Most of the texts on the Internet are written by madmen.
I discovered a post written a few years ago that lists the percentage of Reddit users leaving entries on this site:
Conclusion:
But that's not all - not all users who actually write something, do it regularly. The 1% rule is just another way of saying that the distribution of people making a contribution corresponds to a power law , that is, the level of inequality is stronger the smaller the subset of users we consider. The 2006 article stated:
The only explanation for what is happening is that this person is insane. Normal people don't do that. We can read books 20 a year, maximum, and we do not write reviews for all of these books on Amazon. There must be something wrong with him.
The same is true for other websites. One of the active editors of Wikipedia, Justin Knapp , made an average of 385 amendments per day from the date of registration in 2005 and at least until 2012. Even if he doesn’t sleep or eat and doesn’t do anything else (as long as this is the most likely explanation), so many changes will require one change every four minutes. And he does not slow down; After working for seven years, he made a million edits, and after 13 years he was approaching 2 million edits. This person edited Wikipedia articles every 4 minutes for 13 consecutive years. He is insane, and he has a very serious effect on what we read every day, when we need more information on almost any issue. There are other people like him. One user has 2.7 million edits, and there are many other users with more than a million edits. Moreover, some of them joined the project later than Napp, and, therefore, make edits more often than him; but for some reason I do not want to carry out calculations.
One streamer on the project Twitch, Ninja (the name “in the world” - Tyler Blevins), makes a video about how he plays games, 12 hours a day .
“The schedule is this: I start playing at 9:30, I play until 16 o'clock, it turns out about six, or six and a half hours,” said Blevins. - Then I take a break for 3-4 hours, I communicate with my wife, dogs and family - we like to organize such family evenings - and then I return to the computer at 19 o'clock, and play until 2-3 o'clock in the morning. I do this at least 12 hours a day, and I sleep no more than six or seven hours. ”
And he has been doing this almost without interruption since 2011, although he started earning quite recently.
Now it is no longer so popular, but for about a year almost under any video on YouTube, the most popular comment was the recording made by user Justin Y. He says he spends 1-3 hours a day, leaving comments on YouTube, finding a video through the statistics section, which shows which videos are gaining popularity, and comments on many videos even without looking at them. He may not be crazy, but he clearly interacts with the site in a different way than most people, in fact, are engaged in optimizing likes for comments.
If you read reviews on Amazon, for the most part you are dealing with materials written by people like Grady Harp. If you read Wikipedia, you mostly read articles written by people like Justin Napp. Watching streamers on Twitch, you usually watch people play like Tyler Blevins. And when you read comments on YouTube, you are, for the most part, reading records of people like Justin Young. When you consume content on the Internet, you mostly consume materials created by people who for some reason spend most of their time and energy creating content for the Internet. And these people are clearly different from most people in very important aspects.
I don’t know what to do with such observation, except to note that it is worth bearing in mind when visiting the Internet. I note that I did not mean that these people are really clinical crazy. I use this word in an ironic context; I respect the listed people and they, at first glance, are quite good. I'm just trying to draw attention to the fact that they behave unusually.
- There are about 15 million unique visitors and 500 thousand commentators in Askreddit.
- In / r / pics and / r / funny 10 million visitors and 200 thousand commentators.
- There are no public statistics in / r / TIL and / r / videos, but there are about 150 thousand commentators. Also, there is no statistics for / r / pcmasterrace, / r / wtf, / r / gaming, each of which has 120 thousand commentators.
- Each of the following sub-divisions has about 100 thousand commentators: / r / leagueoflegends (8 million visitors), / r / worldnews (6 million), / r / news (6 million), / r / movies (5 million), / r / adviceanimals (3 million), / r / gifs - unknown.
Conclusion:
In the largest subddits, the number of unique commentators is from 1% to 3% of readers.It turns out that Reddit has about 97-99% of users, who rarely participate in the discussion, and just passively consume the content generated by the remaining 1-3%. And this trend persists steadily in the Internet communities, and is known as a rule of one percent .
