3 ms·

I agree, in general, that there is some threshold above which forums break down, but I suspect that your guess that it's Dunbar's Number can't be right. Are yo

by pohl 17y ago

I agree, in general, that there is some threshold above which forums break down, but I suspect that your guess that it's Dunbar's Number can't be right. Are you counting lurkers? Visible participants tend to be the tip of an enormous iceberg below the surface, and it's not always the same set that happen to participate in any given thread. Also, must the threshold be the same for every participant? Dunbar's Number has to do with a cognitive limit on social relationships. There are many who pay little attention to the identity of those who post, focusing instead on what is being said. If I'm not tracking the people, why would Dunbar's Number be a limiting factor in what I can get out of a forum?

SlyShy 17y ago
You are right that it isn't exactly the Dunbar number. In a forum with a normal participation curve (what percentages of users have what activity level) the breakdown is around 300. In forums where everyone participates actively it breaks down a lot sooner. Lurkers are basically disregarded. On a site like Hacker News where I don't recognize many posters at all, you are right, it doesn't really matter. Except that whatever "culture" HN is aiming for might be diluted.