468
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by Agosagror@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/fediverse@lemmy.world

I was playing around with Lemmy statistics the other day, and I decided to take the number of comments per post. Essentially a measure of engagement – the higher the number the more engaging the post is. Or in other words how many people were pissed off enough to comment, or had something they felt like sharing. The average for every single Lemmy instance was 8.208262964 comments per post.

So I modeled that with a Poisson distribution, in stats terms X~Po(8.20826), then found the critical regions assuming that anything that had a less than 5% chance of happening, is important. In other words 5% is the significance level. The critical regions are the region either side of the distribution where the probability of ending up in those regions is less than 5%. These critical regions on the lower tail are, 4 comments and on the upper tail is 13 comments, what this means is that if you get less than 4 comments or more than 13 comments, that's a meaningful value. So I chose to interpret those results as meaning that if you get 5 or less comments than your post is "a bad post", or if you get 13 or more than your post is "a good post". A good post here is litterally just "got a lot of comments than expected of a typical post", vice versa for "a bad post".

You will notice that this is quite rudimentary, like what about when the Americans are asleep, most posts do worse then. That's not accounted for here, because it increases the complexity beyond what I can really handle in a post.

To give you an idea of a more sweeping internet trend, the adage 1% 9% 90%, where 1% do the posting, 9% do the commenting, and 90% are lurkers – assuming each person does an average of 1 thing a day, suggests that c/p should be about 9 for all sites regardless of size.

Now what is more interesting is that comments per post varies by instance, lemmy.world for example has an engagement of 9.5 c/p and lemmy.ml has 4.8 c/p, this means that a “good post” on .ml is a post that gets 9 comments, whilst a “good post” on .world has to get 15 comments. On hexbear.net, you need 20 comments, to be a “good post”. I got the numbers for instance level comments and posts from here

This is a little bit silly, since a “good post”, by this metric, is really just a post that baits lots and lots of engagement, specifically in the form of comments – so if you are reading this you should comment, otherwise you are an awful person. No matter how meaningless the comment.

Anyway I thought that was cool.

EDIT: I've cleared up a lot of the wording and tried to make it clearer as to what I am actually doing.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world 17 points 6 days ago

Add a TLDR or this post won't get a lot of traction either

[-] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 9 points 6 days ago

Confirmed. I see "Poisson distribution" I start skimming lol

[-] Minnels@lemm.ee 15 points 6 days ago

I comment very seldom and only if i think that I can contribute. I see no need to write anything if I got nothing of significance to add.

Maybe I should. Add comments that is uplifting and kind more often.

[-] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 13 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I comment a shit ton and often with absolute banalities. Especially on posts with 0 comments.

My reasoning is twofold: first of all I want to encourage posters by engaging with their content so they don't stop posting. Second I want to invite others to comment and it's much more inviting to do so if a post has at least one comment. People tend to think it's dead otherwise and not bother.

I think at the current level of MAUs there is no comment too small, and every little bit helps just by virtue of breaking the silence.

[-] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 5 days ago
[-] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 2 points 5 days ago

My meagre contributions pale in comparison to your efforts, but I do what I can.

[-] Minnels@lemm.ee 3 points 5 days ago

I feel guilty now. Yes, everything you just said is true.

I shall become a better... Lemming(?) and comment a few times every day.

I try to be positive, but my way of life are very different from other people's; and i end up doing more harm than good, if i'm forcing myself to be friendly and nice.

[-] ArtificialHoldings@lemmy.world 7 points 5 days ago

Goodhart's Law: "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure."

Not entirely sure how this applies to the discussion, it just came to mind lol

[-] IDKWhatUsernametoPutHereLolol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Average Fediverse Experience:

Post comment

Waits 24 hours

zero replies

zero votes

not even a downvote

check post viewed from other instances

can't find the comment

realizes that the comment never federated

now too much time has passed since the original time of the post, and the joke you commented is no longer funny anymore

😭

[-] tja@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 days ago

Or other people created the same joke without ever seeing your post

[-] JennyLaFae 9 points 6 days ago

This comment will be sad if you don't engage with it.

[-] S_H_K@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 5 days ago

Ohhh poor thing here have an upvote and a comment.

[-] JennyLaFae 2 points 5 days ago

The comment is very happy to be a good comment with 8 updoots and two replies.

10/9.5 🥳

[-] S_H_K@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago

2 upvotes and 1 reply but I wish you the best.

This comment is part of a tree-datastructure that represents the branches of discussion.

