![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jducoeurSo I just noticed a comment in ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
gyzki's journal, that he was randomly selected for a poll of ages of LJ users. The randomized request claims,
Surely this is someone just believing a computer bug, though. If you look at the raw numbers, they claim that there are nearly a million users each at ages 5 and 6 -- and a far-more-believable 800 at age 7. The numbers for ages 5 and 6 must be some kind of glitch; I'd guess that they are buckets that are used for people who don't actually give their ages, but that's just a guess. If you look at the official stats page instead, it shows the main peak at a more likely 18 years old.
I'm really pretty bemused by the whole tempest in a teapot about the average age of the LJ user. Yes, I do suspect that the stats are off, and read a bit too low, because the older crowd are less likely to accurately state their age. But it's not a worldshaking crisis...
gyzki's journal, that he was randomly selected for a poll of ages of LJ users. The randomized request claims,"The official statistics claim that the most common age for LiveJournal users is 5 and two million (out of 10.5 million users) are under the age of 10."I found that a tad preposterous, but was surprised to find that the raw stats page does say exactly that. (Very interesting page, BTW, with things like the raw numbers for all of the most popular interests.)
Surely this is someone just believing a computer bug, though. If you look at the raw numbers, they claim that there are nearly a million users each at ages 5 and 6 -- and a far-more-believable 800 at age 7. The numbers for ages 5 and 6 must be some kind of glitch; I'd guess that they are buckets that are used for people who don't actually give their ages, but that's just a guess. If you look at the official stats page instead, it shows the main peak at a more likely 18 years old.
I'm really pretty bemused by the whole tempest in a teapot about the average age of the LJ user. Yes, I do suspect that the stats are off, and read a bit too low, because the older crowd are less likely to accurately state their age. But it's not a worldshaking crisis...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2006-06-30 05:48 pm (UTC)They appearantly want to send or make "adult" users go over to their sister type board, but I cant remember the name.
The point is that all the adults need to go back and put in their REAL ages as they are using that info to make real plans that could affect adults poorly
(no subject)
Date: 2006-06-30 08:49 pm (UTC)Really, I haven't seen any concrete reason to believe this is true. A lot of people are *claiming* that it's true, but it seems to be based on nothing more than supposition. For the time being, I'm attributing the whole thing to mass hysteria, until and unless someone shows that they're planning on making substantive changes. (I mean, good God, look at all the panic about the incredibly *slight* tweaks they're planning to the user info page. Sheesh.)
They appearantly want to send or make "adult" users go over to their sister type board, but I cant remember the name.
"Vox", IIRC. Again, this seems to be a lot of people panicking for no particularly apparent reason. Nothing that the *LJ* staff has said provides much cause for worry, IMO -- it's just a ton of guesswork and assumptions of secret agendas.
I do think that helping them get their statistics right is probably a good thing -- enabling them to make more informed decisions just makes sense. But I'm sticking to my "tempest in a teapot" opinion until someone points me to something they've said that's more sinister than "most of our users are between 18-25", which is just a statement of (probably correct) fact...