Why should they show subscribers of dead accounts?
Because the number of subscribers gives you a better idea of the size of the community than a vague “visitors” - that includes every single clown who stumbled upon the subreddit after googling or clicking a random link.
Also note the issue of the number including dead accounts could be easily solved.
I think they only kept that to “prop up” numbers before the IPO.
I think they’re actively trying to hide the number of lurkers, by conflating it with casual visitors.
Because the number of subscribers gives you a better idea of the size of the community than a vague “visitors”
It’s literally the exact opposite. Subscribers from dead accounts aren’t active, they aren’t part of the community, they aren’t discussing. They are dead accounts.
The people that ARE in the community are the actual users that show up on a regular basis. THAT is what shows the actual size of the community. Not that it was once a default sub for hundreds of thousands of accounts that are no longer active.
Yeah but it’s not solved JFC. Could could could isn’t accomplished by their currently showing subscribers of dead accounts. JFC.
And it couldn’t be solved easily anyway. What’s a dead account? Log in once a year? That’s certainly not active in that community. But hey let’s count that anyway, right? Subscribed but all you do is browse all? Not active, but let’s count that too, right? A game is popular for a while and gets tons of subscribers, then peters off and the people don’t unsub and just browse all. Again: not active, but fuck it let’s count that too. See the problem yet? Subscriber is way vaguer (your word) than actual participants.
Of course it isn’t solved. Because Reddit does not want to solve it. It doesn’t want users to know how large the community of a subreddit is. It’s simply cooking the numbers: the bigger the better, even if bigger = less accurate. So it’s replacing an inaccurate metric with an even more inaccurate metric.
And, again: it didn’t even need to replace it. I’m saying it should show both metrics dammit. Both are inaccurate, but with both you have better grounds to reach less inaccurate conclusions about community size than with only one of them.
And this is bloody obvious. Specially from Lemmy:
Could could could isn’t accomplished by their currently showing subscribers of dead accounts. JFC.
The fact it could but it won’t matters here, even if you pretend otherwise.
And it couldn’t be solved easily anyway. What’s a dead account? Log in once a year? That’s certainly not active in that community. But hey let’s count that anyway, right? Subscribed but all you do is browse all? Not active, but let’s count that too, right? A game is popular for a while and gets tons of subscribers, then peters off and the people don’t unsub and just browse all. Again: not active, but fuck it let’s count that too. See the problem yet?
“Unless you can solve it perfectly right off the bat than its impassible!!! lol lmao”
Start with an arbitrary cut-off line for activity. Then tweak it over time. Done.
Enjoy the last word if you want it.
I don’t care about the last word. But I do care someone is vomiting false dichotomy, eating their own vomit, and expecting me to eat it alongside them. I’m not doing it.
Because the number of subscribers gives you a better idea of the size of the community than a vague “visitors” - that includes every single clown who stumbled upon the subreddit after googling or clicking a random link.
Also note the issue of the number including dead accounts could be easily solved.
I think they’re actively trying to hide the number of lurkers, by conflating it with casual visitors.
It’s literally the exact opposite. Subscribers from dead accounts aren’t active, they aren’t part of the community, they aren’t discussing. They are dead accounts.
The people that ARE in the community are the actual users that show up on a regular basis. THAT is what shows the actual size of the community. Not that it was once a default sub for hundreds of thousands of accounts that are no longer active.
I already addressed this: “note the issue of the number including dead accounts could be easily solved”.
Emphasis mine. That is not what the “visitors” metric is about.
Yeah but it’s not solved JFC. Could could could isn’t accomplished by their currently showing subscribers of dead accounts. JFC.
And it couldn’t be solved easily anyway. What’s a dead account? Log in once a year? That’s certainly not active in that community. But hey let’s count that anyway, right? Subscribed but all you do is browse all? Not active, but let’s count that too, right? A game is popular for a while and gets tons of subscribers, then peters off and the people don’t unsub and just browse all. Again: not active, but fuck it let’s count that too. See the problem yet? Subscriber is way vaguer (your word) than actual participants.
Enjoy the last word if you want it.
Of course it isn’t solved. Because Reddit does not want to solve it. It doesn’t want users to know how large the community of a subreddit is. It’s simply cooking the numbers: the bigger the better, even if bigger = less accurate. So it’s replacing an inaccurate metric with an even more inaccurate metric.
And, again: it didn’t even need to replace it. I’m saying it should show both metrics dammit. Both are inaccurate, but with both you have better grounds to reach less inaccurate conclusions about community size than with only one of them.
And this is bloody obvious. Specially from Lemmy:
The fact it could but it won’t matters here, even if you pretend otherwise.
“Unless you can solve it perfectly right off the bat than its impassible!!! lol lmao”
Start with an arbitrary cut-off line for activity. Then tweak it over time. Done.
I don’t care about the last word. But I do care someone is vomiting false dichotomy, eating their own vomit, and expecting me to eat it alongside them. I’m not doing it.