[-] Pamasich@kbin.earth 4 points 5 days ago

I disagree that commenting for the sake of commenting is a good idea. Quality over quantity, a single meaningful discussion is superior to a sea of low effort garbage. I also want the fediverse to take off, but not at the cost of adopting modern Reddit culture.

a “good post”, by this metric, is really just a post that baits lots and lots of engagement

Baiting anything is bad.

[-] Agosagror@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 5 days ago

Well exactly, that was kind of the point of this post. Hence "good post" being in air quotes. It being a silly idea as well.

Completely agree with you on that last point.

Ah nice, I encountered a Poisson-distribution in the wild today. I shall recount this encounter to my children.

[-] diffusive@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

A post by fediversechick

[-] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

I think one needs to include parameters like how soon after the topic was created the comment was made and how deep is it in the comment tree. If you for instance consistently comment on 1 month old topics or reply on comments ten levels deep you will get very few interactions.

[-] Agosagror@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 6 days ago

Well exactly, I've said this elsewhere in this thread, this was mostly something that I thought was cool. That said I might try and figure out how to include that data, if I can find it.

[-] NerdyPopRocks@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

I follow instructions, I think. Good post

Interesting numbers, it would be great to see how the statistics look for different "categories" of communities. Interaction based communities (c/ask X) and political communities will naturally garner more comments than information communities. E.g. while you may enjoy the content of blogs posted on !godot@programming.dev or !programming@programming.dev, you're probably less likely to comment than on !asklemmy@lemmy.world or !casualconversation@lemmy.world

[-] Agosagror@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 days ago

I actually plotted the top 50 or so instances, with user size against comments/post. One of the many outlier instances was lemmynsfw.com which obviously lacks all that much engagement, with a score of around 1 c/p. Which makes quite a bit of sense when you think about it.

[-] Gullible@sh.itjust.works 145 points 1 week ago

We had the chance to upvote this heavily without leaving any comments, but we blew it

[-] morrowind@lemmy.ml 35 points 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

post is too [good] unfortunately

[-] riot@lemmy.world 31 points 1 week ago

post is too unfortunately

they don't think it be like it is but it do

[-] Zachariah@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ocean@lemmy.selfhostcat.com 50 points 1 week ago

Fun break down! More comments is more interesting than more posts for me

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 32 points 1 week ago

You need a factor for niche communities. A post with 4 comments in a backpacking community with 20 subscribers is way "gooder" than 40 comments in a 5k subscriber news community.

I.E. add a community size factor.

[-] CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world 25 points 1 week ago

Doing my part to make this a good post, cause it was.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] RideAgainstTheLizard@slrpnk.net 15 points 1 week ago

I've happily found that there is much more interaction here than on Mastodon :)

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

So I modeled that with a Poisson distribution, and I learnt that to a 5% significance level, if your post got less than 4 comments, that was statistically significant. Or in other words – there is a 95% probability that something else caused it not to get more comments. Now that could be because it is an AMAZING post – it covered all the points and no one has anything left to say. Or it’s because it’s a crappy post and you should be ashamed in yourself. Similarly a “good post”, one that gets lots of comments, would be any post that gets more than 13 comments. Anything in-between 4 and 13 is just an average post.

So, like, I do have a background in stats and network analysis, and I'm not sure what you are trying to say here.

if your post got less than 4 comments, that was statistically significant.

Statistically significant what? What hypothesis are you testing? Like, how are you setting this question up? What is your null?

Because I don't believe your interpretation of that conclusion. It sounds like mostly you calculated the parameters of a poisson and then are interpreting them? Because to be clear, thats not the same as doing hypothesis testing and isn't interpretable in that manner. Its still fine, and interesting, and especially useful when you are doing network analysis, but on its on, its not interpretable in this manner. It needs context and we need to understand what test you are running, and how you are setting that test up.

I'm asking these questions not to dissuade you, but to give you the opportunity to bring rigor to your work.

Should you like, to further your work, I have set up this notebook you can maybe use parts of to continue your investigations or do different investigations.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 week ago

The other chance that you got no comments on your post for is that you are banned from the remote instance/community, or federation is broken (still happens intermittently).

Lemmy will still allow you to post from your home instance since you are not banned there, but your content will simply get black-holed by the remote instance if you're banned there. Sometimes you have to check the remote instance directly to see if your post was federated or not.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Maiq@lemy.lol 13 points 1 week ago

Okay. Look. We both said a lot of things that you're going to regret. But I think we can put our differences behind us. For science. You monster.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 13 Apr 2025
468 points (100.0% liked)

Fediverse

32856 readers
560 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS