>From time to time, I analyze posting stats for the list. As we move toward the city election, I thought it would be a good time to look again.
This is a very limited sample - 22 days in May (through Saturday). The caveat is that events (DFL convention, Hodges/Samuels, etc.) can skew results somewhat, but every month there's something. These should be taken generally. May so far is one of the busier traffic months, but no busier than January, the year's busiest so far. A few conclusions are at the end. On to the tote board... Subscribed addresses: 960. (I'm guessing this works out to 800-850 unique members, when you figure in those who sign up with multiple addresses.) Number of members posting: 174. (These are individual people; I've factored out those posting from more than one address). City neighborhoods represented: 57 of the city's 80 Member neighborhoods parceled into the city's 11 Planning Communities (which are groups of 5-10 neighborhoods): Southwest: 29 Powderhorn: 23 Longfellow: 21 Near North: 12 Nokomis: 12 Calhoun-Isles: 11 Central: 10 Northeast: 9 University: 8 Camden: 7 Phillips: 3 Communities overrepresented on list (% of members posting more than % of city's population) Ranked by over-representation factor: 1. Longfellow: 14.5% of list posters, 7.2% of city population (twice population percentage) 2. Southwest: 20% of list posters, 12.4% of city population (1.6 times population percentage) About on par: 3. Central: 6.9% of list posters, 6.3% of city population (1.1 times population percentage). 4. Powderhorn: 15.9% versus 14.9% (1.1) 5. Calhoun-Isles: 7.6% versus 7.9% (.96) 6. Near North: 8.3% versus 9.3% (.89) 7. Nokomis: 8.3% versus 9.7% (.85) Underrepresented: 8. University: 5.5% of list posters versus 8.7% of city population (.63) 9. Northeast: 6.2% versus 10.4% (.59) 10. Camden: 4.8% versus 8.4% (.57) 11. Phillips: 2.1% versus 5.1% (.41) Some conclusions: 1. We're still skewed toward Southwest and Longfellow, two politically active areas. 2. However, this skewing is nowhere near what it was before the 2001 election (Minneapolis-Issues' third year). We're at par in the Central and Near North communities, which was not the case then. (The Booker/Don thing might explain the latter, but I'll bet if I looked at any 2005 month, it would be true). And with the not-inconsiderable exception of Phillips, every area of the city is has at least half the posting percentage of its population percentage, and no more than twice as much. That's much less variation than 2001. 3. Posting members account for 20 percent of individuals subscribed (174 divided by 800). If I included a completed month, it would probably be 25 percent, which is about the same as 2001. (The actual lurker percentage is higher, because many people read us on the Web, but I have no way to know how many check in that way.) 4. It'd be fun to analyze a longer period to reduce variation, but there's only so much fun a stat geek can have at once. Back out to the back yard to shovel off gravel and re-plant grass... David Brauer List manager REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
