ASDLC Netscan statistics - 90% fewer posts from same month last year!

Fallen off the wagon?

Marengo wrote:
:: I got these statistics from http://netscan.research.microsoft.com
:: today about our newsgroup. I knew there had been a lot fewer posts
:: lately, but I had no idea that it was a 90% reduction from last year!
:: Wow! What happened to all of our old regulars? There are scads of
:: them I can think of that used to post all the time that we haven't
:: heard from in ages.
::
::
:: alt.support.diet.low-carb
::
:: This Year Last Year
:: Messages 4419 43452 -90 %
::
:: Replies 3863 / 40090 -90 %
::
::
:: --
::
:: Peter

In article <[email hidden]>,

Marengo said:

I got these statistics from http://netscan.research.microsoft.com
today about our newsgroup. I knew there had been a lot fewer posts
lately, but I had no idea that it was a 90% reduction from last year!
Wow! What happened to all of our old regulars? There are scads of
them I can think of that used to post all the time that we haven't
heard from in ages.

alt.support.diet.low-carb

This Year Last Year
Messages 4419 43452 -90 %

Replies 3863 / 40090 -90 %

A lot of them are probably doing what I do.
Mostly lurking. ;-)

There is only just so much to say, so a lot of the material starts
repeating itself.
--
Peace, Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-[censored]." -Jack Nicholson

OmManiPadmeOmelet said:

A lot of them are probably doing what I do.
Mostly lurking. ;-)

There is only just so much to say, so a lot of the material starts
repeating itself.
--

Also my sense is that there are more posts from zealots such as Crazy
Chung, Mr. Grains for Brains and so on and these are rather off-putting

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anthony said:

OmManiPadmeOmelet said:

A lot of them are probably doing what I do.
Mostly lurking. ;-)

There is only just so much to say, so a lot of the material starts
repeating itself.
--

Also my sense is that there are more posts from zealots such as Crazy
Chung, Mr. Grains for Brains and so on and these are rather off-putting

That's what killfiles are for......
--
Peace, Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-[censored]." -Jack Nicholson

OmManiPadmeOmelet said:

That's what killfiles are for......
--
Peace, Om.

I'm using Google to access this group and I don't know how to killfile
in it, if indeed there is such an option

On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 02:46:59 -0500, Marengo wrote
(in article <[email hidden]>😉:

Quoted message said:

I got these statistics from http://netscan.research.microsoft.com
today about our newsgroup. I knew there had been a lot fewer posts
lately, but I had no idea that it was a 90% reduction from last year!
Wow! What happened to all of our old regulars? There are scads of
them I can think of that used to post all the time that we haven't
heard from in ages.

alt.support.diet.low-carb

This Year Last Year
Messages 4419 43452 -90 %

Replies 3863 / 40090 -90 %

The number of helpful, on-topic posts has remained the same :-)

--
Steve

Marengo said:

I got these statistics from http://netscan.research.microsoft.com
today about our newsgroup. I knew there had been a lot fewer posts
lately, but I had no idea that it was a 90% reduction from last year!
Wow! What happened to all of our old regulars? There are scads of
them I can think of that used to post all the time that we haven't
heard from in ages.

alt.support.diet.low-carb

This Year Last Year
Messages 4419 43452 -90 %

Replies 3863 / 40090 -90 %

You are comparing the "Year To Date 2006" figures with the "TOTAL 2005"
data, and you get a false reading of very hight drop in the postings.

You will see this clearly if you read the subtitle over the results on
the page where you got the results you posted above.

I compared January 2005 with January 2006 and got:

January 2005 postings 6840
January 2006 postings 1797
Decrease 74%

February 2005 postings 5430
February 2006 postings 1917
Decrease 65%

If the postings for Jan and Feb of 2005 totaled only 12,270 ... it would
be extraordinary to believe that the postings for Mar 2005 would boot
the then year to date total to 43,452....

It is a difficult page with which to work.

The postings are indeed down dramatically, around 70% down. But nowhere
as bad as 90% down.

I recall your many, many gripes about bad or careless research and how
worthless many researchers are...... :-)

Jim

--
1) Eat Till SATISFIED, Not STUFFED... Atkins repeated 9 times in the book
2) Exercise: It's Non-Negotiable..... Chapter 22 title, Atkins book
3) Don't Diet Without Supplemental Nutrients... Chapter 23 title, Atkins
book
4) A sensible eating plan, and follow it. (Atkins, Self Made or Other)

Yep. :-)

--
Cheri

OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote in message ..

