<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=iso-8859-1"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div>On 21 Aug 2013, at 11:24, Hieu Hoang <<a href="mailto:Hieu.Hoang@ed.ac.uk">Hieu.Hoang@ed.ac.uk</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div>imo, it is an imperfect but useful bit of information to gauge the relative popularity of the mailing list. In Oct 2010, i asked the same question for some popular NLP/SMT mailing list:<br>
</div> Corpora list : 3600<br></div> EAMT - 792<br></div> Moses - 630<br><br></div>Hope that helps someone<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div>Are these aggregate numbers comparable? And how many subscribe to more than one mailing list? </div><div><br></div></div><div>There's some interesting information to be gleaned from your list.</div><div><br></div><div>Assuming I picked the right EAMT list, I don't need to be a subscriber to view the list contrary to what the mailman archive page says. I can get to every post via gmane. Am I a subscriber or not? </div><div><br></div><div>And, as I said earlier, can get to the gmane archive of this list without being a formal member. When I do am I regarded as a subscriber or not?</div><div><br></div><div>However, is the number of subscribers any indication of the /<i>quality/</i> of the list? The number of postings to them might be a more suitable metric as it would indicate the level of activity. But as with ever list the volume can be exaggerated by slanging matches.</div><div><br></div><div>Using our own corpus analysis tools on the open archives to extract simple statistics like average volume of postings, frequent posters, relevance of posts would be more useful in discussions than the bald "how many people are subscribed?".</div><div><br></div></div><div>
Regards, Trevor.<div><br></div><div><>< Re: deemed!</div>
</div>
<br></body></html>