4 ms·

This page seems long on cute fuzzy pictures and short on content. They don't say what discussion forums they sampled: most likely, their own. They don't descr

by waqf 15y ago

This page seems long on cute fuzzy pictures and short on content. They don't say what discussion forums they sampled: most likely, their own. They don't describe their methodology in detail (I looked in vain for a link to or citation of a proper experimental writeup.) And what did they learn? As far as I can tell, they learned that people who bother to sign up for forum accounts ("pseudonyms", in their terminology) make more return visits/contributions than people who use least-effort ways of logging in (existing Facebook account, or anonymous contribution). Well, that's a surprise.

zeeg 15y ago
We sample data from the entire network of Disqus (which is over a million sites). I may be wrong (as I'm not on the marketing side of things), but I believe when we're saying pseudonym we're saying "not Facebook". Things that let you choose whatever name you want, and not require your real name/singular identity.
- waqf 15y ago
  Thanks for following up. I think you're confirming my assumption on the definition of "pseudonym", but correct me if you disagree. Oh, and since I seem to have zeeg's attention ... why is it that every site I care about works just fine on my browser (Chromium/incognito mode/AdBlockPlus) but Disqus comments never load (I just get a "Disqus" spinning/loading GIF for ever)? I have stopped commenting on BoingBoing because it switched to Disqus and I don't care enough to debug.
  - zeeg 15y ago
    Are you blocking JavaScript somehow? Or AdBlocking the disqus media maybe?
  - thetylerhayes 15y ago
    If you don't have JS disabled like zeeg mentioned, AdBlockPlus is a red flag. Can you try incognito mode with no extensions enabled? If that doesn't fix this reach out to our support team at http://disqus.com/support http://disqus.com/support and we'd be happy to lend a hand.
danielha 15y ago
Sorry, we put up the image first but haven't gotten a blog post up yet. We'll write about this and put up our thoughts soon.
ro_gupta 15y ago
We're going to blog about it which should shed more light on methodology -- TC just linked to the infographic. But yeah this was across the entire Disqus network, ~600 MM monthly UVs and ~60 MM commenters, and I believe "pseudonyms" include proprietary site logins + social media handles besides FB. The major insight was that pseudonyms yield significantly more quantity and quality on the network. May seem obvious to you but wasn't so for many, including a number of us who've been with Disqus for years. The conventional wisdom was that anonymous comments would rank highest in quantity and FB comments would score highest in quality.
- pavel_lishin 15y ago
  If I may offer a suggestion, perhaps mention that pseudonyms generally tend to be long-held identities - a lot of people think that pseudonyms are just throw-away identities used to gossip about your employer safely, instead of identities that persist for months, years or even decades. (A lot of people would recognize the handle CmdrTaco, but how many know his real name?) (p.s. your backyard is awesome)
  - sabret00the 15y ago
    "pseudonyms generally tend to be long-held identities - a lot of people think that pseudonyms are just throw-away identities used to gossip about your employer safely, instead of identities that persist for months, years or even decades." A fact too often forgotten. This is the same ignorance that keeps me from using Google+ while I'm prolific on Twitter.
- sirclueless 15y ago
  Honestly I don't see how you could possibly have a reasonable methodology for the claims you make in the infographic. How do you avoid selection bias, particularly in regards to frequency of comments? For example, a source of technical bias could be that it is a simpler process to log into a Disqus pseudonym than to authenticate with Facebook when posting. Usability is incredibly important in attracting repeat users, so if it is easier to post under a disqus username then it is not surprising that pseudonymous users post more frequently. Another source of obvious selection bias is the disqus branding: I expect people who have Disqus accounts are both more likely to frequent blogs, and are more likely to recognize that they can easily comment on a blog with a Disqus comment section. By way of contrast, Facebook users may not even recognize that they have the credentials to easily comment, and may be reluctant to share their credentials with your third party service except in cases where they have a strong opinion about a piece of content. I can see the data on comment quality being more objective and interesting, but even here there is probably selection bias: if most of the indicators of quality come from Disqus accounts' appraisals, then you may be measuring whatever bias Disqus users have as regards comment quality from Facebook commenters.

by waqf 15y ago

zeeg 15y ago

We sample data from the entire network of Disqus (which is over a million sites). I may be wrong (as I'm not on the marketing side of things), but I believe when we're saying pseudonym we're saying "not Facebook". Things that let you choose whatever name you want, and not require your real name/singular identity.

waqf 15y ago
Thanks for following up. I think you're confirming my assumption on the definition of "pseudonym", but correct me if you disagree. Oh, and since I seem to have zeeg's attention ... why is it that every site I care about works just fine on my browser (Chromium/incognito mode/AdBlockPlus) but Disqus comments never load (I just get a "Disqus" spinning/loading GIF for ever)? I have stopped commenting on BoingBoing because it switched to Disqus and I don't care enough to debug.
- zeeg 15y ago
  Are you blocking JavaScript somehow? Or AdBlocking the disqus media maybe?
- thetylerhayes 15y ago
  If you don't have JS disabled like zeeg mentioned, AdBlockPlus is a red flag. Can you try incognito mode with no extensions enabled? If that doesn't fix this reach out to our support team at http://disqus.com/support http://disqus.com/support and we'd be happy to lend a hand.

danielha 15y ago

Sorry, we put up the image first but haven't gotten a blog post up yet. We'll write about this and put up our thoughts soon.

ro_gupta 15y ago

We're going to blog about it which should shed more light on methodology -- TC just linked to the infographic. But yeah this was across the entire Disqus network, ~600 MM monthly UVs and ~60 MM commenters, and I believe "pseudonyms" include proprietary site logins + social media handles besides FB. The major insight was that pseudonyms yield significantly more quantity and quality on the network. May seem obvious to you but wasn't so for many, including a number of us who've been with Disqus for years. The conventional wisdom was that anonymous comments would rank highest in quantity and FB comments would score highest in quality.

pavel_lishin 15y ago
If I may offer a suggestion, perhaps mention that pseudonyms generally tend to be long-held identities - a lot of people think that pseudonyms are just throw-away identities used to gossip about your employer safely, instead of identities that persist for months, years or even decades. (A lot of people would recognize the handle CmdrTaco, but how many know his real name?) (p.s. your backyard is awesome)
- sabret00the 15y ago
  "pseudonyms generally tend to be long-held identities - a lot of people think that pseudonyms are just throw-away identities used to gossip about your employer safely, instead of identities that persist for months, years or even decades." A fact too often forgotten. This is the same ignorance that keeps me from using Google+ while I'm prolific on Twitter.
sirclueless 15y ago
Honestly I don't see how you could possibly have a reasonable methodology for the claims you make in the infographic. How do you avoid selection bias, particularly in regards to frequency of comments? For example, a source of technical bias could be that it is a simpler process to log into a Disqus pseudonym than to authenticate with Facebook when posting. Usability is incredibly important in attracting repeat users, so if it is easier to post under a disqus username then it is not surprising that pseudonymous users post more frequently. Another source of obvious selection bias is the disqus branding: I expect people who have Disqus accounts are both more likely to frequent blogs, and are more likely to recognize that they can easily comment on a blog with a Disqus comment section. By way of contrast, Facebook users may not even recognize that they have the credentials to easily comment, and may be reluctant to share their credentials with your third party service except in cases where they have a strong opinion about a piece of content. I can see the data on comment quality being more objective and interesting, but even here there is probably selection bias: if most of the indicators of quality come from Disqus accounts' appraisals, then you may be measuring whatever bias Disqus users have as regards comment quality from Facebook commenters.