Web stats-- Ever wondered who makes up the community?

[Fairfax]

some interesting, if question-raising, statistics here.
(Not that we needed a bar graph to tell us there are 4 men for every woman on the TMF)

http://www.quantcast.com/ticklingforum.com



42% of TMF visitors are addicts?-- Yikes!

*wonders if he falls into that category*

 

[Dr. Vollin]

I'm wondering how they could have determined ethnicity.

 

[drew70]

That's easy. A Harris poll.

 

[MrPartickler]

I'm not so quick to dismiss all of these stats. These guys look like they've done their homework. (Read the FAQs to understand the methodology.) The data tracks your IP address through a number of sites. They're apparently affiliated with sites that span the gamut--some of which do, in fact, track age, gender, ethnicity, etc.

How? By people submitting such info. For instance, if Match.com is one of their member sites, and a TMFer joins or visits that site (and/or uses the search engines) their IP gets anonymously associated with a certain age, gender, and/or ethnicity, etc. and fed into their database. There are other sites out there (e.g., for insurance quotes, or loan rate estimators, etc.) that may have people enter things like income range or education, etc. So these too can be associated with a TMFer's IP address.

This anonymous sample (called a panel) of the TMF audience is used to generate statistics to characterize the group as a whole. Obviously the larger the sample, the more accurate the statistics. However, provided it's a truly random sampling, the panel size can be surprisingly small and still generate reasonably good results-- +/- say 5 percentage points or so. <a href="http://janda.org/c10/Lectures/topic05/GallupFAQ.htm">Gallup polls</a> (the "gold standard" for polling) are often generated with samples on the order of 1000 people to represent the views of hundreds of millions. Still their nationwide election polls tend to be pretty good indictators of the final outcome.

I'm certainly not saying all the Quantcast numbers don't warrant further scrutiny. (In fact, I'm still looking for their margins of error--which should rightly be posted, but don't appear to be easy to find....) I'm just suggesting that this might be more reliable than pretty much any other information we have to date about the demographics of this site.

42% of TMF visitors are addicts?-- Yikes!

Actually it says only about 6% are addicts. 42% is reportedly the fraction of visits attributed to those members.

 

[milagros317]

I know I'm among the 6% of the people who make 42% of the visits. 😛

 

[Dussicar]

It's interesting, but the numbers don't mean a whole lot. "100 = Internet Average". Average what? Is that a percentage? Is that first graph saying that there are 59% less women on the site than the internet average or that there are only 41 women on the site or is the key in the 100s or 1000s??? How did they determine my annual income and level of education? Whose ass were all these numbers pulled from?

No. It's pretty spot on. I'm the 42% they were talking about.

 

[maniactickler]

Am i reading that right, that the highest ethnicity of this forum are blacks? isnt that impossible considering their population is miniscule compared to caucasions?

 

[Bugman]

There are lies,damn lies and statiatics.Mark Twain.I'm just not buying into the validity of the whole thing.

 

[CitY of MicA]

oh, who am I kidding...

I was going to object to their use of the word addicts, but it's true, it's true. I'm an addict . I try to limit my time here- but I just can't! Someone could be uploading another clip as I type this! In the P&R forum, they might be debating whether or not people who blow themselves up while waiting in the line at the DMV are extremists (I would say no, due to the wait ). Then I have to submit my picks in the football pool, and before you know it, someone else is having a birthday! The new posts and threads are endless! But calling someone who vists the site over 100 times in a 24 hour period an 'addict' seems a bit over the top, if not entirely subjective. Maybe that person's doing research , I don't know. If the people at Quantcast would investigate the time-consuming nature of some of the activities here and the commitments we undertake, they might understand. Perhaps, they might reconsider condemning those of us who can't log off before opening and commenting on just one more thread. Oh, what's the use... what's the earliest date we can cast our votes for the Golden Feathers ?

 

[MrPartickler]

Am i reading that right, that the highest ethnicity of this forum are blacks? isnt that impossible considering their population is miniscule compared to caucasions?

You're not reading it right.

The bar graphs provide an index that compares a given quantity/measure specific to this site to the internet average. Anything over 100 indicates a greater percentage on this site than is average for the internet at large. Anything below indicates there is a smaller representation of said group on this site.

 

[maniactickler]

You're not reading it right.

The bar graphs provide an index that compares a given quantity/measure specific to this site to the internet average. Anything over 100 indicates a greater percentage on this site than is average for the internet at large. Anything below indicates there is a smaller representation of said group on this site.

ohhhh. 😉

 

[TMF Jeff]

Very interesting, thanks for sharing that!

 

[Dussicar]

No. It's pretty spot on. I'm the 42% they were talking about.

EDIT: Ohhhhh. They were talking about people who are addicted to the FORUM.

phhhtttt.

I'm gonna go swig back a few methadone cocktails, chase it with a few lines of coke, pop a few pills and lay shirtless and twitching in an alley somewhere and laugh at those pathetic losers with no real lives.

