OK, so how many of the 7 thousand members post here

[Legman]

Okay, I found a copy on my home computer of the first post of the thread I mentioned above - where I kept track of the total number of posters in the "census". It was last updated on July 2nd, 2000. It also explains a little about the approach of the thing, but a few days back is not to be taken too literally. It was in fact close to a week back that I browsed the OT threads for new names to add to the list. Here's an excerpt from the post:

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>I had a bit of time on my hands so I browsed through the threads of the OT a few days back and recorded the usernames of the posters who replied to any of the subjects.

I've added some usernames on my own, mainly from the threads entitled Login Changes Archive and Apolyton Age & ICQ FAQ (courtesy of Narck) in the Apolyton Forum. When people have changed their login recently I've tried to go with the current one.

Please feel free to post to this thread the logins that you see missing from the list - if you think they can be labeled regular OT posters. I'll probably add some myself along the way if I don't get bored with it - or find something useful to do instead...

The state of the Census is currently 237 OT regulars.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

- So my estimate from memory above of 340 was 100 too high. This isn't the exact truth about the total number of posters, but it could be seen as a very conservative estimate. If anyone is interested in seeing which posters were included in the total of 237 (fat chance!), I could post the names too...

[MarkG]

check the news

[ColdWizard]

cool, more people are active than i thought

[Lefty Scaevola]

. I do not post here, o wait, maybe I do.

------------------
Gauis Mucius Scaevola
older richer & wiser than you

[Builder]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by ColdWizard on 10-31-2000 04:48 PM</font>
cool, more people are active than i thought
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

yes.

I was surprised to see 1000 active in a month.

[Empress]

oh oh I want to put my post in!

[UltraSonix]

Judging by the pathetic reponse to this thread - I think we can conclude that at best, there only 23 unique posters here...

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... Despite any stupid advertisments you may see to the contrary...

[phoenixcager]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>People asked for them, so here are some statistics for our forum members

Active logins over the last

one month: 1015
two months: 1306

Unique logins in current(not archived/deleted) threads of forum

Civ3-general: 547
Civ2-general: 685
CtP2-general: 292
CtP-general: 455
AC-general: 465
OT: 464

Logins with last activity during

1998: 1
1999: 3087
2000: 4042

But let's give some more stats: the results from our Hitbox counters showed a record making increase in actual visitors:

54,000 monthly unique visitors in October from 42,000 in September

74,000 daily unique visitors in October from 57,000 in September

<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

I'm pretty surprised that there are more unique logins in civ & civ2 than in the OT. Maybe it's because the threads are archived much quicker. (I saw a 2-year-old thread bumped up recently in CtP-help)

How are the 'unique visitors' counted in that last section?

[Dissident Aggressor]

alright, who is the ******* who hasn't posted since 1998

[UltraSonix]

I can't believe it! There's more people going to civ3 then OT?!

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... Despite any stupid advertisments you may see to the contrary...

[MarkG]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>How are the 'unique visitors' counted in that last section?
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>
that is based on the IP of the visitor, it has nothing to do with the forum mechanisms

btw,
a daily unique is someone who has come at least once during a day
a monthly unique is someone who has come at least once during a month

[tonic]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>
I'm pretty surprised that there are more unique logins in civ & civ2 than in the OT.

<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

It's not really surprising when you think about it. OT is a high volume forum made so by a core of very active posters (and some might say, spammers), whereas the on-topic ones like civ2 get a lot of one-timers with specific game related queries. After all most of us are attracted to this site primarily through our interest in the civ games.

[phoenixcager]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by MarkG on 11-03-2000 03:32 AM</font>
btw, a daily unique is someone who has come at least once during a day a monthly unique is someone who has come at least once during a month
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

I'm still confused... how do you get figures in the tens of thousands?

[ColdWizard]

those are the numbers computers with different ip #s that entered the site

[phoenixcager]

Ok....I think I get it. It refers to the site not the forums specifically, right?