(For last year’s results, see “Uncommon Descent” and “The Skeptical Zone” in 2015)
 |
| Fig 1 |
In 2016, “The Skeptical Zone” (TSZ) overtook “Uncommon Descent” (UD) – at least with regard to the number of comments:
Number of Comments 2005 – 2016
| year | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UD | 41,400 | 28,400 | 42,500 | 53,700 | 53,100 | 28,000 |
| TSZ | 2,200 | 15,100 | 16,900 | 20,400 | 45,200 | 54,200 |
That is not much of a surprise: the general amnesty of Oct 2014 enlivened UD only for a short time. This trend seems to be spotted at UD, as user Dionisio started to proof the superior quality of edits at UD (I wonder why (s)he didn’t look for “oil of the red herring”…)
Number of Comments
 |
 |
| Fig 2 | Fig 3 |
| UD has three times at many contributors as TSZ – the need for socks could play a role…. | |
 |
 |
| Fig 4 | Fig 5 |
Number of Threads
 |
 |
| Fig 6 | Fig 7 |
The situation is reversed with the posts: only a few authors are allowed to start a thread at UD, while the group of authors at TSZ is more diverse.
 |
 |
| Fig 8 | Fig 9 |
Obviously, threads at TSZ gather more comments over time and can be go on for quite a while – while the longest living thread of UD is reanimated regularly by Dionisio….
 |
 |
| Fig 10 | Fig 11 |
Replies at “The Skeptical Zone”
Commentators at TSZ can (but don’t have to) reply to other comments – this allows to track the interaction between editors:
|
 |
| Fig 12 | Fig 13 |
So, half of all comments were replies! The commentators who gave at least 50 replies are shown in the following graph:
the interaction between editors:
 |
| Fig 14 |
Top 100 Articles
 |
 |
| Fig 15 | Fig 16 |
 |
 |
| Fig 17 | Fig 18 |
Unique Editors per Month
 |
 |
| Fig 19 | Fig 20 |
- The number of unique editors per month is between 1.5 and eight times bigger at UD than at TSZ
- I had expected a more poignant effect of the amnesty, but it seems that the return of just a few previously banned editors was enough to create a flurry of activity for a couple of months.
Top 250 words used in comments in 2016
 |
 |
| Fig 21 | Fig 22 |
One Just God is at the heart of both blogs…
(added Jan 18,2016)
Ann: I gathered TSZ’s data by visiting http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/wp-admin/edit.php?post_type=post&all and http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/wp-admin/edit-comments.php – the numbers of threads and comments I got fit nicely the number of all published threads and all approved comments.
For UD, I enumerated the posts using the monthly archives, e.g., http://www.uncommondescent.com/2017/01/ , and then visited each post to collect the comments. This seems to agree with UD’s internal numbering of the comments: E.g., for 2016, I could retrieve 27,987 comments, while the numbering suggests that 28,729 comments were made: A rate of 2.6% of deleted and indefinitely moderated comments seems plausible…
UD’s post Uncommon Descent at 15000 posts: A tribute to Bill Dembski is my 14,999th post (out of ca. 17,700): that is as satisfying confirmation of my method, too.
Alas, I cannot give any guarantee that some edits and posts were not inadvertently omitted, and I’m grateful for any party involved willing to check my results.
When can I start getting paid for this?
As soon as you start making posts with above zero value.
excellent post.
Seconded! Thanks DiEb
Alan Fox,
This reminds me of the US structure of government. It’s not perfect but it is the best out there.
If you mean TSZ, then the compliment is much appreciated, I’m sure! 😉
At UD:
“14
bornagain77January 8, 2017 at 3:53 pm
DiEB, nice work. Still not going to visit.
Most of the main top Atheistic contributors at TSZ whom I recognize and have interacted with in the past, IMHO, could care less for empirical science and are only interested in defending atheism no matter what.
Mung has far more patience than I in such matters”
In other news, shares of scrollwheel down 9%.
Of course it’s BA77’s opinion.
You know the worth of that…
Glen Davidson
At least his stock is impervious to decline.
To be fair about the comparison, some of the trolling has shifted from there to here.
But at least we don’t have BA77 and KF droning on forever.
Glen Davidson
If he didn’t visit, how does he know that it was nice work?
From visiting UD, the one thing I know from reading their comments is that they all visit TSZ and AtBC. The main reason that people like KF, BA77 and Barry never come here is that their fragile egos can’t tolerate not having the power to ban those who can present a logical argument against their views.
Acartia,
They read everything here yet “never visit”. because goodness forbid they get caught on a level playing field where they can’t close comments or disappear things!
Richardthughes,
I’m sure we’d give a warm welcome and a fair hearing to any UD denizens who did pay us a visit.
