve-of-views-replies-for-sdmb-threads/471458/2 "2008-11-06T21:27:20Z")
Threads significantly below the curve are generally the ones started by me.
---
### Author:  [@Santo\_Rugger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Santo_Rugger)
#### Post date: [November 6, 2008, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/standard-curve-of-views-replies-for-sdmb-threads/471458/3 "2008-11-06T21:37:13Z")
> [@Sapo](#):
>
> Is this of any interest?
Guess you’ll find out based on the views/replies to this thread. 😛
---
### Author:  [@spinky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spinky)
#### Post date: [November 6, 2008, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/standard-curve-of-views-replies-for-sdmb-threads/471458/4 "2008-11-06T21:54:56Z")
> [@Sapo](#):
>
> Is this of any interest?
Totally. I could imagine a dozen different interesting angles you could analyze if given access to do the right SQL queries against the database. Slice it by forum, by ratio of views to replies, by reply/view rate decrease rate, by OP post count, by average thread length for other threads started by OP, by average post length, by length of time between OP and followups, etc, etc. Is there a correlation between a thread’s activity level (measured various ways) and the level of participation of its contributors (is it good for a few people to have a high percentage of the posts in the thread or for more people to contribute)?
I dig poring through piles of numbers that are connected to real things to see interesting patterns.
Of course, there is pretty much zero chance of getting direct access to the db, so forget that. 🙂
---
### Author:  [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)
#### Post date: [November 6, 2008, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/standard-curve-of-views-replies-for-sdmb-threads/471458/5 "2008-11-06T22:20:43Z")
I don’t think it matters whether or not an “official” reply is expected. Since this is basically about this board, it’s better placed in ATMB than GQ.
Regarding the OP, many years ago I recall someone did an analysis, and the views/replies did differ substantially by forum. IIRC the Pit had one of the highest ratios.
If someone wanted to make the effort, a few pages of threads from each forum would probably provide enough data to calculate the basic ratios for different forums.
Moving to ATMB.
---
### Author:  [@Chez\_Guevara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chez_Guevara)
#### Post date: [November 6, 2008, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/standard-curve-of-views-replies-for-sdmb-threads/471458/6 "2008-11-06T23:32:22Z")
Behold [Useless SDMB Statistics](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=259417) (June 2004) post #8 courtesy of **Earthling** :
> [@](#):
>
> Replies Per Thread
>
> ```auto
>
> Mean Median
> ATMB 10.7 5
> CoCC 13.5 6.5
> CoSR 15.1 9
> GQ 9.8 6
> GD 42.9 27
> CS 20.4 10
> IMHO 22.1 14
> MPSIMS 23.0 10
> Pit 43.7 29
>
> ```
>
> Views Per Thread
>
> ```auto
>
> Mean Median
> ATMB 313 155
> CoCC 556 328
> CoSR 525 384
> GQ 277 176
> GD 839 578
> CS 481 232
> IMHO 457 268
> MPSIMS 476 226
> Pit 1447 1034
>
> ```
>
> (WOW!)GD and Pit get the most replies and views per thread. I guess it must be good entertainment.
>
> Views-to-Replies Ratio
>
> ```auto
>
> ATMB 29.2
> CoCC 41.1
> CoSR 34.8
> GQ 28.3
> GD 19.5
> CS 23.5
> IMHO 20.7
> MPSIMS 20.7
> Pit 33.1
>
> ```
The OP, one of several statistical _magna opera_ from the **Earthling** canon, gives the context for the above post.
---
### Author:  [@Sapo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sapo)
#### Post date: [November 7, 2008, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/standard-curve-of-views-replies-for-sdmb-threads/471458/7 "2008-11-07T16:37:32Z")
Scary and fascinating effort from Earthling. Thanks to him for that thread, and thanks to you for the link.
---
### Author:  [@Chez\_Guevara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chez_Guevara)
#### Post date: [November 7, 2008, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/standard-curve-of-views-replies-for-sdmb-threads/471458/8 "2008-11-07T17:53:08Z")
Yeah, the guy has a prodigous talent for the arcane discipline of SDMB Usage Analysis.
For those who haven’t read the link, in post #17 **Earthling** goes on to discuss the noble art of threadkilling. Not content with giving weighted results (he excludes moderators because they are threadlockers) he gives statistics on threadkilling efficiency.
