Editing to let people know that I will be blocking anyone who feels the need to tell me why this graph is inaccurate. I truly don’t care, but feel free to chime in with your useless take and land a spot on my block list! 🙂

  • aasatru@kbin.earth
    55·
    6 months ago

    The fact that you believe these platforms were the same before and after these events makes it sound like you were not, in fact, there to see it happen. In my experience, it permanently changed both platforms, transforming them from weird niche sites to genuine alternatives.

    That said, what you find interesting or not is not any of my business.

      • aasatru@kbin.earth
        121·
        6 months ago

        Yeah, I know I shouldn’t bother. I am just annoyed by the misconception that all graphs should always start in 0 on the Y axis, as if it was some law of nature. Shouldn’t allow myself to get dragged in further. :)

          • Blaze (he/him)@feddit.orgEnglish
            121·
            6 months ago

            Oh, wow, very impressive! Did you have to use a calculator to get to this challenging result?

            That’s unnecessarily agressive

              • porous_grey_matter@lemmy.mlEnglish
                8·
                6 months ago

                It’s not “again” for anything you’ve written in this comment thread.

                And you specifically suggested that these numbers can’t be extrapolated, i.e. that they are not a trend. If it’s indeed a trend for Lemmy to have 200% yoy growth then yeah, I’d think that’d be pretty successful.

                  • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
                    3·
                    6 months ago

                    The expression “back to baseline” comes from Science and Engineering and literally means that something has gone back to the previous average flat level (for example: “the power line noise level spiked when your turned the machine on but is now back to baseline”)

                    Edit: not average, but actually specifically the original flat level below which things would not fall. Sorry, it’s kinda hard to explain in words but very easy to point out in a graph or a scope were it’s just this flat line to which things always return.

                    That expression makes sense if you’re talking about the rate of growth itself (i.e. the Lemmy rate of growth spiked at the time of the Reddit changes and eventually went back to baseline, since Lemmy is not growing any faster now than before the Reddit changes) but it doesn’t make sense if you’re talking about user numbers since the number of Lemmy users grew a lot with the Reddit changes and never went back to the average before them, not even close.

                    Your original post is not clear on which of those things you’re talking about when you wrote “back to baseline” and your subsequent posts are mainly talking about user numbers, giving the idea that that’s what your “back to baseline” is refering to, in which case you’re using that expression incorrectly.

      • xapr [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
        2·
        6 months ago

        Mastodon had 1M something before Elon, hit up close to 2M and now is sitting around 800k.

        This stat is really surprising. Do you by any chance have a link where I can see this data?