Well at least at UD they support ID. No one here knows how to support blind watchmaker evolution/ Coyne’s definition of evolution. So that would be a huge plus for UD.
Alan Fox
Agreed.
So true,KF and BA are a huge plus
I was going to say the same thing. Its pretty much thanks to you and I.
Quantity does not equal quality.
Thirded! Thanks DiEb.
It’s too bad that there isn’t an easy way to do either of these:
1. Weight comments by their length. That would make clear how far off scale BA77 is at UD.
2. Detect cases in which the same diagram is published in multiple posts. kairosfocus would win out there, with the beloved diagram of an exploded view of a fancy fishing reel probably in first place.
What do people think these figures mean?
I remember the campaign to boycott UD. Yet I still see people here making reference to comments they see at UD.
If some of the folks who post here who are theists were to boycott TSZ, can anyone predict what would happen to TSZ?
How many theists have come to this site and contributed on a regular basis who did not first post at UD?
Mung,
It means the never if comments is declining, Mung. I doubt that is a good sign. look at you. You love it here. Xx
I’d love you more if you tossed that no good keiths to the curb. 🙂
Mung,
He had me at not banana.
ok, but how did you know it was not edible without first taking a bite?
Mung,
Because it was a raven.
Yes. And he exclaimed, when you tried to cook it? Nevermore?
Both are doing well but there should be more business.
Origin mattters can rouse up the volume of any 20 young people anywhere. however its like the army. In origin matters only the officiers argue/debate. Whatever rank of that officier. onltuy those intellectually able to keep up, be interested in involved/complicated matters, use the internet for this interplay. the regular soldiers don’t get involved although interested at entry level.
i wish there were more, more visited, ssharper and vigourous origin contention blogs/forums.
Even amongst intellectual ‘officers’ there is no enoufgh action. Things should be settled by the guys who are right. Yes mostly/almost all guys.
I enjoyed and learned and contributed to UD. However they have a problem with free speech and free thought. Then censor and ban even while complaining of same by the establishment in academia.
They allow unjust posters to do wrong and don’t all just posters to do right.
Censorship is for the historic bad guys in issues of truth discovery. Not the good guys. ID/YEC are the good guys intellectually, often morally.
TSZ has a more fair, intelligent, approach to posting. There are problems between some and burden moderators. I see it.
TSZ deserves this asskicking of UD. UD needs to reform and obey the laws of truth discovery and freedom of speech.Lighten up and smarten up. Americanize and not third worldize.
DiEb,
Glad to see you’re alive and kicking. Excellent work.
Mung:
Wrong reference. The raven was Hempel’s.
I think this post should be featured, because it actually is a scientific study, not just yip-yap about science, and also because DiEb put a lot of work into it. The post is, in and of itself, as clear an indication as any of how different TSZ is from UD.
Or perhaps you should start to pay rent? 😉
@AhmedKiaan, Alan Fox, stcordova, Tom English
Thanks for the encouragement!
It can be done – I have the data. But I’m not sure what it will proof:
1) There is the KF/BA school of thought: the longer a comment, the better. On the other hand, there are countless very short flippant remarks which don’t contribute much to a discussion, neither.
2) KF used the fishing rod 31 times….
(edit: he used two versions of the pic)
Robert Byers,
1) Mostly, not the officers are debating, but only the political commissars…
2) The one time, ID’s officers were called to battle/debate, the most prominent went AWOL (Dover…)
3) Most of the debates are just philosophical/theological musings and won’t change any minds.
Tom English,
Thanks! Last year’s post was much more work, this year I just had to try to understand the scripts I used the last time 😉
I don’t even make any of the graphs. Where do you guys make the time for this shit? I have work to do and… pc games to play. By the way, factorio is awesome.
Tom English,
Done
DiEb:
That guy is a walking caricature of himself.
My favorite thing about KF is he took CSI and made up his own new FIASCO acronym for it, so he could imagine he’s an important contributor to ID Theory.
Really? With 1300 comments you are the 17th most busy contributor – of course, you show up in the graphs (though only the top 10 get their own colors – yours is grey, as for everybody else…)
Rumraket,
Hi DiEb,
Fascinating post. I have a question. How many distinct individuals read TSZ posts on a typical day?
Only now did I realize the network graph looks like a flower. Pretty 🙂
That’s the kind of question I cannot answer as I have no access to the server.
Therefore design
Beat me to it. Definitely a post worth pinning.
DiEb’s findings should make Lizzie proud. Thanks Elizabeth, and hope someday you’ll see the fruit of your labors.
DiEb,
I too think the post should be featured. In case Denyse tells Mung to spampost it off the first page ;P
Looks like UD peaked in November 2014. That makes sense. It’s almost an echo chamber over there now, they allow like 3-4 dissidents.