vincent
@pixel
re: "why are active users stagnant?" cc @betashop.eth @dwr.eth early fids are active, but fids 1-2k, 2-3k, ..., 11-12k are less active than 0-1k group hypothesis to the question: early users are the "cool kids," subsequent users have to cast harder to become one, no motivation to engage https://i.imgur.com/JkUwr60.png
6 replies
1 recast
6 reactions
vincent
@pixel
the last two groups are active because new, but what matters is whether they become long-term engaged members. initially expected the graph to look like a slope (down to the right), the fact that `range(1k, 11k, 1000)` is constant kinda surprised me
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
vincent
@pixel
CORRECTION: small calculation error, but trend stays the same, first group and last two group has high value, other groups are lower, this is the corrected plot: https://i.imgur.com/8XTqDR7.png
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Neat analysis. First 1K isn’t actually the first 1K since we migrated in September 2022 to Goerli and didn’t migrate inactive accounts (many of whom would have had low FIDs). I’m pretty sure we had 40% attrition, which would make it much closer to the mean cohort.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Jason Goldberg
@betashop.eth
@pixel great stuff! I’ll dm you to do some activation analysis together. Love this stuff
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
mk
@mk
Interesting to think you could maybe offset this by biasing feeds around time of joining then slowing relax the bias. You see more of the people that joined when you did.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Eric Platon
@ic
The hypothesis assumes everyone wants to become a cool kid. Is that so? Some people do comment there are large Web3/NFT streams. It may be—without assuming coolness—that people do not engage by lack of discourse diversity (plus long tail anyway)?
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
cchhuuss
@cchhuuss
Buen análisis
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
