OT - tell us you're here

vicmilt wrote on 11/15/2006, 4:00 PM

Being a Direct Response marketeer for so many years, numbers sort of fascinate me.

Fer instance, I've often wondered what the "real" readership of this forum is. I know there are a lot of folks out there who read but are too shy to comment or write.

So how about this experiment.

If you've read this, just reply with the next consecutive number. We'll refresh this thread for one week.

Or is this thread too inflamatory??

OK - 1

Next? (reply with "2")

Smiles,
v

Back to post

Comments

craftech wrote on 11/16/2006, 6:31 AM

72

Craftech (John)

DavidSinger wrote on 11/16/2006, 6:40 AM

73 -
my experience over the years is approximately a 10:1 ratio of lurkers to writers for boards like this. The lurkers don't reply even to counts like this. Only Sony knows who's actually signed up for the board. But the lurkers know and read these boards avidly, depending upon other classmates to ask questions.

TomG wrote on 11/16/2006, 7:00 AM

TomE wrote on 11/16/2006, 7:18 AM

75
TomE

GenJerDan wrote on 11/16/2006, 7:20 AM

76
No Tom Whatsoever

YesMaestro wrote on 11/16/2006, 7:23 AM

77
Paul

baysidebas wrote on 11/16/2006, 8:16 AM

78, not my age, I can assure you.

mjroddy wrote on 11/16/2006, 9:22 AM

briggs wrote on 11/16/2006, 9:25 AM

Ecquillii wrote on 11/16/2006, 9:51 AM

It’s tricky, what with the possibility of simultaneous posts and compounded errors, being sure what number I am, but considering that “Replies=81” in the address bar as I refresh this page, and remembering that those 81 replies do not include the original poster, that would make me 81 + 1 + 1 = 83, which, however, is two more than what the entry previous to mine would lead me to believe I should be, and leaving me trapped in cardinal and ordinal uncertainty.

Tim 83

dand9959 wrote on 11/16/2006, 10:08 AM

0x54

kayakthom wrote on 11/16/2006, 11:15 AM

1010101

Tom

daryl wrote on 11/16/2006, 11:33 AM

1010110
daryl

garo wrote on 11/16/2006, 11:58 AM

I ththink we lost track or is this trek ... you figure it out ..

85?

//Garo

Dale7 wrote on 11/16/2006, 12:19 PM

86 ??

BobMoyer wrote on 11/16/2006, 12:28 PM

88
Closer to my age than I usually like to admit!

Bob

Steve Mann wrote on 11/16/2006, 12:37 PM

That would be 0100 1001

00110001 = 31.

Logan5 wrote on 11/16/2006, 12:43 PM

89 maybe

MarkWWW wrote on 11/16/2006, 12:51 PM

90

Mark

plasmavideo wrote on 11/16/2006, 1:34 PM

Dach wrote on 11/16/2006, 1:50 PM

cityanimal wrote on 11/16/2006, 2:14 PM

93
I read what people are discussing much more than I take time to post.

backlit wrote on 11/16/2006, 2:37 PM

94

wanted to hold out for 100 but ....

McVid wrote on 11/16/2006, 3:48 PM

1 … 3 4 5 … 9

of 9