We had the chance to upvote this heavily without leaving any comments, but we blew it
this post was submitted on 13 Apr 2025
448 points (94.6% liked)
Fediverse
34080 readers
734 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I was playing around with Lemmy statistics the other day, and I decided to take the number of comments per post. Essentially a measure of engagement – the higher the number the more engaging the post is. Or in other words how many people were pissed off enough to comment, or had something they felt like sharing. The average for every single Lemmy instance was 8.208262964 comments per post.
So I modeled that with a Poisson distribution, in stats terms X~Po(8.20826), then found the critical regions assuming that anything that had a less than 5% chance of happening, is important. In other words 5% is the significance level. The critical regions are the region either side of the distribution where the probability of ending up in those regions is less than 5%. These critical regions on the lower tail are, 4 comments and on the upper tail is 13 comments, what this means is that if you get less than 4 comments or more than 13 comments, that's a meaningful value. So I chose to interpret those results as meaning that if you get 5 or less comments than your post is "a bad post", or if you get 13 or more than your post is "a good post". A good post here is litterally just "got a lot of comments than expected of a typical post", vice versa for "a bad post".
You will notice that this is quite rudimentary, like what about when the Americans are asleep, most posts do worse then. That's not accounted for here, because it increases the complexity beyond what I can really handle in a post.
To give you an idea of a more sweeping internet trend, the adage 1% 9% 90%, where 1% do the posting, 9% do the commenting, and 90% are lurkers – assuming each person does an average of 1 thing a day, suggests that c/p should be about 9 for all sites regardless of size.
Now what is more interesting is that comments per post varies by instance, lemmy.world for example has an engagement of 9.5 c/p and lemmy.ml has 4.8 c/p, this means that a “good post” on .ml is a post that gets 9 comments, whilst a “good post” on .world has to get 15 comments. On hexbear.net, you need 20 comments, to be a “good post”. I got the numbers for instance level comments and posts from here
This is a little bit silly, since a “good post”, by this metric, is really just a post that baits lots and lots of engagement, specifically in the form of comments – so if you are reading this you should comment, otherwise you are an awful person. No matter how meaningless the comment.
Anyway I thought that was cool.
EDIT: I've cleared up a lot of the wording and tried to make it clearer as to what I am actually doing.
that could be because it is an AMAZING post – it covered all the points and no one has anything left to say
Finally, I know why.
This does happen with comments sometimes. I go into a post and someone has already eloquently said what I would have said (often better than I would have). So I upvote it and move along
Fun break down! More comments is more interesting than more posts for me
Well then, here, have a comment.
You need a factor for niche communities. A post with 4 comments in a backpacking community with 20 subscribers is way "gooder" than 40 comments in a 5k subscriber news community.
I.E. add a community size factor.
In my mind, that shows that "copying reddit" was not the best idea and people should really have copied things like phpBB or SMF for the flagship "community-based" fediverse platform, at least to start out.
On traditional forums, even relatively small communities cause interesting content to appear all the time, by thread bumping and back-and-forth discussion that can go over many pages. However it is obvious that this structure doesn't scale well to communities with thousands of active users writing thousands of comments in one thread. The reddit structure works better for such communities, but most communities we have here on the threadiverse just aren't that big yet.
I grew up with traditional forums and discovered other structures for "social media" much later; I still consider traditional forums way superior to any "social media" structure that is nowadays popular.
I think meaningful commenting only works in trees, for example the old mailing lists.
With classic linear forums, I quickly loose track of different discussions. Good luck finding replys to a comment on page #3 when the post has 300 comments.
True, that structure does also have its own peculiar problems.
It's just what I grew up with (from when I was a preteen, only first became active on reddit ~10 years later), so I'm kinda nostalgic for it. :D One aspect of linear forums is that you gradually got to know the people regularly commenting, much more so than on reddit or Lemmy.
load more comments
(3 replies)
I was also a very active user of traditional forums but, in my experience, small niche subreddits (when I was on Reddit) were a decent substitute in terms of content, since posts could stay on their front page for several days. Lemmy isn't big enough to have those yet but I hope it will be. The thing I miss most about forums isn't the format but rather the community. The forum I posted on the most had only a few dozen regulars and I knew them.
There was the guy with a kind, insightful take on controversial issues and a fetish for women with more than two arms. The active duty marine who reliably posted harsh truths. The feminist I didn't get along with at all despite agreeing with her about most things. The dedicated father who bought real razor wire for his daughter when she wanted a UN-peacekeeper-base themed birthday party. The very determined conservative who defended his position no matter how outnumbered he was and once bragged that he had given his wife several dozen orgasms in a row...
I suppose I was the young man with strange views about what was or wasn't fair and a great deal of anger over any perceived unfairness. (I don't think I was particularly well-liked.) The internet is so much less personal now.
While I love traditional forum structure, I don't think it would be great to transition later from one structure to another completely different. In my mind, the only thing that needs a bit of tuning is the "Hot" algorithm of the front page
ActivityPub is flexible enough that we don't have to choose. Someone could implement a piece of compatible software that displays threadiverse communities as "boards" and everyone could join whatever they liked best. NodeBB is already doing something similar to that.
