5 ms·

Quora is now 3 years old and has taken $61 million from investors. Are there any numbers publicly available to show user growth over this period?

SwellJoe 14y ago
All the numbers show stagnation, and Quora getting dwarfed by other (less prone to ass-hattery) answers sites, like StackOverflow. Quora traffic hasn't grown in years, according to Alexa and others. I believe they're simply optimizing the wrong variables. It has certainly driven me away. I use the google personal block list, and Quora was among the first sites to go on it.
- dolphenstein 14y ago
  I'd consider over zealous mods as somewhere along the ass-hattery spectrum.
- MrMatters 14y ago
  Correct me if I'm wrong, but: 1. Third party statistics sites like Alexa and Compete are horribly untrustworthy indicators of reality. 2. Growing traffic isn't the best way to foster a community. I believe pg has written about this a few times, with regards to communities in general and HN. I think the Quora community is amazing. It's very populous and the quality of answers is generally on par or better than specialty interest sites/forums from a wide range of topics, all in one place. Of course, it has its strengths and its weaknesses - for example, a strength would definitely be reading an answer from an actual CIA [something] analyst, former Foreign Service Officer, doctor, etc. on a relevant question, but it falls behind in areas like technology IMO. The site is annoying and I hate a lot about the community (surprise, it turns out "mature adults" can use shitty memes just as much as the teens everyone blames for them on reddit), but I think they've done a great job at fostering the kind of community they want so far. If anything, it's being threatened by the pressure of growing.
  - jarek 14y ago
    HN can afford to go ahead and foster a community, but then again it hasn't taken $61 million that investors are expecting a return on.
    - iuguy 14y ago
      Also HN doesn't rely on asshattery sign up tactics for you to read other peoples' content.
  - SwellJoe 14y ago
    "1. Third party statistics sites like Alexa and Compete are horribly untrustworthy indicators of reality." They're always wrong. But, from what I can tell, they're usually wrong in ways that are still usefully predictive. If you compare two sites at Alexa.com, and there is a vast difference in popularity (as is the case between Quora and StackOverflow), you can probably assume StackOverflow is bigger and growing faster...even if you can't be sure how big the difference is. I wouldn't want to make business decisions on it, but it's good enough for me to feel comfortable making snarky comments about Quora. "2. Growing traffic isn't the best way to foster a community. I believe pg has written about this a few times, with regards to communities in general and HN." But, it is the way to justify $61 million of investment. HN doesn't have to ring the cash register. Quora does, at some point. Anyway, I find Quora annoying. The community may be awesome, but I don't believe the curators of that community are deserving of my attention or my contribution to their walled garden.
    - sesqu 14y ago
      Regarding Alexa and Compate, you're half right. They're wrong in useful ways, but not the way you suggest. What's important to realize is why they're wrong - sampling bias. So they give an accurate representation of a certain demographic, but the usefulness of that depends on the target audience of the site in question. I don't have any examples at hand, but I've come across plenty of big sites that pretty much flatline on Alexa et al - because their clientele is not welcoming to such measurements, for cultural or geographic reasons. So you can (usually) use them to contrast direct competitors, but I would be wary about quora vs. stackexchange.

SwellJoe 14y ago

All the numbers show stagnation, and Quora getting dwarfed by other (less prone to ass-hattery) answers sites, like StackOverflow. Quora traffic hasn't grown in years, according to Alexa and others. I believe they're simply optimizing the wrong variables. It has certainly driven me away. I use the google personal block list, and Quora was among the first sites to go on it.

dolphenstein 14y ago
I'd consider over zealous mods as somewhere along the ass-hattery spectrum.
MrMatters 14y ago
Correct me if I'm wrong, but: 1. Third party statistics sites like Alexa and Compete are horribly untrustworthy indicators of reality. 2. Growing traffic isn't the best way to foster a community. I believe pg has written about this a few times, with regards to communities in general and HN. I think the Quora community is amazing. It's very populous and the quality of answers is generally on par or better than specialty interest sites/forums from a wide range of topics, all in one place. Of course, it has its strengths and its weaknesses - for example, a strength would definitely be reading an answer from an actual CIA [something] analyst, former Foreign Service Officer, doctor, etc. on a relevant question, but it falls behind in areas like technology IMO. The site is annoying and I hate a lot about the community (surprise, it turns out "mature adults" can use shitty memes just as much as the teens everyone blames for them on reddit), but I think they've done a great job at fostering the kind of community they want so far. If anything, it's being threatened by the pressure of growing.
- jarek 14y ago
  HN can afford to go ahead and foster a community, but then again it hasn't taken $61 million that investors are expecting a return on.
  - iuguy 14y ago
    Also HN doesn't rely on asshattery sign up tactics for you to read other peoples' content.
- SwellJoe 14y ago
  "1. Third party statistics sites like Alexa and Compete are horribly untrustworthy indicators of reality." They're always wrong. But, from what I can tell, they're usually wrong in ways that are still usefully predictive. If you compare two sites at Alexa.com, and there is a vast difference in popularity (as is the case between Quora and StackOverflow), you can probably assume StackOverflow is bigger and growing faster...even if you can't be sure how big the difference is. I wouldn't want to make business decisions on it, but it's good enough for me to feel comfortable making snarky comments about Quora. "2. Growing traffic isn't the best way to foster a community. I believe pg has written about this a few times, with regards to communities in general and HN." But, it is the way to justify $61 million of investment. HN doesn't have to ring the cash register. Quora does, at some point. Anyway, I find Quora annoying. The community may be awesome, but I don't believe the curators of that community are deserving of my attention or my contribution to their walled garden.
  - sesqu 14y ago
    Regarding Alexa and Compate, you're half right. They're wrong in useful ways, but not the way you suggest. What's important to realize is why they're wrong - sampling bias. So they give an accurate representation of a certain demographic, but the usefulness of that depends on the target audience of the site in question. I don't have any examples at hand, but I've come across plenty of big sites that pretty much flatline on Alexa et al - because their clientele is not welcoming to such measurements, for cultural or geographic reasons. So you can (usually) use them to contrast direct competitors, but I would be wary about quora vs. stackexchange.