• Elcripple@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    93
    ·
    1 year ago

    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).

    • fuzzzerd@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

      • Elcripple@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        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

    • loobkoob@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 year ago

      I believe the rule of thumb is the 90:9:1 ratio:

      • 1% of users create original content
      • 9% of users interact with that content - voting/commenting on it, sharing it, etc.
      • 90% of users are essentially just in read-only mode
      • pensivepangolin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        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

        • bassomitron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          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:

          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.

    • TheSaneWriter@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.