But that's not all - not all users who actually write something, do it regularly. The 1% rule is just another way of saying that the distribution of people making a contribution corresponds to a power law , that is, the level of inequality is stronger the smaller the subset of users we consider. The 2006 article stated:
Inequality is found in Wikipedia, where more than 99% of users are just visitors. According to Wikipedia itself, only 68,000 active authors participate in it, that is, 0.2% of 32 million unique users in the United States.I do not know how the author of the article at one time found the most fruitful critic, but I found a critic who, since 2011, has 20.8 K reviews . This is a little less than 3,000 reviews per year, or about 8 reviews per day. This person wrote an average of 8 reviews on Amazon per day, every day, for seven years. I thought it might be some kind of bot posting fake reviews for money, but if so, then this bot is good, because Grady Harp is a real person whose work coincides with the description in the account. I skimmed through some of the reviews, and they look relevant to the books, and also these reviews have a “purchase checked” mark, which means that he probably also actually read them.
The most active backbone of Wikipedia, 1000 people, or 0.003% of all users, make about two thirds of all edits to the site. It turns out that Wikipedia is even more asymmetric than blogs, with its rule of 99.8–0.2–0.003.
Inequality of participation exists in many places of the network. On Amazon.com, you can find a book sold in thousands of copies, despite the fact that it has only 12 reviews - which means that less than 1% of users make such reviews.
At the time of writing, 167,113 book reviews on Amazon were made by a small number of people from the top 100. The most fruitful of them wrote 12,423 reviews. It doesn't fit my mind how anyone can write so many reviews - not to mention reading all these books - but this is a classic example of inequality of participation.
The only explanation for what is happening is that this person is insane. Normal people don't do that. We can read books 20 a year, maximum, and we do not write reviews for all of these books on Amazon. There must be something wrong with him.
The same is true for other websites. One of the active editors of Wikipedia, Justin Knapp , made an average of 385 amendments per day from the date of registration in 2005 and at least until 2012. Even if he doesn’t sleep or eat and doesn’t do anything else (as long as this is the most likely explanation), so many changes will require one change every four minutes. And he does not slow down; After working for seven years, he made a million edits, and after 13 years he was approaching 2 million edits. This person edited Wikipedia articles every 4 minutes for 13 consecutive years. He is insane, and he has a very serious effect on what we read every day, when we need more information on almost any issue. There are other people like him. One user has 2.7 million edits, and there are many other users with more than a million edits. Moreover, some of them joined the project later than Napp, and, therefore, make edits more often than him; but for some reason I do not want to carry out calculations.
One streamer on the project Twitch, Ninja (the name “in the world” - Tyler Blevins), makes a video about how he plays games, 12 hours a day .
“The schedule is this: I start playing at 9:30, I play until 16 o'clock, it turns out about six, or six and a half hours,” said Blevins. - Then I take a break for 3-4 hours, I communicate with my wife, dogs and family - we like to organize such family evenings - and then I return to the computer at 19 o'clock, and play until 2-3 o'clock in the morning. I do this at least 12 hours a day, and I sleep no more than six or seven hours. ”
And he has been doing this almost without interruption since 2011, although he started earning quite recently.
Now it is no longer so popular, but for about a year almost under any video on YouTube, the most popular comment was the recording made by user Justin Y. He says he spends 1-3 hours a day, leaving comments on YouTube, finding a video through the statistics section, which shows which videos are gaining popularity, and comments on many videos even without looking at them. He may not be crazy, but he clearly interacts with the site in a different way than most people, in fact, are engaged in optimizing likes for comments.
If you read reviews on Amazon, for the most part you are dealing with materials written by people like Grady Harp. If you read Wikipedia, you mostly read articles written by people like Justin Napp. Watching streamers on Twitch, you usually watch people play like Tyler Blevins. And when you read comments on YouTube, you are, for the most part, reading records of people like Justin Young. When you consume content on the Internet, you mostly consume materials created by people who for some reason spend most of their time and energy creating content for the Internet. And these people are clearly different from most people in very important aspects.
I don’t know what to do with such observation, except to note that it is worth bearing in mind when visiting the Internet. I note that I did not mean that these people are really clinical crazy. I use this word in an ironic context; I respect the listed people and they, at first glance, are quite good. I'm just trying to draw attention to the fact that they behave unusually.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/437108/