Revised Update on Usage of Talk by DMS Members

DMS General
1

This post is both a correction and an addition for the previous post (Update on Usage of Talk by DMS Members)

While in the process of adding data about how frequently eligible voters for the upcoming election view Talk, I noticed the data set extended to 8:24 am on May 1st. Since a number of users check Talk posts either in the wee hours or at the start of their day, those counts were improperly excluded. Corrected it and will be more careful to check that in the future. This correction resulted in the end of month line being essentially the same pattern seen on the first data pull conducted on 4/11/19.

I have added the visits made by eligible voters. There are 329 members eligible to vote on May 10, 2019. A total of 145 visited Talk at least once during April. Of those, 128 visited during the last 7 days.

image
image727×616 15.4 KB

I would like to see an effort undertaken by PR or Education or by the BoD to research what keeps 74% of members, 60% of Green Dots and 55% of Voters from looking at Talk at least once a month.

2

@bertberaht what are the two different vertical axis’ of your graph measuring?

3

All Members on the left and Voters on the right.
Labels are placed on the appropriate sides accordingly.

In each case it shows how many of the members or voters have yet to view member only topics on Talk during the past number of days as shown on the horizontal axis.

Example: If you start with 329 eligible voters and look at their viewing frequency, 128 visited during the past 7 days; leaving 201 who haven’t. Another 17 viewed something during the previous 23 days leaving 184 who did not visit Talk at all during the month of April.

4

The Talk data are in UTC, not local time. I don’t know if that affects your data.

5

No, I correct for UTC.

2 Likes
6

Part of it is surely due to some people loudly proclaiming that Talk is toxic, etc., so that new members are disinclined to try it.

For those averse to drama, try reading it without logging in. It is quite a different place.