DDI - 8000 subscribers and counting - When will it stop?
- Thread starter Jack99
- Start date
There is a vast difference between "is unknown for certain" and "is 100% unknown." I was just politely pointing that out.
Most of my points are indisputable- for example, it is quite simply mathematically unlikely that vast numbers of people just happened to have their subscriptions run out in the short period between having a subscription and logging in to the forums, and now. Why? Because there just haven't been that many days since the new forums started, and the shortest possible subscription period is one month.
Same with my point about people with intermittent subscriptions counting as at least partial successes for WotC- a yearly subscription is $71.40 right now. Using your example, someone who subscribes for one month every six months is still paying $19.90 per year. And honestly there's a straight mathematical probability that, to the extent that people are actually doing this, for everyone person who's shown up in that list so far who's pulling this trick there ought to be four or five times more who haven't shown up because they're in the a no-subscription period of their cycle.
Eh, forget it. Sales data about WotC is one of your hobbyhorses, and I should just let you have it.
Most of my points are indisputable- for example, it is quite simply mathematically unlikely that vast numbers of people just happened to have their subscriptions run out in the short period between having a subscription and logging in to the forums, and now. Why? Because there just haven't been that many days since the new forums started, and the shortest possible subscription period is one month.
Same with my point about people with intermittent subscriptions counting as at least partial successes for WotC- a yearly subscription is $71.40 right now. Using your example, someone who subscribes for one month every six months is still paying $19.90 per year. And honestly there's a straight mathematical probability that, to the extent that people are actually doing this, for everyone person who's shown up in that list so far who's pulling this trick there ought to be four or five times more who haven't shown up because they're in the a no-subscription period of their cycle.
Eh, forget it. Sales data about WotC is one of your hobbyhorses, and I should just let you have it.
Imaro
Legend
This is correct but it is not the only factor in play... the fact that a few to many may have not joined the group yet is also a factor that skews the numbers as well. The fat that a brand new class was introduced this month (thus creating a more likely time for people to restock on Dragon/Dungeon/CB and grab the Monster Builder)... In other words what I am saying is that when the skewing factors are taken in combination they create a wide variance. You seem to think these things only happen in isolation...and they don't. Now if the counter adjusts dependent upon whether a members subscription is active or not, then we are definitely getting a better overall estimate.
This makes no sense unless you know how the counter works... otherwise those people will eventually show up in the number of subscribers (and may even be represented disproportionately due to such things as the assassin class and monster builder showing up in a particular month), again if the number adjusts then all of this is accounted for and an even steady number would be reached at a certain point. If it doesn't then the data is useless.
Hey, how did I know something dismissive would show up soon (even though I've stuck to logic)... whatever man.
Dannager
First Post
I thought it had already been pretty solidly established that the member count of the D&D Insider group is not an accurate count of subscribers at all, since only those who have recently registered with the new forum community are counted. The actual number of subscribers is probably many times the number of people in the community group.
Imaro
Legend
And again if the counter does subtract and add members according to their status then we may very well get a pretty accurate average number of subscribers per year at a certain point... if all it does is add dependent upon status at time of creating a profile... we will never have anything close to an accurate number... I just asked which one was the case.
I think I understand the point you are trying to make.
But for me it's more info than we ever had...and while it may not be facts, it can be used as an indicator, along with other inidicators that can give us an idea of the big picture.
Technically, all data we see will be flawed in some way, discounting it on that basis means we won't ever be using the data.
It's a data point. Not the entire picture.
Jack99
Adventurer
It doesn't.
Imaro
Legend
It doesn't what? And how do you know?
Yes, well, that does raise the question - should we be "using" the data. My personal vote is "No." You see, the data we get out here, outside of WotC, is so woefully incomplete that any conclusions we draw from it are probably very seriously flawed.
There is a point where admitting you don't know enough to make a judgment is far more constructive than making judgments based on lousy data.
Echohawk
Shirokinukatsukami fan
It has now been one month since Jack99 posted this, and the total is now sitting at 14392, not quite double where it was on Sept 6th.
