Timeline for Userbase has gone up, but participation in the election has gone down?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 25, 2012 at 5:20 | comment | added | Ward - Trying Codidact Mod | There are more people eligible to vote (1.65x as many as last year) but the number of eligible people who visited the site during the election period was up by a larger amount (2.4x as many). So it's not that the people who could've voted didn't visit SF, but they didn't bother going to the election page. | |
| Jan 25, 2012 at 4:35 | comment | added | voretaq7 Mod | I can sort of agree with this -- The reputation barrier to entry to be considered an "eligible voter" is incredibly low (150). If we consider only the users above 1000 rep (using the numbers from the Reputation Leagues) our voter turnout numbers are much better: 2/3 visited the election page, and around half actually voted. | |
| Jan 24, 2012 at 23:13 | comment | added | John Gardeniers | @Nils, I don't have any numbers but just looking at the posts, or even the user list, show that the vast number of people come to the site, post one or a few questions and/or answers and then go away. Those who have remained active, even as little as myself, for extended periods are a minority. | |
| Jan 24, 2012 at 21:48 | comment | added | Nils | Interesting approach. Are there any numbers about that? | |
| Jan 24, 2012 at 21:07 | history | answered | John Gardeniers | CC BY-SA 3.0 |