Vocal minority though, surely?
I’ve visited a few times on Desktop (old.reddit) since the shutdown and the rate of new content seems to have slowed down quite drastically.
Twitter metrics used to point to 90% of the content coming from 10% of the users.
If Reddit is similar, it makes sense to assume that many of the very active users were on 3rd party apps (to improve the basic experience, moderation etc.) so those being unavailable could put them off entirely (I know I’m using Reddit a fraction of what I once was).
Seems like in 2014, a peer-reviewed study confirmed that it’s pretty close to accurate:
A 2014 peer-reviewed paper entitled “The 1% Rule in Four Digital Health Social Networks: An Observational Study” empirically examined the 1% rule in health-oriented online forums. The paper concluded that the 1% rule was consistent across the four support groups, with a handful of “Superusers” generating the vast majority of content.[6] A study later that year, from a separate group of researchers, replicated the 2014 van Mierlo study in an online forum for depression.[7] Results indicated that the distribution frequency of the 1% rule fit followed Zipf’s Law, which is a specific type of power law.
Indeed. Not many people hopped ship, but those who did were disproportionately power users, mods, and other content generators. Because of that, I’ve heard that Reddit content generation has somewhat slowed.
I hadn’t heard that stag from Twitter, but I really do hope that is how it is on reddit and that the content generating users have begin making the switch. Sadly, I think some of reddit recent rise in popularity attracted some folks there only for views so they’ll probably stay. Hopefully their content isn’t much to miss.
I’ve a feeling you’re not wrong about attracting users who’re solely after notoriety, though I’ve a feeling it’ll only further water down meaningful content and discussion on the platform as that no longer necessarily brings with it much in the way of karma
Vocal minority though, surely?
I’ve visited a few times on Desktop (old.reddit) since the shutdown and the rate of new content seems to have slowed down quite drastically.
Twitter metrics used to point to 90% of the content coming from 10% of the users.
If Reddit is similar, it makes sense to assume that many of the very active users were on 3rd party apps (to improve the basic experience, moderation etc.) so those being unavailable could put them off entirely (I know I’m using Reddit a fraction of what I once was).
I believe the rule of thumb is the 90:9:1 ratio:
Not that I don’t believe you, but do you have a source about that? Quite literally for the sake of my curiosity/further reading
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1%25_rule
Seems like in 2014, a peer-reviewed study confirmed that it’s pretty close to accurate:
There’s a Wikipedia page about it with all sorts of links to rabbit holes you can go down!
Oh wow thanks for the reply! I’ve never read about this topic at all so this will definitely be fun to tumble down
Indeed. Not many people hopped ship, but those who did were disproportionately power users, mods, and other content generators. Because of that, I’ve heard that Reddit content generation has somewhat slowed.
I hadn’t heard that stag from Twitter, but I really do hope that is how it is on reddit and that the content generating users have begin making the switch. Sadly, I think some of reddit recent rise in popularity attracted some folks there only for views so they’ll probably stay. Hopefully their content isn’t much to miss.
I’ve a feeling you’re not wrong about attracting users who’re solely after notoriety, though I’ve a feeling it’ll only further water down meaningful content and discussion on the platform as that no longer necessarily brings with it much in the way of karma