Between (old) reddit, phpbb and smf... the old reddit model wins by a landslide in my opinion. I've used all of these over the years and absofuckinglutely HATE phpBB and SMF, with SMF earning slightly less hatred than phpBB.
I'm also old enough to have downloaded .QWK files for offline BBS forum reading/replying and even connecting to the internet over a FidoNet-internet bridge. Lemmy did the exact right thing in copying reddit's format.
load more comments
(3 replies)
No, you did your math wrong
Also, something about politics.
(Just kidding. This is neat 😎)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Add a TLDR or this post won't get a lot of traction either
Confirmed. I see "Poisson distribution" I start skimming lol
I comment very seldom and only if i think that I can contribute. I see no need to write anything if I got nothing of significance to add.
Maybe I should. Add comments that is uplifting and kind more often.
I comment a shit ton and often with absolute banalities. Especially on posts with 0 comments.
My reasoning is twofold: first of all I want to encourage posters by engaging with their content so they don't stop posting. Second I want to invite others to comment and it's much more inviting to do so if a post has at least one comment. People tend to think it's dead otherwise and not bother.
I think at the current level of MAUs there is no comment too small, and every little bit helps just by virtue of breaking the silence.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
I've happily found that there is much more interaction here than on Mastodon :)
It's a different model.
Mastodon, like Twitter, is a person-centered setup. You can use hashtags, but most people don't. You follow people not communities. As a result it's basically microblogs, where most people are just posting into the void. Celebrities are followed more, so they get more replies, so there are more conversations. But, fundamentally it's not really inviting interactions.
Lemmy, like Reddit, is a topic-centered setup. It has a bunch of communities and people post something because they think it might be interesting for people who are also interested in that community. Every post is basically an invitation to have a discussion about something.
I think the friction to posting something on Lemmy is slightly higher, but when you do, it's more likely to generate comments.
Mastodon mainly only looks like there is no interaction happening because of their federating logic. Which is being worked on to be fixed sometimes this year
Does that mean we would see more posts / accounts being recommended?
It means that if you see a post, you will finally see all replies and interactions to that post. Currently this is not working.
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Okay. Look. We both said a lot of things that you're going to regret. But I think we can put our differences behind us. For science. You monster.
The other chance that you got no comments on your post for is that you are banned from the remote instance/community, or federation is broken (still happens intermittently).
Lemmy will still allow you to post from your home instance since you are not banned there, but your content will simply get black-holed by the remote instance if you're banned there. Sometimes you have to check the remote instance directly to see if your post was federated or not.
load more comments
(2 replies)
The average for every single Lemmy instance was 8.208262964 comments per post.
I wonder how much that statistic would change if you exclude news or politics communities.
load more comments
(1 replies)
You didn't factor in the variability of federation vs. a single platform and how not only can it affect how long it takes for everyone to see a post, if they do at all, but also how many duplications there may be floating around. And I don't know if you can predict that reliably, as we're all still trying to figure it out.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Goodhart's Law: "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure."
Not entirely sure how this applies to the discussion, it just came to mind lol
Haha nice bait, which I took to get some actually interesting statistics, well executed !
Here is your comment, you deserve it. Now your post made it to "average"! You're welcome.
(Was there any correlation between upvote count and the comment-based metrics? That could also be pretty interesting)
load more comments
(1 replies)
A post by fediversechick
Similarly a “good post”, one that gets lots of comments, would be any post that gets more than 13 comments.
By my count, this comment will take your post from one with 12 comments to one with 13 comments, therefore I'm conferring on you the title of "good post". Congratulations!!
However, I'm assuming that you're including your own comments in the comment tally. If you're not, then your 2 comments so far to this post don't count, and you'll only be at 11, and therefore "not good".
If you are counting your own comments on your own post, can you juice the numbers by adding lots of comments? In other words, can you make a post good by interacting with the people who are interacting with the post? Like some kind of um... conversation? Sounds like cheating to me.
I think one needs to include parameters like how soon after the topic was created the comment was made and how deep is it in the comment tree. If you for instance consistently comment on 1 month old topics or reply on comments ten levels deep you will get very few interactions.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Cool !
Good post bro. 😉
Now what is more interesting is that comments per post varies by instance, lemmy.world for example has an engagement of 9.5 c/p and lemmy.ml has 4.8 c/p
I don't understand what this is supposed to mean. The commenter's account, or the community they posted to is on .world/.ml? Because those aren't necessarily the same.
Presumably where you posted it, given that local feeds show posts based, not on if someone is on the instance, but rather which instance the post is made on. The model I used is litterally the most basic thing in the world, so I just cobbled something together that was somewhat meaningful. I only took college stats, so complex models are out of my range.
Another likely cause: you're posting to a non-local community and you got hit by federation issues, while your instance thinks the post got created, the target instance doesn't know about it.
Happened to me a few times.
this is a certified good post
Post in a obscure sub