> [@](#):
>
> In terms of threadkilling efficiency, which is defined as the number of threads killed in relation to the total number of posts made, the highest numbers belong to users with the lowest post-counts – which makes sense, if one thinks about it. However, because of estimation errors (I did not get an exact count of the number of posts each user made over the last year), strange results (e.g., ETK \> 1 – oh yeah, this is looking so scientific now!) show up with these users, so we’ll artificially limit the calculations to only those who have made at least 100 posts last year.
There follows a table of the most successful threadkillers (May 2003 - May 2004).
In post #21 he refers to a study on membership statistics he plans to publish shortly. Whether he did, this I don’t know.
---
### Author:  [@Sapo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sapo)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2008, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/standard-curve-of-views-replies-for-sdmb-threads/471458/9 "2008-11-08T18:06:53Z")
Ok. After studying that thread, my question is, Is views per reply a linear thing? I would expect longer threads to have more views per reply, as everybody who has posted to it keeps peeking in to see what is going on.
And 4% of GQ threads go unanswered?! That’s way too much. Not even a silly joke or a bump or anything. It has happened to me, btw.
---
### Author:  [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2008, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/standard-curve-of-views-replies-for-sdmb-threads/471458/10 "2008-11-08T18:31:46Z")
**Sapo** , this might help you: [http://boardreader.com/sp/Straight\_Dope\_Message\_Board\_11709.html](http://boardreader.com/sp/Straight_Dope_Message_Board_11709.html)
Go to forum and click on their Forum profile and [you get the following](http://boardreader.com/fp/Straight_Dope_Message_Board_11709/General_Questions_33309.html):
Site: **Straight Dope Message Board**
(site profile, domain info [straightdope.com](http://straightdope.com))
Title: General Questions
Url: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/forumdispla](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/forumdispla)…
Users activity: 66 posts per thread
Forum activity: 554 active threads during last week
Posting activity on **General Questions** :
Week Month 3 Months
Threads: 554 2,388 6,703
Post: 3,976 15,882 44,176
**Top authors during last week:**
Name Posts
Really Not All That Bright 59
Sapo 43
KneadToKnow 36
beowulff 31
Markxxx 30
Chronos 30
sailor 28
Giles 28
Santo Rugger 27
Gfactor 26
---
### Author:  [@Gary\_Robson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Robson)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2008, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/standard-curve-of-views-replies-for-sdmb-threads/471458/11 "2008-11-08T20:19:55Z")
> [@Sapo](#):
>
> Ok. After studying that thread, my question is, Is views per reply a linear thing? I would expect longer threads to have more views per reply, as everybody who has posted to it keeps peeking in to see what is going on.
It varies with subject matter. Sex-related threads, for example, tend to have a _lot_ of people who read them but don’t want to post anything in them. GD threads that are interesting questions with definite answers may get a lot of views (people who want to know the answer) but not many responses (because there’s nothing more to say).
> [@Sapo](#):
>
> And 4% of GQ threads go unanswered?! That’s way too much. Not even a silly joke or a bump or anything. It has happened to me, btw.
Yeah, I have an [unanswered one](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=491630) there now.
---
### Author:  [@Sapo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sapo)
#### Post date: [November 8, 2008, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/standard-curve-of-views-replies-for-sdmb-threads/471458/12 "2008-11-08T20:55:49Z")
Second most prolific poster in GQ? Time to shut up a little, I guess. I don’t remember actually answering any questions.
I guess there are lots of different factors that affect view/replies, as InvisibleWombat says. I am sure they all start with a surge of view but no replies, then replies climb and then there is the A-B conversation finale that creates even more replies with minimum views.
Would it be possible to harvest info on the climb of views on a thread when it is locked? I confess I cannot see a locked thread and not want to peek in to see why it was closed.
---
### Author:  [@Chez\_Guevara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chez_Guevara)
#### Post date: [November 9, 2008, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/standard-curve-of-views-replies-for-sdmb-threads/471458/13 "2008-11-09T15:59:00Z")
> [@Sapo](#):
>
> And 4% of GQ threads go unanswered?! That’s way too much. Not even a silly joke or a bump or anything. It has happened to me, btw.
That did seem a fraction high, so I had a look.
During the past month there have been 1,153 threads started in GQ. This number excludes those that were moved out. It also ignores the first two pages. 33 threads attracted zero replies. The percentage is 2.86.
For what it is worth.