Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!decwrl!reid
From: reid@decwrl.dec.com (Brian Reid)
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.groups
Subject: Re: Newsgroups receiving poor propagation, rec.humor.funny, and the REAL top 40
Message-ID: <75@bacchus.DEC.COM>
Date: Fri, 9-Oct-87 02:59:58 EDT
Article-I.D.: bacchus.75
Posted: Fri Oct  9 02:59:58 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 11-Oct-87 12:21:56 EDT
References: <1002@looking.UUCP>
Reply-To: reid@decwrl.UUCP (Brian Reid)
Organization: DEC Western Research
Lines: 25
Xref: mnetor news.admin:1140 news.groups:1673

In article <1002@looking.UUCP> brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes:
 >While scanning the recent news readership surveys, I noted that a number of
 >groups have readership popularity figures that far outstrip their propogation.
 >These are groups that are either a) recent, b) controversial or c) not fully
 >propogated due to network losses during their creation.

 >What prompted this was examination, of course, my own group, "rec.humor.funny"
 >which only has a propagation figure of 60% in spite of the fact it has existed
 >for two months.  I note that when I divide readership by propagation, this
 >group actually ranks third in net popularity. (plug, plug)

 >I did a further check to see if any other groups were getting good readership,
 >but poor propagation.

Patience, patience. It takes 6 months for any new group to get full
propagation. Always has, always will. I've been taking data for several years,
and haven't seen a single example of a group whose propagation has reached
the 90% mark sooner than 4 or 5 months after its creation. There is no point
in fudging the readership statistics to try to account for a transient
phenomenon. 60% propagation after 2 months is remarkable.  Relax. Everybody
loves your newsgroup, even after the vulgar joke about the different kinds of
tea, and in a few more months you'll see the 95%+ propagation that you
deserve.

Brian