Quoted message said:

A lot of them are probably doing what I do.
Mostly lurking. ;-)

There is only just so much to say, so a lot of the material starts
repeating itself.
--
Peace, Om.

Anthony said:

OmManiPadmeOmelet said:

That's what killfiles are for......

I'm using Google to access this group and I don't know how to killfile
in it, if indeed there is such an option

UseNet is nearly worthless without fillfiles. As a result, Google in
their infinite not-caring-ness, does not implement killfiles. For
amusement - I've read and posted through Google for years. if
they ever offered access for pay and it had killfiles, I'd be a
paying customer in a shot. If they ever switched to pay for
service and it had no fillfiles, I'd be someone else's paying
customer in a shot.

If you're put off by trolls, then it is time to switch to a real
newreader that does have killfiles. I currently use Internet
Explorer and it offers a newsreader under Tools -> Mail and
News -> Read News. The tool it launches is very poor
compared to good newsreaders but it does offer some filtering
ability. You have to configure it to point at the news server
of your ISP. That's one reason I started using Google. At
the time I travelled for work and I never knew what ISP was
local that week.

Jbuch said:

Marengo said:

I got these statistics from http://netscan.research.microsoft.com
today about our newsgroup.

You are comparing the "Year To Date 2006" figures with the "TOTAL 2005"
data, and you get a false reading of very hight drop in the postings.

I compared January 2005 with January 2006 and got:

January 2005 postings 6840
January 2006 postings 1797
Decrease 74%

February 2005 postings 5430
February 2006 postings 1917
Decrease 65%

The postings are indeed down dramatically, around 70% down. But nowhere
as bad as 90% down.

Google groups has full archives of the groups it carries. From
reading ASDLC there, I followed the "About this group" link and
it gives the entire posting history of the group month by month
since it was formed. (Available for any group even the ancient
net.* heirarchy from the 1980s). Let see if a cut-n-paste survives
the font change -

Archive
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1998 552 862 1581 1810 4144 4274 4368
5662 6963 5287 4277
1999 10605 7632 7832 7391 7456 9658 13070 13830 12247
15279 12240 9597
2000 12537 10511 10667 9288 8863 9042 9554 7426 8620
9992 9381 9944
2001 11552 6875 8334 7040 8097 9729 9680 10395 7637
6727 9957 7115
2002 13744 10507 9566 9144 9625 8891 11990 11750 10490
12788 11465 10569
2003 16258 11080 9055 9515 12179 14554 17415 14048 12608
10459 9617 8297
2004 14176 13685 13762 11809 11855 11643 8377 7922 5572
5108 3848 4545
2005 6831 5406 4187 3577 3341 3711 4294 3843
2807 1839 1849 1644
2006 1774 1905 1255 (this last number of month to date)

So the group appears to have been popular from January 1999 (I
started Atkins 21 Jun 1999) and it started dropping in popularity
in the summer of 2004.

So it's not a 90% reduction from the peak popularity in 2004
but the decline in populatiry is significant. Low carbing has gone
from the latest fad back to just one of the more popular dieting
styles.

"Marengo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

lately, but I had no idea that it was a 90% reduction from last year!

An instance perhaps of the adage that "less is more"?

--
Bob
http://www.kanyak.com

Doug Freyburger said:

Quoted message said:

I'm using Google to access this group and I don't know how to killfile
in it, if indeed there is such an option

UseNet is nearly worthless without fillfiles. As a result, Google in
their infinite not-caring-ness, does not implement killfiles. For
amusement - I've read and posted through Google for years. if
they ever offered access for pay and it had killfiles, I'd be a
paying customer in a shot. If they ever switched to pay for
service and it had no fillfiles, I'd be someone else's paying
customer in a shot.

If you're put off by trolls, then it is time to switch to a real
newreader that does have killfiles. I currently use Internet
Explorer

Thanks for confirming what I suspected about Google. I have IE but
every so often it refuses me access and this is one of those times and
I'm too ignorant to fix it myself so I have to call in Rentanerd which
is expensive - hence Google

Anthony said:

Thanks for confirming what I suspected about Google. I have IE but
every so often it refuses me access and this is one of those times and
I'm too ignorant to fix it myself so I have to call in Rentanerd which
is expensive - hence Google

Google is paid for by its banner ads. Hard to beat that price but
price is not why I use it. At this point I use it because I used to
have valid reasons about travel and I continue out of inertia.