Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!decwrl!decvax!ucbvax!SRI.COM!LAWS
From: LAWS@SRI.COM (Ken Laws)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.digest
Subject: Head Count Results
Message-ID: <572903162.0.LAWS@IU.AI.SRI.COM>
Date: 26 Feb 88 19:46:02 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 38
Approved: ailist@kl.sri.com

I received 30 responses to my request for messages from
readers with birthdays in early February.  (There were 19
from the U.S., 3 each from Australia and the UK, 2 from
Canada, and 3 from Bitnet sites unknown to me.)  Multiplying
by the appropriate time-span factor (365/15) shows that there
were about 730 readers alert, able, and willing to reply
to the request.

The number of AIList readers is obviously much higher than
that. Bitnet alone distributes to 400 addresses (only a
few of which are known to be further redistributions).
Applying this factor of 3/400 to the full response of 30
implies that there are about 4000 readers physically able
to reply.  (Many readers, e.g. in Great Britain, do not
have outgoing mail priviledges due to the expense involved.
Many others in Europe, Japan, South Korea, and elsewhere
may be unable to construct the necessary return path.)

Another handle on the readership is the number of AAAI
members with net addresses.  I don't have access to the full
membership list, but about 3500 of the members have net
addresses short enough to list in the printed directory.
If we assume that 3000 such members in the U.S. are all
Arpanet/CSNet AIList readers, the full 30 replies would
represent a pool of 4737 AIList readers worldwide.  This
is certainly imprecise, but perhaps U.S. net members not
reading AIList are balanced (or more than balanced) by
students reading AIList bboards and by readers with long
net addresses (when viewed from the Arpanet).

My conclusion is that there are probably around 4000
readers (perhaps 3000 to 6000), with fewer than 1000
able to respond to any given query or message.  A more
precise (or accurate) estimate of the readership would
require surface mail as the reply medium.

					-- Ken
-------