On a serious note, something dosen't add up here. They claim that 42% of the members are addicted to the forum. We are scraping by at almost sixty thousand members as it stands. To me, there seems to be an extremely low percentage who actually participate here. Yes we have videos and pictures, but people aren't contributing every few seconds so that (by my guesstimate) would get pretty damn old after a while. What would keep somebody with no posts and a lack of active participation here coming back to such a degree that they would be considered addicts?

42% of sixty thousand just dosen't seem right. At least to me. I guess it could happen, though.

 

[Kalamos]

Extremely interesting.
And they have rough datas for Tickle Theater too.

Fascinating thing, the two forums do have different demographics too.
Even more fascinating fact, the most popular search keys were, apparently, Jessica Alba's feet.

...

Something I am not sure about is: how do they infer a user's ethnicity?
From search keys alone, or can they track surfing habits down to a user's ethnos?

Or is it a reverse guess?

...


EDIT:

Oh, silly me!
They get infos from dating services.
Of course.

🙂

...

Now we know african-american mature men in search of a date do not refresh their IPs after checking the latest foot clips on TMF.

😀

...

Wonder if we should adjust stuff accordingly.

 

[LindyHopper]

42% of sixty thousand just dosen't seem right. At least to me. I guess it could happen, though.

MrP. has already explained this. 6% of TMF users are "addicts." They make up 42% of all the visits to the TMF. Clear now?

Now, I wonder what percentage of TMF users don't read past the initial post before posting to a thread? My guess is.... enough of them. 😉

 

[Barlow]

Fascinating thing, the two forums do have different demographics too. Even more fascinating fact, the most popular search keys were, apparently, Jessica Alba's feet.

Um...it wasn't me...it was the one-armed man!

 

[Kalamos]

Um...it wasn't me...it was the one-armed man!

Ach! Thought so...



...

😉

 

[isabeau]

I was going to object to their use of the word addicts, but it's true, it's true. I'm an addict . I try to limit my time here- but I just can't! Someone could be uploading another clip as I type this! In the P&R forum, they might be debating whether or not people who blow themselves up while waiting in the line at the DMV are extremists (I would say no, due to the wait ). Then I have to submit my picks in the football pool, and before you know it, someone else is having a birthday! The new posts and threads are endless! But calling someone who vists the site over 100 times in a 24 hour period an 'addict' seems a bit over the top, if not entirely subjective. Maybe that person's doing research , I don't know. If the people at Quantcast would investigate the time-consuming nature of some of the activities here and the commitments we undertake, they might understand. Perhaps, they might reconsider condemning those of us who can't log off before opening and commenting on just one more thread. Oh, what's the use... what's the earliest date we can cast our votes for the Golden Feathers ?

lol..you are so funny..i love your sense of humour...

 

[toyou444]

Been there...done that.

I conducted two TMF Censuses over two years and all the stats are around if you want to search for them.

I didn't get any interest in doing one last year, so I didn't and therefore didn't do one this year either.

If anyone wants me to I'll gather the data again.

~ toyou

 

[Dussicar]

MrP. has already explained this. 6% of TMF users are "addicts." They make up 42% of all the visits to the TMF. Clear now?

Now, I wonder what percentage of TMF users don't read past the initial post before posting to a thread? My guess is.... enough of them. 😉

Yeah, yeah, I fucked up. Settle down.

 

[LindyHopper]

Yeah, yeah, I fucked up. Settle down.

Dude, it's not just you. It happens all the time. And I just have a pet peeve about people who are so much more interested in shooting off their own mouth that they can't take the time to read what anyone else has to say (again, not talking about you personally, but about the pattern of behavior in general). This is particularly irksome when another poster has actually gone to the trouble of posting an answer to a question, to clarify confusion. If someone else later on in the thread stays confused, or looks foolish, because they didn't bother to read the rest of the thread, well... I figure they kind of earned it. 😛

 

[Dussicar]

Dude, it's not just you. It happens all the time. And I just have a pet peeve about people who are so much more interested in shooting off their own mouth that they can't take the time to read what anyone else has to say (again, not talking about you personally, but about the pattern of behavior in general). This is particularly irksome when another poster has actually gone to the trouble of posting an answer to a question, to clarify confusion. If someone else later on in the thread stays confused, or looks foolish, because they didn't bother to read the rest of the thread, well... I figure they kind of earned it. 😛

Look. I was piss-tank drunk when I made that post, alright?

The only reason why I didn't say that before was then, you get some dipshit whining because "I'm s'pozda post only while sober." Even though plenty of people here have admitted to doing it...Including those that might get a little ornery with me in the first place.

It wasn't that I didn't look at Mr.P's post, it was that I didn't look at ANY of the posts in this thread after my first joke response on page one. I just felt like saying something and I did. I'm not writing a fucking master thesis here.

Considering some of the dumbass idiotic posts I see some people type here every now and then while they are stone-cold sober, I figure I'm doing good.

PS: I will eventually post whilst drunk again. At least I have an excuse.

 

[Kalamos]

Ok, we all need to sober up but...
why Jessica Alba's feet, anyway...?

 

[Dussicar]

Ok, we all need to sober up but...
why Jessica Alba's feet, anyway...?

Because Gwen Sefani won't take off her shoes!

Why won't she take off her shoes???